American Election 2024

[ghazi52]

Harris tries to turn the tables on Trump by embracing the border as a key issue​

By Eric Bradner, CNN
September 28, 2024

US Vice President and Democratic presidential candidate Kamala Harris visits the US-Mexico border with US Border Patrol Tucson Sector Chief John Modlin, right, in Douglas, Arizona, on September 27, 2024.
Rebecca Noble/AFP/Getty Images CNN —

Vice President Kamala Harris made an aggressive move to cut into Donald Trump’s polling lead on immigration, traveling to the southern border for the first time as the Democratic nominee on Friday to lay out her plans to tackle what she described as a problem that has languished for decades.

Harris, during her trip to the key swing state of Arizona, lambasted Trump for his role earlier this year in tanking a border security bill that was the product of months of bipartisan negotiations.

It was one of Harris’ more specific policy speeches since becoming the Democratic nominee, attempting to use her past as California’s attorney general to prove that she has what it takes to attack Trump on his signature issue.

“It was the strongest border security bill we have seen in decades. It was endorsed by the Border Patrol union. And it should be in effect today, producing results in real time, right now, for our country,” she said at a rally in Douglas, a town on the US-Mexico border.

“But Donald Trump tanked it. He picked up the phone and called some friends in Congress and said, ‘Stop the bill,’” she said. “He prefers to run on a problem instead of fixing a problem. And the American people deserve a president who cares more about border security than playing political games and their personal political future.”

The former president responded to Harris’ border trip by amping up his own rhetoric on immigration. Highlighting violent crimes committed by undocumented immigrants, Trump told a crowd in Walker, Michigan, that Harris “delivered these horrors.”

“She unleashed these atrocities, and blood is on her hands at a level that, probably, nobody’s ever seen in this country,” he said.

Trump also falsely again accused Democrats of letting people enter the country illegally because “they want the votes.” Non-citizens cannot vote in US elections — a reality ignored by Trump, who for years has lied about widespread fraud in the 2020 election.

The Democratic offensive on immigration and border security is an attempt to cut into one of Trump’s clearest-cut political advantages. A CNN poll conducted by SSRS released this week found the former president is trusted by 49% of likely voters to handle immigration, while Harris is trusted by 35%.

Harris on Friday also laid out proposals to strengthen restrictions that have largely barred migrants from seeking asylum in the United States. And she said she would seek paths to citizenship for undocumented immigrants brought into the United States as children.

“They are American in every way. But still, they do not have an earned pathway to citizenship. And this problem has gone unsolved at this point now for decades,” Harris said.

 

[ghazi52]

US Electoral College: Why the popular vote doesn’t decide the presidency​

In recent years there has been growing criticism of the electoral college and its role in the US elections

News Desk
November 04, 2024

Each state has a number of electors that’s equal to the total number of representatives and senators it has in Congress. PHOTO: PEXELS

In a quirk of American democracy, US citizens don’t actually get to directly choose their president. Instead, that responsibility lies with the electoral college—a process that dates back to the 18th century and has, at times, sparked controversy and confusion.

Every four years, electoral college members—typically party loyalists and officials—gather in each of the 50 states to cast votes for the president. This process happens in December after the general election, and although they hold significant power, these electors remain largely out of the public eye.

In recent years, criticism of the electoral college has grown, especially as two Republican presidents—George W Bush in 2000 and Donald Trump in 2016—won the presidency without winning the popular vote. Despite these issues, changes to the electoral college remain unlikely.


What is the electoral college?


The US constitution’s Article II sets out the process for electing the president. Each state has electors equal to its total representation in Congress, with Washington, DC, allotted three electors. In total, there are 538 electors, and a candidate needs 270 votes to win.

Most states use a winner-takes-all approach, where the candidate with the most votes in that state receives all its electoral votes. Maine and Nebraska, however, allocate their electors differently, allowing for a mix of statewide and congressional district winners.

Why does the US use an electoral college?

The system was born out of the 1787 Constitutional Convention in Philadelphia, where early discussions proposed that Congress should elect the president. Concerns about the separation of powers prompted a rethink, but direct popular voting lacked broad support. Historian Alexander Keyssar explains in *Why Do We Still Have the Electoral College* that the framers’ concerns included potential bias towards larger states and voters’ limited knowledge of candidates from distant regions.

Racial and regional divisions also played a role. The so-called “three-fifths compromise” boosted southern states' representation by counting enslaved individuals as three-fifths of a person for population purposes, skewing voting power in their favour. A direct popular vote would have diminished their influence, so southern delegates opposed it. Ultimately, the electoral college was a compromise.

What is a ‘swing state’?

A swing state is one where both major candidates have a solid chance of winning, making them crucial battlegrounds. In the 2024 election, key swing states include Pennsylvania, Wisconsin, Michigan, Georgia, North Carolina, Arizona, and Nevada. Since winning the presidency often hinges on these states, candidates focus much of their time and resources there.

The status of swing states can shift with demographic changes. Ohio and Florida, once considered swing states, are now reliably Republican. Meanwhile, Michigan, once a Democratic stronghold, turned red for Trump in 2016.

Does the electoral college allow minority rule?

In five US elections—1824, 1876, 1888, 2000, and 2016—the winning president lost the popular vote. Critics argue that this system dilutes individual voting power based on location. For instance, in California, each elector represents over 726,000 people, while in Wyoming, they represent just over 194,000. Such disparities highlight concerns that the system empowers a small number of voters to decide the outcome. In 2020, a mere 44,000 votes in Wisconsin, Georgia, and Arizona were enough to secure Joe Biden’s victory.

Do electors have to vote for a particular candidate?

State parties typically choose electors who are steadfast supporters of their party’s nominee, reducing the risk of ‘faithless electors’—those who cast votes for other candidates. In 2016, seven electors voted against their pledges, marking the first instance since 1972. Many states have laws compelling electors to follow their pledge, and in 2020, the Supreme Court upheld states’ rights to penalise faithless electors.


Why has the electoral college endured?

Efforts to abolish the electoral college began almost immediately after it was created. Historian Alexander Keyssar notes that over 1,000 proposed constitutional amendments to reform or eliminate the system have been filed since 1800, with some coming close. The first proposal for a national popular vote was rejected in 1816 after objections from southern states, where enslaved populations boosted electoral influence but lacked voting rights.

The closest attempt came in the 1960s. George Wallace, a segregationist governor, nearly denied any candidate a majority in 1968, prompting the US House to pass an amendment abolishing the college. However, it stalled in the Senate, where southern lawmakers filibustered. A renewed attempt in 1979 also failed to gain enough Senate support.

“It’s not like we are suddenly discovering this system really doesn’t work,” Keyssar observes, highlighting its entrenched place in US politics.

Could the electoral college be abolished?

The most active effort to circumvent the electoral college is the National Popular Vote Interstate Compact. Under this arrangement, participating states agree to award their electors to the national popular vote winner, bypassing the electoral college system. The compact will only take effect if states with a combined 270 electoral votes—enough to win the presidency—sign on.

So far, 17 states and Washington, DC, with a total of 209 electoral votes, have joined. However, most of the remaining states have Republican-led legislatures or governors, making it unlikely they’ll join. Legal questions also loom, with any challenge to the compact likely heading to the Supreme Court.

 

[ghazi52]

US election: Which presidential candidate is better for Pakistan?​

If Harris wins, relations may be limited; however, many Pakistanis prefer Trump in light of Imran Khan's incarceration

Anadolu Agency
November 04, 2024

If Harris wins, relations may be limited; however, many Pakistanis prefer Trump in light on Imran Khan's incarceration. PHOTO: REUTERS

Like all parts of the world, countries in South Asia are closely following the US presidential race, keeping an eye out for their interests and preparing to tweak policies based on who among Donald Trump and Kamala Harris prevails on November 5.

Analysts say major regional countries — Afghanistan, Bangladesh, India, and Pakistan — are divided in who they would like to be the next US president, but all remain willing to engage with whoever emerges victorious.

On the flip side, US policies are likely to be in the realm of “continuation”, with neither administration applying “a very sharp strategic lens to South Asia”, according to Michael Kugelman, an expert on Washington’s relations with South Asian nations.

“But I do think that you would see a sharper lens, relatively speaking, from Harris than from Trump,” he said.

The US will “investigate possibilities for infrastructure investments in South Asia, working with India for sure to counter China, trying to step up varying levels of cooperation on security levels … especially through maritime cooperation”, Kugelman, director of the Wilson Center’s South Asia Institute, told Anadolu.

Pakistan-US ties ‘could change in a big way if Trump wins’

Pakistan is not a major policy priority for the US at this point in time, according to Kugelman.
“I think the government in Pakistan might think, and rightly so, that the current dimensions of the relationship … could change in a big way if Trump were to come back,” he said.

However, issues like climate change and clean energy cooperation, which have become a big part of the relationship with Pakistan, will not be prioritised in case Trump returns, he said.

“If Harris wins the election, I imagine you would see a status quo. There would be continuity in policy, which would basically be to pursue a limited relationship with Pakistan, but still one that would hold out the possibility of great economic support,” he said.

There could also be “assistance and cooperation around some of these big global multilateral challenges like climate change,” he added.

Kugelman said a Trump administration likely would not be interested in these issues, which would be a cause of concern for Pakistan.

Regarding public sentiment in Pakistan, he said supporters of incarcerated former Prime Minister Imran Khan believe Trump would be a better option and could put pressure for his release.

Afghanistan leaning toward Trump

For Afghanistan and the Taliban, they want a US president who will not give them “a hard time”, according to Kugelman.

It was in Trump’s previous tenure that the US negotiated the deal to pull out its troops from Afghanistan, and Harris was part of an administration that supported and enforced the decision, he said.

He believes that the Taliban government might be more inclined towards a Trump administration.

“With Afghanistan, I think the Taliban will be okay with whoever wins, but may lean a bit more toward wanting to see a return of Trump. But in the end … it could live with whoever wins the election,” he said.

Trump as president, he explained, would be less likely to focus on the state of women’s education and human rights in Afghanistan.
“The key question for the Taliban becomes which president would be more likely to want to look into the possibility of scaling up assistance to Afghanistan, particularly assistance for development, with Trump more inclined to look into financing opportunities,” he said.


However, he cautioned that, at the same time, Trump would not want to start violating US sanctions and giving aid to the Afghan government.

Who would India want in the White House?

India, the biggest economy of South Asia and a key US ally, has a level of comfort when it comes to these elections as there is strong bipartisan support in Washington for close ties with New Delhi, according to Kugelman.

There is a strategic imperative of needing to work with India to counter China, he added.

Kugelman believes that the US-India relationship could change if Trump wins, pointing to some major issues that have emerged in cooperation over the last few years, including technology, clean energy and climate change.
Trump’s hard line on export controls could make technology transfers very difficult, he said.

“Tech transfers have become a big part of the US-India relationship. There’s a much greater focus on those than there ever has been before. So, if Trump were to come back and if he were to maintain that hard line on export controls, I think that could cause some major challenges for US-India tech cooperation,” said the analyst.

Another issue is trade as, according to Kugelman, while Trump has been supportive of commercial ties, he has long been unhappy about India’s tariff policies.

“Trump has said relatively little about India on the campaign trail, but what he has said has been focused on India’s tariff policies. He has referred to India as an abuser, and he is referring to its tariff policies and this is very concerning for India,” he said.

“The Indian government would worry about a return of Trump because of the possibility that this could lead to significant changes in the nature of the relationship that could inject some tensions into their relationship.”

At the same time, Kugelman believes New Delhi would prefer to see a return of Trump, mainly because of foreign policy, especially with regards to Russia.

“Russia has become a bit of a constraint for US-India relations because of Russia’s close relationship with India. Trump has taken a more restrained position toward Russia and the war in Ukraine,” he said.

If Harris was to win the presidency, India would continue to feel the pressure from the US about this partnership with Russia, he said.

“India would have reasons to be both concerned and assured if Trump or Harris become president, so basically they could live with it,” he added.

With tensions escalating between Canada and India over the murder of a dissident Sikh activist on Canadian soil, Kugelman said both Harris and Trump could pressure New Delhi on this issue.

“They would not let it go. They would pressure India to carry out an investigation. If Harris were to come, there would be continued efforts on the part of the US to balance its alliance with Canada with its strategic partnership with India, and try to throw its support behind Canada’s efforts to push for an investigation, while at the same time being very careful about how it goes about its relationship with India,” Kugelman explained.

“If Trump were to come back as president, he has traditionally expressed more skepticism to the idea of alliances, and he may not feel as compelled to ensure that level of solidarity with Canada over its own allegations.”

US-Bangladesh ‘relationship has been reshaped’

In Bangladesh, the interim government led by Nobel laureate Muhammad Yunus would be hoping for a Harris victory, according to Kugelman.

Dhaka recognises that the relationship with the US has shifted in a big way since the major political changes in Bangladesh,” he said, referring to the August ouster of ex-Prime Minister Sheikh Hasina, who ruled the country for over 15 years.

“It recognises that the relationship has been reshaped in a way that development assistance and support for reforms have become a big part of the relationship.”

For Trump, Bangladesh knows he likely would not have any interest in shaping any relationship around providing development assistance or support for reforms, said Kugelman.

“Dhaka would likely fear that if Trump were to come back, he would want to scale back the relationship and perhaps make it more about strategic issues, maybe make it more about trade issues,” he continued.

The other challenge for Bangladesh, he added, is that this new government “is much more inclined to strengthen relations with China than the previous government.”

“Sheikh Hasina did strengthen ties with China for sure, but I think this government wants to strengthen relations with both the US and China, which makes sense from the perspective of strategic autonomy,” said Kugelman.

 

[ghazi52]

When are US election results typically announced? A look at past presidential races​

Extended poll hours, a close Trump-Harris race, and ballot-counting rules may affect the timing of election results

News Desk
November 05, 2024

Large number of peoples are casting their early votes in US. PHOTO: PIXABAY

Millions of Americans, along with international observers, may need to wait beyond election night to learn the outcome of the US presidential race.

Although Americans have become accustomed to news outlets projecting a winner by bedtime or early morning, final results are rarely completed on Election Day. This year, local and state deadlines for certification range from two days after 5 November to over a month.

The 2000 and 2020 presidential races saw the longest delays in the past 25 years. The 2000 election famously dragged on due to a razor-thin margin and ensuing legal battles, while a surge in mail-in voting during the COVID-19 pandemic slowed the 2020 results. In 2024, state laws in Pennsylvania and Wisconsin, which bar early vote counting until Election Day, could also delay results.

Factors such as extended polling hours, a close race between former President Donald Trump and Vice President Kamala Harris, and ballot-counting regulations may impact the timing of results. However, officials emphasise that a delayed announcement does not indicate issues with the tabulation process.

Here’s a closer look at how quickly results emerged in the past six US presidential elections:

When were the 2020 results announced?

The 2020 election between President Joe Biden and Trump took place on 3 November, but news outlets did not declare Biden the winner until four days later, on 7 November.

How do news outlets call elections before every ballot is counted?

Outlets follow varied methods. The Associated Press, for instance, calls a race once “trailing candidates no longer have a path to victory,” using research and analysis to support its projections.



When were the 2016 results announced?

In 2016, the race between Hillary Clinton and Trump was called for Trump shortly before 3 a.m. EST on 9 November.

When were the 2012 results announced?

On Election Day 2012, former President Barack Obama’s re-election over Mitt Romney was projected before midnight on 6 November.

When were the 2008 results announced?

Barack Obama’s historic 2008 victory over John McCain was called around 11 p.m. EST on 4 November, shortly after the polls closed.

When were the 2004 results announced?

In 2004, John Kerry conceded to President George W. Bush via phone call just after 11 a.m. the day after the election, which was held on 2 November.

When were the 2000 results announced?

A notable outlier, the 2000 election between Al Gore and George W. Bush was ultimately resolved five weeks after Election Day, on 12 December. The close race in Florida sparked debates, recounts, and legal battles. Gore requested a manual recount in Florida due to a narrow margin, which was later upheld by the Florida Supreme Court.

However, the Bush campaign contested this decision, and the US Supreme Court ultimately ruled 5-4 to halt further recounts, concluding that Gore’s campaign had run out of time for additional proposals. The decision, which remains controversial, gave Bush the state of Florida by 537 votes, securing his victory.