US election: what's at stake for Europe?
The citizens of the United States will decide today, Tuesday, whether they want Kamala Harris or Donald Trump to lead their country. In the congressional elections taking place at the same time, all the seats in the House of Representatives and roughly a third of those in the Senate will also be filled. A glance at the commentaries shows that for Europe, too, there's a lot hanging in the balance.
Bad examples are also copied
De Volkskrant sees the rule of law facing an acid test:
“Trump poses a massive threat to the idea of freedom and responsibility. The man who encouraged his supporters to storm the Capitol in 2021 has already said that he will not accept another election defeat. The blueprint has already been drawn up for purging the state apparatus. He wants to have political opponents prosecuted. His victory will give America an authoritarian face. This is not just bad news for the Americans. This America, too, could serve as an example for other Western democracies.”
Roundly condemn rioting
The Economist hopes things will remain peaceful after the election:
“Predictions of imminent civil war are clearly overblown. Even widespread violence seems unlikely. But irregularities and a few bad incidents are inevitable. ... Overall, police seem prepared. And election officials have put measures in place, including live feeds of drop boxes, in an attempt to build trust in the process. Sending a signal that political violence will be severely punished would help. Unfortunately Mr Trump is conveying the opposite message to his supporters - by promising to pardon January 6th rioters if re-elected. As long as violence is not roundly condemned, it is impossible to rule out.”
Perhaps the shock therapy the EU needs
La Stampa explains why some analysts hope that a Trump presidency could actually help the EU:
“Paradoxically, the slap in the face that Donald Trump's return to the White House would cause could have a beneficial effect on the EU. Just like the major crises of recent years, which in some ways forged and strengthened the Union, starting with Covid, which led to a common reaction to the economic crisis with the introduction of the Next Generation EU plan - and the health crisis, with the joint procurement of vaccines. This is certainly an optimistic vision, but several analysts are convinced that the electric shock of a Trump comeback could give the EU the jolt it needs to take the right steps towards greater integration.”
Harris win also poses a big risk for Europe
Time is running out for Europe regardless of the outcome, El País warns:
“A victory for Harris would come as a huge relief. However, precisely that relief would also pose a risk for Europe: complacency in the face of reforms that are urgently needed regardless of whether Harris or Trump wins. The EU is in a state of profound weakness, with semi-paralysed governments in key capitals (Berlin, Paris, Madrid) and others in the hands of the far right. In such a context it's hard to move forward, and a Harris mandate could – consciously or unconsciously – create a false sense that time is on our side. The EU is losing the global competition. It must strengthen its capacity to stand on its own two feet in the world and speak with its own voice.”
An outdated electoral system
The US electoral system is in urgent need of reform, Pravda puts in:
“The two-party system not only undemocratically excludes other candidates, it also prevents the people from directly electing the president. In every state, the winner takes all. The American president is decided by the so-called swing states, or more precisely, a few swing districts. Is this normal? After 240 years, isn't it time for the Americans to reform their electoral system and adapt it to modern times? How can the world be dominated by a country whose citizens cannot directly elect their president (the government) or where a candidate who receives fewer votes than his opponent becomes president?”
Enough of the endless polls!
The Frankfurter Allgemeine Zeitung criticises the fixation on pre-election polls:
“Surveys can be important indicators of moods, but if they are published in a continuous loop they just become self-perpetuating. Opinion research creates opinions and falsifies results. On the one hand, it influences voters, who vote tactically instead of according to their convictions, and on the other hand it influences politicians, who become too afraid to make long-term decisions because they are already looking ahead to the next Sunday poll. Wouldn't it be easier to ban polls in the last six or four weeks before election day, as has already been done in other countries? Then the public could discuss political issues instead of numbers and scenarios in the crucial weeks before the election.”
Support for the ex-president extends beyond the US
Trump also has many friends in Europe, La Stampa points out:
“According to the polls, around half of all Americans will vote for Donald Trump on November 5. This 'around', with the added complication of the Electoral College, will decide the outcome of the election and is exclusively in the hands of the US citizens. However, the pro-Trump half of Americans are not alone. That 'around' also includes Italians and Europeans. ... Some of them - many in fact - are convinced that a re-elected Trump would revitalise America, shake up the West and promote a privileged bilateral relationship with Italy. ... At the price of having an egocentric, megalomaniac US president who is undemocratic, dishonest and racist, as well as anti-European and sympathetic towards autocracies.”
Harris must pin her hopes on women
Many Americans are not yet open to the idea of a female president, Die Presse points out:
“Harris may have moved towards the centre, but her earlier left-wing positions still resonate. Her party's dominance among Latinos and Black men is crumbling. The fact that many voters in the US are simply not ready for a female president could - tacitly - be playing a role here. Should Harris nevertheless cross the finishing line first, it will be women she will have to thank for it.”
Congressional elections also crucial
The results of the congressional elections could prove decisive, writes Polityka:
“As the US elections draw closer, public attention seems to be focusing almost exclusively on the outcome of the race for the White House, but the congressional elections that take place at the same time are also crucial. All the more so given that Congress could become one of the most effective barriers in stopping Donald Trump from taking his most radical steps.”
Two opposing visions to choose from
Die Presse sees two completely different world views:
“Trump's doomsday scenario clearly resonates more with voters than the vision of hope and a better, fairer future. Even the high-flying rhetoric is no match for the harsh reality in supermarkets and shopping malls - and Kamala Harris is no Barack Obama. The fact that the US male world does not trust a woman with a multicultural background to hold the highest office in the land – despite her being endorsed by Arnold Schwarzenegger – smacks of resentment. The election is not over yet, but the momentum is swinging towards a comeback for Trump and his grim world view.”
Unreliable polls
The candidates still have a few days of hard work ahead of them, notes Tvnet:
“Voter surveys are causing the predictions about votes in swing states to change every day, so a two-vote lead projected for Harris today has little meaning. Moreover, the last two US presidential elections have shown that the polls tend to be disproportionately unfavourable for Trump – his supporters seem reluctant to admit their preference in polls. If the trend holds for this election too, Harris will have to work hard in the coming days to gain a more convincing lead.”
Against instead of for
Elections are losing their meaning, complains La Stampa:
“Everyone goes to the polling station with the intention, or at least the desire, to improve their lives, in the hope that a cross on a symbol will lead to more prosperity, more rights and sometimes also more freedom. At least in theory. Because in the West we live in, but not only there, another motivation is gaining ground: voting to prevent the victory of a candidate you don't like. This is an increasingly common theme in the election campaigns of a political class that seems to have lost its way and which, instead of charting out a new course, prefers to delegitimise the opposing captain.”
Whoever wins, the problems will remain
According to Sašo Ornik commenting in his blog Jinov svet, how voters in the US vote won't change anything fundamentally - and certainly not for the better:
“They can only decide whether their primary adversary will be Russia or China. ... The militarised police and overcrowded prisons will still remain. The poor will still be poor and health insurance for all will remain an impossible endeavour. Many people from other countries will continue to come to the US because the economy needs them, and the only difference will be whether they enter through legal programmes or are smuggled across the border illegally. The military system will still be the top priority and there will be a shortage of funds for infrastructure... No, on Tuesday, Americans will not choose between fascism and communism.”
This could be a bitter and bloody lesson
Új Szó fears a violent reaction should Trump loose:
“The conservative Maga [Make America Great Again] movement would not be able to accept this with its current communication dynamics. ... Has it become necessary, from time to time, for democratic societies to be made to experience first-hand that today's agitation can lead to real bloodshed tomorrow? That this danger is even more grave in the era of the power of words, and especially in the era of social media and echo chambers? And that there are many authoritarian competitors who seek out the wounds caused by social debates to rub salt into them?”
A threat to global financial stability
Le Temps is concerned about something both parties have in common:
“Donald Trump initiated [international] hostilities by imposing tariff barriers to protect US manufacturing, but Biden has not changed course. Both presidents strengthened the 'Buy American Act' ... Biden has also advocated re-establishing the independence of the US in sectors such as the semiconductor industry. Trump has already promised new tariff barriers if he is re-elected. Kamala Harris also wants to protect American jobs at all costs and ensure dominance over China in the 21st century. Both parties plan to implement their programmes by increasing national debt, which poses a threat to global financial stability.”