on 5 November, an event of historic proportions will take place in the United States: Americans will elect their next president. The passion of the election race is only now gaining momentum. Before becoming the official Republican presidential candidate, Donald Trump survived an assassination attempt. Kamala Harris, the official Democratic nominee, replaced incumbent US President Joe Biden in the race. The heated debate between Harris and Trump, the Democrat’s sudden lead in the polls, and her likely victory – all about it Komersant ukrainskyi
asked Valeriy Klochko, head of the Centre for Public Analysis “Tower”, about all this.
According to a survey of potential voters conducted from 5 to 9 August in Michigan, Pennsylvania and Wisconsin, Harris is ahead of Trump. When asked who Americans would vote for if the election were held today, 50% of voters preferred Harris to 46% who favoured Trump.
The reason for these figures is that when Biden was the candidate, analysts and experts were predicting a Trump victory. Now the picture of the race is beginning to change and the Democrats are again one step ahead of the Republicans?
Remember 2016, when Trump campaigned against a female Democrat, and now the situation is repeating itself. I understand that it was not easy for the Democrats to make this decision for a number of reasons: firstly, they had a bitter experience when Hillary Clinton lost and then Biden did not really want to give up the election, but his age played against him, among other things. There was a perception in American society that both Trump and Biden were too old. At the same time, Trump looked more favourable in this regard against Biden. This is a plus to his rating.
Kamala Harris, given the publications that were available, really wanted to be a candidate, but she had little hope. She did not publicly advocate that Biden should be removed. Democrats are strict about this, as are Republicans, by the way. But donors played a key role: they began actively transferring money to her campaign from the moment the talks began and the procedure for removing Biden from the presidential race was not yet formally completed.
The support of donors is very important: when business supports the future president, it adds significantly to the rating.
As for Trump. He had an unprecedented chance to win after the attempt on his life. We are, of course, critical of this story. It is very similar to the story of Yanukovych’s eggs. But then, for Trump’s political technologists, the campaign was a done deal. If only there had been a Biden.
But everything turned around because of a new young candidate, Kamala Harris. She took into account the mistakes made during the 2016 campaign. Political strategists chose this position: Harris does not criticise Trump. Her main message is a free America.
So it is donor support and the right positioning that play a key role in the rapid rise in the Democrats’ ratings?
Yes, trust from donors, good public speaking skills, and the correct work of political technologists, including their work in the tick-tock, all play into their hands. Harris also chose a very good vice president, Tim Walz: he wears a baseball cap, is a kind of simple guy who is very open to people. And Harris herself is a respectable and young candidate who goes along with him in the right tandem.
The other day, Donald Trump gave an interview to billionaire Elon Musk on Platform X. Could this interview have any impact on his rating?
Trump’s interview with Musk will not change anything, he has already exhausted himself and said nothing new. He needs a very serious upgrade in the election campaign for the Republicans to regain their positions. I am not ready to say that Trump will collapse completely. In general, the Republicans have very good prospects if they work in key states. They can get a lot of votes there.
Remember the story of 2016. Trump had a lower national rating than Hillary, but the voters decided otherwise and in fact appointed him president. For a candidate to win, there must be a very large gap between them and support in key states, and the election campaign is not yet over.
What is the impact of the alleged debate between Trump and Harris, which is supposed to take place in September?
I think there will be no debate between Trump and Harris. At first, the Republicans said they agreed, then they said they did not agree to a debate. In the end, they allegedly agreed, but offered not 1, but 3 debates.
The Democrats, in turn, said that 3 debates were not agreed upon in the schedule, to which the Republicans said that then there was no need for debates at all. At least that’s how it looked from the outside.
Given that Trump, as a presidential candidate, is behaving dishonestly, I believe that he will continue to do everything possible to avoid debates.
Why? The last debate with Biden was to his advantage
Because Trump will lose them. He’s a good speaker and showman, he speaks in simple phrases that are close to the people, but Trump is weak for a meaningful discussion. I think he is afraid of Harris.
There have already been cases like this in Trump’s case: if he cannot resolve an issue, he turns around and leaves. Trump can talk a lot, make statements, but when he sees that he will not win, he turns around. Trump is a very risky man, he was not born into a simple family, he has a large inheritance, he has gone bankrupt and then risen. This is his advantage. But he is not systemic.
We see that Trump is a kind of “black swan” and it is not known how America’s policy towards Ukraine will change as a result of his victory. And what about Harris? Will she support our country in the same way as Joe Biden?
Kamala Harris is different in her political views. She is an ardent supporter of Palestine and condemns Israel for its attacks on the Gaza Strip. But we have to understand that at the same time, Kamala Harris is the head of the Democratic Party, which is very consistent in its support for Israel. The same goes for Ukraine.
It will not be able to turn everything upside down on its own. Trump didn’t even manage to do that when he seriously opposed the vote on the $61 billion aid package.
But it simply won’t happen anyway, because candidates are one thing, presidents are another. Nobody knows what kind of president Kamala Harris will be. What her foreign policy will be is also unclear. Of course, we know that she has an interesting, little-known and little-understood national security adviser who is allegedly very radical. For example, he condemned Barack Obama for allegedly telling us to give up Crimea. But this is all conjecture.
So we can say that if Harris wins, he will continue the current Democratic policy towards Ukraine?
Yes, but the Democrats have changed today, just like everyone else in the world. A striking example is our successful operation in the Kursk region, which was supported by the White House.
So perhaps something in the US foreign policy strategy is changing now. And I would not say for sure that one candidate will be bad for us and the other will be good for us.
The only thing that is right is that we see that Bankova Street is “putting its eggs in different baskets” – both Republicans and Democrats, and that is right. Although, for example, we are now more sympathetic to the Democrats than to Trump’s populist statements, we have to have good contact with everyone, given our state position.
Let us recall how in 2016 our officials deleted posts from Facebook that hated Trump. So it’s good that history teaches our officials something. I don’t think it will be worse for us if we have Harris. We will be able to continue working with the Democrats. They are more predictable and flexible. The Republicans also have sane politicians with whom we can communicate. Therefore, the overall consensus decision that will be made in Congress will be decisive for any newly elected president. However, I would not underestimate the role of the Oval Office chief of staff in the final signature on the documents.
Author – Alyona Kaplina