There is no shortage of turbulence in the US elections for both Republicans and Democrats. Panel guests debated on Zurich’s Falkenstrasse who was more likely to prevail in the end.
Donald Trump and Kamala Harris: The historian at the NZZ podium predicts that the latter will be elected.
Brian Snyder / Reuters
In less than a week, Americans will elect the next president. Either Kamala Harris, who kept a low profile as Joe Biden’s vice president, or Donald Trump, the former president and provocateur, who wants to know it again. Both are rhetorically versed. The “NZZ Podium” discussed what the candidates actually want to achieve under the title “Harris versus Trump – Showdown for the White House”.
Present on stage were the political scientist Gerlinde Groitl, the historian Michael C. Kimmage and Peter Rásonyi, head of the NZZ’s foreign editorial department. The event was moderated by Martin Meyer, head of the “NZZ Podium”.
Gerlinde Groitl.
Joel Hunn / NZZ
Michael Kimmage began by putting forward three theses about the 2024 US election. Firstly, a lot of continuity can be expected, especially in American foreign policy. Secondly, it was a less ideologically emotional election campaign than in 2016, when Trump prevailed against Hillary Clinton. And, according to the third, more pessimistic thesis: Trump will not necessarily make the USA more “governable”.
Stability in foreign policy
When it comes to foreign policy, Harris and Trump are not that dissimilar, said Kimmage. For both, resistance to China’s rise will be a priority. Both upheld Israel’s support. And skepticism about free trade is guaranteed among both Democrats and Republicans.
The president has less power than it might seem, said Kimmage. Domestic politics, the influential Congress and the bureaucracy, controlled foreign policy.
International editor Peter Rásonyi also assesses the scope for foreign policy to be rather small. However, there is also a lack of creative will in some cases. There is hardly any energy to really control the fortunes of the Middle East as a player. There are big question marks about Russia. It has always been a mystery why Trump maintains closeness to Putin. “Determined support for Ukraine is already failing under Biden,” said Rásonyi.
Martin Meyer.
Joel Hunn / NZZ
Efforts towards the center
In general, a certain moderation can be observed, said Kimmage. Harris inherited a moderate domestic policy from Biden. Her deputy, Tim Waltz, with his non-elitist character and his origins from the Midwest also embodies this. Harris is trying to win over the political center. “This is not a sign of polarization, but of cross-party cooperation,” said Kimmage. Even Trump’s election campaign has moderated compared to 2016. “Back then he talked a lot about the decline of the country, but in 2024 he talks almost only about himself.”
Political scientist Gerlinde Groitl agreed that Harris was significantly more left-wing as a senator than she appears now. Now she is striving for a centrist position. Nevertheless, the division has become so deeply rooted in society that around half are prepared to vote for Trump. Even his long record of sins, from breaking the most fundamental democratic norms to convictions, can’t affect him: “He’s the Teflon Donald, everything slides off him.”
At the same time, it is a dangerous political move to constantly warn that the end of democracy is imminent and that Trump is a fascist, said Groitl. The harsh terminology does not lead to getting voters back from him. “Instead they are pushed out of the democratic community. “This could be understood to mean that the Democrats are trying to secure their electoral success by completely delegitimizing the other side.”
The distance that Trump puts between himself and the establishment benefits him greatly, said Rásonyi. At the same time, he couldn’t back down from it. Ultimately, it is a role that he plays that binds him to his voters. A side aspect of this is that he is entertaining and his fans have fun with him. As a non-white, female candidate, Harris has a more difficult starting position due to structural disadvantages, said Rásonyi.
It was also agreed on the podium that Harris seemed relatively flat in terms of content. Programmatically, it promises citizens relief in their everyday lives, such as price reductions, said Rásonyi. But it also shows a very proactive attitude towards the economy and market developments. This illiberal, market-remote side frightens many voters and business circles. However, you don’t know her enough and you don’t know what you’ll really get if you vote for Harris. The same applies to Trump, who, in contrast, is associated with deregulation and liberalization. It remains very vague what positive effects it would bring to the economy.
Unregierbares Land
According to Kimmage’s third thesis, the USA could become a “failed state” after the election of Donald Trump. Trump does not adhere to constitutional neutrality, said Klimmage. In a second term he could use political institutions more specifically for his personal purposes. His provocations, which triggered a vicious circle of backlash among Democrats and liberals, could also bring the political system to a standstill. “The USA would remain a great power, but without the ability to use this power sensibly or coherently. That would be suboptimal for Europe, which is suffering from a war with Russia.”
According to surveys, the result will be close. Both candidates are relatively unpopular. Who is ultimately elected depends on who can best mobilize their supporters. Kimmage said: The election campaign is a competition between women and men. If Trump is elected, it will be because his persona has reached young men. For Harris, however, the issue of abortion plays a major role. If more young women go to the polls, Harris will win, Kimmage said. He predicts the latter.
