Anti-establishment
candidates triumph in New Hampshire primaries
The contest has only just begun, of course, but it is already clear that the anti-establishment wave that has been criss-crossing Europe - from Spain to Greece to the election of left-winger Jeremy Corbyn to Labour Party leader - not to mention the rise of UKIP - seems to have crossed the Atlantic. There is a palpable sense of disillusionment with established political elites and new hope that emerging movements of resistance will be able to take on the financial and political power of big banks whether in London, New York or Berlin, and turn back the tide of 'austerity' policies that have seen draconian cuts in public spending on the middle classes as well as the most vulnerable in our societies.
Bernie Sanders’s big lead in polls was replicated in the
election – with 60% of the vote, over 20% ahead of Clinton. Sanders’s call for
a ‘political revolution’ resonated with Democrats far more than Clinton’s ‘realism’.
Sanders seems to be winning in the Democrats’ tug-of-war over who’s the real ‘progressive’
candidate. Hillary is losing ground to Sanders especially among young and women
voters. Her claims that she can ‘rein in Wall Street’ while suggesting Sanders
is impractical did not cut any ice with NH electors.
Bill and Hillary Clinton have received election campaign donations of $3 billion over the past 40 years, according to a Washington Post investigation (https://www.washingtonpost.com/graphics/politics/clinton-money/.
And the Clinton Foundation has been rocked by revelations of its links with major banks and corrupt businessmen providing donations in exchange for major government contracts. http://ij-poli-blog.blogspot.co.uk/2015/02/clinton-foundation-corruption-and-human.html
Sanders huge win will
drive home his message that he can take on Clinton, even though he lags
behind in racially diverse states like Nevada and S Carolina. But back in June
2015, Clinton led in NH by 15%; she lost by 22%.
Sanders is still not
making any real appeal to minorities, despite popularity with young voters.
In Iowa over 80% of voters under 29 years of age supported Sanders. However,
former president and CEO of National Association for the Advancement of Colored People (NAACP), Ben Jealous, has endorsed Sanders for the
nomination, a significant step ahead of the South Carolina primaries where
Clinton’s lead is around 40%, and African-Americans make up 60% of Democratic
voters.
With the progressive label being fought over in the
Democratic party and the Republican shift to the right brought about by Trump’s
popularity, the partisan divisions in the US remain very wide.
The leading anti-establishment Trump won a resounding
victory too – cashing in on widespread disgust with professional career
politicians. Although Rubio picked up more endorsements after Iowa and moved
closer to Trump in terms of Google search volume in New Hampshire (and the US
more generally), his campaign suffered a severe setback after winning just 10% of
the vote and coming in fifth behind John Kasich, Jeb Bush, and Ted Cruz, who
did relatively well despite gaining just 1 new endorsement to Rubio’s 9 since
Iowa.
The Republican race remains wide open although the scale of
Trump’s gives the GOP leadership a real headache.
The point to bear in
mind, however, is that the GOP race is front-loaded with states likely to favour
outsiders like Trump and Cruz – high proportions of non-college educated and
evangelical voters, where delegates are allotted on the basis of proportional
representation. But later down the road, state primaries are first-past-the-post,
winner-takes-all delegates, and have far more delegates to distribute.
Yet, it must also be remembered that a large proportion of
Trump’s white non-college-educated base is economically liberal – they want
bigger government programmes for the poor and working families, and heavier
taxes for the rich, and redistribution of wealth and income. Indeed, a majority
of Republican voters favour redistributive measures. Party images – focused around
ethno-racial and cultural factors – are the principal perceptions keeping apart
economically-liberal GOP and Democratic voters.
But those opinions – on left and right – do not accord with
the views of large donors to the Clinton and Rubio/Cruz/ Bush campaigns – and they
have flatly refused to address the matter.
In Europe, money talks; in America, money screams
No comments:
Post a Comment