We are five weeks away from Election Day in the US, and things have certainly been eventful in the presidential race, to put it mildly.
This election may be American democracy’s greatest test. With revenge in mind, and with a guide to converting the federal bureaucracy into a conservative vehicle and removing many checks on presidential power vis-a-vis Project 2025, a second Trump presidency would be dramatically worse than his first and may well signal the end of American democracy. Even in defeat, his refusal to accept the results in a tight race will likely instigate political violence as it did on 6 January 2021, but across multiple states. Since the United States is one of the greatest military and economic powers on Earth, as well as an ally and proudly democratic country, such outcomes would be deleterious to the rest of the free world.
The Electoral College is the key to Donald Trump’s success in 2024. Despite Kamala Harris’s nationwide three-point lead, this may be insufficient to overcome its distortive effects. However, Trump may not even need to win states’ popular votes to win the Electoral College. Learning from 2020, pro-Trump Republican strategists have endeavoured to put in place election officials who will refuse any state-level result other than a Trump win to enable the appointment of Republican electors by Republican-controlled legislatures.
It’s worth taking a moment to think about the enormity of the events in the US.
I remember that day, not far off 49 years ago, when the resignation of a US President was of such monumental importance that there was tv at breakfast time.
Almost half a century on, there’s a 24 hour news cycle and social media to chew over the fact that a former leader of the free world has been charged with trying to fraudulently overturn the result of the election in which he was defeated by Joe Biden.
Despite having lost, the Defendant was determined to remain in power. So for more than 2 months following the election day on 3 November 2020, the Defendant spread lies that there had been outcome determinative fraud in the election and that he had actually won. These claims were false and the Defendant knew they were false. But the President repeated and disseminated them anyway, to make his knowingly false claims appear legitimate, create an intense national atmosphere of mistrust and anger and erode public trust in the administration of the election.
It’s about as far from the presidential oath, in which he promised to preserve, protect and defend the US constitution as you can get.
The indictment relies heavily on the fact that Trump and his co-conspirators knew what they were doing. A significant part of the evidence is based on the contemporaneous notes of Vice President Mike Pence. Trump had asked him not to declare the results of the election in Congress on 6 January and at one point, when Pence refused, told him that he was “too honest.”
The team from Pod Save America, one of my favourite US politics podcasts analyse the indictment here. Jon Favreau, Jon Lovett and Tommy Vietor were all staffers during the Obama administration and set up Crooked Media in 2017.
Hywel @Jeff
There should then be a lot of evidence of people increasing working hours/finding better paid jobs in 2010-2015. How did that compare to people doing th...
Peter Martin Can I suggest an experiment with social housing? We'd need to find a local council who will be willing to co-operate.
The government will need to lend out, s...
Jeff Daniel Walker 17th Jul '26 - 11:41am:
Not the EU though, which covers much of Africa under the Everything But Arms program, and some of the rest, inc...
Jeff Peter Hirst 24th Jul '26 - 5:16pm:
This country certainly needs something tangible that demonstrates to the world that it is becoming a different co...
Peter Hirst What is it that we want the media, the public and the world to take as the defining message of this conference? Most are not interested in the intricies of our ...