Can America Lead Amidst Chaos? Tight Election, Global Challenges

With the US election just days away, the race between Kamala Harris and Donald Trump feels more tense than ever, a reflection of a deeply divided nation grappling with global crises.

The ongoing conflict in Ukraine, the volatile situation in the Middle East, and a sense of unease about the future are all casting long shadows over this election.

Wyoming Star spoke to Paul Kubicek, a leading political analyst, to understand how these events are shaping the race and the potential outcomes.

 

 

WS: Has there ever been such a tough competition for the White House in the past few decades? In your opinion, who of the candidates is more likely to win and why? 

I would say this has been the tensest, darkest, and in many ways dirtiest campaign I can recall.

The vitriol on both sides is very high, and the stakes are pained in very stark terms. Polls are exceptionally close. No one has a crystal ball.

If I had to guess, I would favor Trump slightly, because he has motivated his voters and polls in the past have not captured the full degree of his support. 

 

WS: In general, polls show relatively equal support to both Harris and Trump, including in the swing states. Why is that? Can we trust the polls to reflect the public sentiments?

The electorate is very polarized, and people are very dug in their choice, and it has been hard to move people off their positions. I think a lot of this that people are getting news from sources that only confirm their pre-existing views and they are less prone to change their mind even when there are new developments.

I do think the polls are largely accurate, but as indicated, it would not surprise me if Trump votes are slightly unrepresented.

Still, it will come down to a few thousand votes in a few states, a lot like 2016 and 2020. 

 

WS: What can you say about allegations of foreign interference into the US presidential election, including from such countries as Iran, China and Russia? Can they be considered true or baseless?

I think foreign countries have definite rooting interests, and I think all those states are happy to cause mischief if they can. We know, for example, that Russia Today has presented pro-Trump views, and there have also been efforts to hack into campaign information.

So I do think the threat is real, but whether there is any real impact on voters, I cannot really say.

WS: What do you think is going to happen in the Middle East, especially with what’s been happening in Lebanon since last month? Who of the candidates, in your opinion, is capable of ending the conflict in the region before it escalates even more?

It seems that Israel is intent on prosecuting this war until its enemies are completely defeated. This may prove to be a fool’s errand, as the costs of continued war are high and Israel is creating more enmity against it in the region and globally.

I am unsure any candidate is really capable of ending this conflict.

Trump is likely to give Israel a green light to do what it wants, and Harris probably lacks the leverage or ability to bring parties to a negotiating table.

Continued conflict is of course risky, as all-out war serves no one’s interest. I think even Iran and Israel realize this, but this conflict is very dangerous. 

 

WS: How would Harris and Trump handle the war in Ukraine if elected? Do you think a potential confrontation between Russia and NATO is possible in the near future? What do you think of the military aid to Ukraine, is it justified or a burden to the US budget?

Trump and Harris have starkly different positions on Ukraine.

Trump may be more likely to end the war, but only on terms that favor Russia. This would be a defeat for Ukraine as well as NATO and the US.

Harris would continue to aid Ukraine, which may ensure its survival, but it seems now doubtful Ukraine can achieve a major pushback against Russia. I think Russia can win a prolonged war of attrition, as it has more resources and Western aid cannot be unlimited. That said, I strongly favor US support for Ukraine–it is both justified and in the big picture it is not a huge drain, as the actual money goes to US defense companies.

However, I think Harris, if elected, has to couple US aid with an eye to an endgame or at least a ceasefire, but should not wholly abandon Ukraine.