We present below the translated version of the notes on the webinar “Democracies in Dispute: United States”. The webinar was held on June, 4th, 2024, as part of the Pending and Emerging Debates Forum. The original report, in Spanish, is available here.
In 2024, more than 60 countries will have elections at different levels of government. The contests will not only be electoral, but also about the very meaning of democracies, with a struggle for political and narrative power among multiple actors, including populists, who have instrumentalized the democratic concept and practices to erode democracy from within. It is therefore a decisive year that from the progressive camp challenges us to mobilize majorities to defend democracy and human rights.
Aiming to debate this intense electoral cycle, we resume the conversations of the Pending and Emerging Debates Forum, a joint regional initiative of the Sexuality Policy Watch (SPW), Akahatá, Promsex, Puentes, and Synergia, convening a series of debates that will take place throughout the year. Our expectation is that these conversations can contribute to help activists and researchers working in the field of gender, sexuality, and human rights to better situate their actions and projects in what is, without a doubt, a complex and very uncertain situation [2].
This cycle of debates began on May 7 with an electoral panorama of Latin America, whose report written by Mariana Carbajal is available on our website. On June 4, we presented a discussion on the pre-electoral scenario in the United States, whose report, written by Argentine journalist Juan Elman, is now available on our website.
Elections in the United States: Preliminary Considerations
As the leading global power, elections in the United States have always been relevant. Their results have important consequences throughout the world, politically, economically, militarily, and culturally. Latin America, perhaps the region most affected by Washington’s influence, has been no exception, and it is possible to read in its recent history – from the dictatorships to the current cycle of instability, including the wave of leftist governments – a direct link with political changes in the United States.
But there is something about this new election cycle that seems different. The November elections are perceived as the most relevant in a long time. The growth of the ultra-right throughout the world, the geopolitical movements resulting from the rise of China and its challenge to US hegemony, added to the conflicts in Ukraine and Gaza and the climate crisis, among other factors, make the outcome of this election a determining factor for the immediate future of the world. Once again, Latin America, in which challenges in economic, security, and migratory issues are increasing, will not be an exception.
With five months to go before the vote, the race looks even, but the Democratic Party is starting from an uncertain position. The chances of Donald Trump returning to the White House for a second term are real, and are based on two major factors. On the one hand, polls show the Republican candidate making gains among key groups on the left, such as Latinos, people of color, and young people [2]. Secondly, and perhaps more importantly, the disenchantment of a significant portion of Democratic voters with candidate Joe Biden means that possible disengagement and voter absenteeism will play a central role and could end up hurting his chances of reelection.
Unlike in 2016, when Trump’s victory took much of the Republican Party by surprise, the extreme right claims to have a plan to govern. After meticulous work by ultra-conservative foundations and think tanks, Trumpism has built an army of loyal officials to implement a radical agenda, which, if achieved, would structurally transform the US government and have an impact on those of other countries. The most conspicuous outline of that plan is known as Project 2025 [3].
But this is far from a fait accompli. The elections will be competitive, and due to the US electoral system – indirect via the electoral college – it will be six or seven states that will determine the outcome. The Democrats still have room to change their message, mobilize their base, and prevent Trump’s victory. In that framework, the dispute over sexual and reproductive rights, under threat in several states, may play a central role, as it did in the midterm elections in 2022, a few months after the repeal of abortion rights by the Supreme Court. The majority of the US electorate, according to polls, is against radical right-wing proposals [4].
During the meeting, moderated by Sonia Corrêa, presentations were made by researcher and consultant Anat Shenker-Osorio (United States), academic expert in sexual and reproductive health Françoise Girard (United States), researcher specialized in right-wing extremism Heidi Berich (United States), and political scientist Fernando Brancolli (Brazil), dedicated to security and defense issues.
Keys to understanding the election
First, a brief explanation:
The electoral system in the United States is indirect by electoral college. This means that in order to become president it is not necessary to obtain the majority of the citizens’ votes, but to gather 270 electoral votes, which are equivalent to the majority in the college. These votes are distributed among the states, each receiving a certain number according to its population. A big state like California delivers 55; a small one like Montana, 3. Here you can see it on a map:\
Except for two small states (Maine and Nebraska), which distribute their electoral votes proportionally, in the rest of the states whoever wins the majority of the popular votes takes the totality of the electors at stake. That is, if in Florida Trump wins by, say, one hundred votes, he takes the 29 electoral votes that correspond to that state, and so on in each of them. Most states, because of their tradition and the composition of the electorate, already have a winner – it is already known how they will vote. The election is defined by the so-called swing states, which shift their vote from election to election and where the race is especially competitive.
This year, there are six key swing states: Arizona, Georgia, Michigan, Nevada, Pennsylvania, and Wisconsin. North Carolina could be a seventh, according to some polls. It is in these states that attention should be focused.
According to Anat Shenker-Osorio, in these states, 4 out of 10 voters are not already decided. This is a departure from other election cycles, reflecting widespread dissatisfaction with the candidates of the two dominant parties, Trump and Biden. Among these voters, Shenker-Osorio suggests, there are two key groups: “disaffected Democrats,” who have drifted away from the party and the president in recent years, and “voters to be persuaded,” those who change their vote depending on each election and do not have a solid party identity. They are, to be sure, a small group.
Understanding that is important because contrary to what is sometimes believed, there are not that many “swing voters.” The majority of those who will vote are already decided. That is why Shenker-Osorio speaks of a “third candidate”: the option of staying home and not voting. In this election, the centrality of this “third candidate” is greater. In fact, there are voters who vote for legislative and local offices and not for president (again, this tendency is symptomatic). In this election there are also third-party candidates, among them Robert F. Kennedy Jr., whose destabilizing effect remains to be seen, since it is not yet clear which of the two traditional parties will be more affected [5].
Since the same traditional candidates are running in this election as in 2020, most voters have already made up their minds between Trump and Biden. Therefore, Shenker-Osorio stresses, most potential Democratic voters are deciding between the couch (staying home) and Biden, not between Biden and Trump.
Breaking through the malaise
Now, how to appeal to them? In this context, in a climate of disenchantment and impotence, the fear that may exist in this electorate of a second Trump presidency may not be enough. It is important to go on the offensive and have more to offer than resistance to Trump. In 2022, in the midterm elections, the message about the fight for freedom proved effective; this year it can be effective again, along with the fight for more rights and the defense of the family and the future. This means contesting issues that in recent years part of the left has abandoned.
Shenker-Osorio proposes, in that sense, three narratives: to disrupt and contest the sense of discouragement that prevails in a part of the disaffected electorate, to draw a contrast with the opposition, and to inspire defiance. Let voters, angry and threatened by Trump’s agenda, not only believe that the election is winnable but also that it is possible to create a better future, a desirable one and thus break through the discouragement and pessimism. For the success of these messages, it is important to involve civil society and other actors not from partisan politics.
This strategy does not imply abandoning the message about the dangers of Trump’s agenda. The former president’s more radical proposals are not popular with most Republican voters and even fewer independents. Many voters may be horrified as they learn about that agenda and regret that vote. While many of those voters will not go Biden’s way, their demobilization may also help the Democratic campaign.
The centrality of sexual and reproductive rights
While the campaign is dominated by different issues, including immigration and the economy, the sexual and reproductive rights issue may play an important role, as it did in the 2022 midterm elections. This can help mobilize disaffected Democratic voters and a handful of independents, especially women. We refer principally to abortion rights and transgender issues.
The picture is as troubling as it is chaotic. Since the reversal of the Roe v. Wade ruling, which guaranteed the right to abortion, more than 14 states have passed legislation that in practice prohibits access to abortion. Today, more than 22 million women of reproductive age live in states where it is almost impossible to obtain an abortion, to which should be added people with the capacity to gestate [6]. As a result, the number of pregnant women forced to travel to other states has increased considerably. In 2023 alone, according to data compiled by Françoise Girard, 160,000 were forced to travel for abortions. The researcher affirms that, contrary to popular belief, there has been an increase in the practice of abortions because, in conjunction with the reversal of the ruling, access to contraceptives has decreased.
Far from being satisfied with the Supreme Court ruling, the Republican Party proposes to move forward with its offensive against abortion rights, and more states could join the virtual ban [7]. This push is also against the rights of transgender people, an increasingly recurrent theme in the discourse of the extreme right and especially in its anti-woke narrative. Trump is not the only figure to have wielded that narrative. In fact, politicians like Ron DeSantis, the Florida governor who failed in his presidential bid, present an even more extremist discourse than the current candidate, who has nonetheless promised to reverse the current administration’s protections for trans people [8].
The electoral effects remain to be seen. For the moment, the backlash to the Supreme Court ruling has increased voter turnout, helping Democrats in most elections beginning in 2022. In addition, ballot initiatives seeking to limit abortion in different states failed, although several states will be bringing it to the ballot this year. According to Girard, the fact that some of these initiatives have failed in conservative states demonstrates that there are Republican voters, especially women, who oppose the agenda. In fact, support for legalized abortion has increased in several states since 2022 [9]. The prominence of the issue in this year’s campaign and its presence in some key states may help Democrats in various elections, including those of judges.
The researcher notes that most Democratic Party leaders, who in the past have wavered in their positions on the issue, are now fully engaged in its defense. But there does seem to be a difference with respect to trans rights. While it is an agenda that mobilizes and concerns many young people, the electoral impact is smaller, and thus the focus is also narrowed. On a positive note, the Republican attacks on trans people have not benefited them electorally so far, although some of Trump’s more radical proposals on the issue enjoy considerable support [10].
The Other Side: Understanding Trumpism 2.0
Beyond the presidential contest, it is essential to pay attention to Donald Trump’s campaign and the transformation of the Republican Party. The recurrence of the former president’s candidacy is symptomatic. At the beginning of 2021, his political career seemed over. Not only was he one of the few presidents who lost their reelection, but the scars of that defeat, after the assault on the Capitol on January 6, seemed to have left him isolated in the party. A pile of court indictments was already coming, and Trump also had to survive impeachment. The media speculated that heavyweights such as Mitch McConnell, the Republican leader in the Senate, might vote against him to purge the party of Trumpism.
Trump survived the impeachment with the almost total support of the party, and quickly confirmed his power in grassroots circles. The candidacy of Ron DeSantis, who positioned himself as a Trumpist successor without his dramatic character, turned out to be a bluff. The judicial charges eventually piled up, but Trump ended up strengthening his position in the primaries, adding supporters and raising millions of dollars. Trump had no competition for the nomination despite the fact that the party lost the 2022 midterm elections in large part because of the extremist candidates the former president pushed. Today it is evident that the Republican Party does not exist without Trumpism, which has also gained control of key positions [11].
But that is not the only change. Unlike the first campaign and after the experience of four years of government, Trump has a team behind him that is thinking about how to shape a new administration. In short, different sectors of the American extreme right are suggesting that in a second term a more radical agenda [12] should be implemented. For this reason, different organizations, among which the Heritage Foundation and its Project 2025 stand out, are recruiting an army of loyal officials to prevent the government’s agenda from being co-opted by civil servants or other “establishment” figures. This project is directly linked to the discourse promoted by Steve Bannon, the far-right guru who has again cozied up to Trump, who claims that the top priority of an eventual government must be to dismantle the “deep state”, the state bureaucracy.
Among other things, initiatives such as Project 2025 propose to end gender equity, diversity, and inclusion programs, as well as affirmative action policies and legal protections for sexual minorities. It also proposes a profound reform of the administrative state, including the dismantling of the FBI, the Department of Commerce, and even the Department of Education. It also proposes cutting funding for climate research and eliminating emergency contraception coverage, among other measures. The agenda has a strong Christian imprint, and in fact various organizations speak of injecting the federal government with a dose of nationalist Christianity [13].
For researcher Heidi Berich, understanding this agenda is key, because it is the new frame of reference for the US extreme right. In fact, there are already states that have begun to implement part of this program. Another element to emphasize is that the 2024 election must be viewed not only nationally but also locally, as many of the changes noted above – for example, in terms of access to sexual and reproductive rights – are happening regardless of who wins the presidency, although of course the outcome will be key.
Even if Trump loses, the threat of this agenda will not be eliminated. In fact, as Gillian Kane points out in a recent article, elements of Project 2025 have already been exported to other parts of the world, in countries as dissimilar as Uganda and Peru [14]. The title of the article is suggestive: “Project 2025 is already here”.
Conclusion: why this election matters
As political scientist Fernando Brancoli points out, the United States is a unique case where the distinction between domestic and international politics is not so clear; both are in constant interaction. In the campaign, for example, global events such as the war in Ukraine and Gaza are likely to affect electoral behavior, whether for economic reasons – the costs of supporting Ukraine and rising prices – or moral ones, such as the questioning of the Biden Administration’s support for Israel, an issue of concern for many Democratic voters, especially young people.
At the same time, the outcome of the campaign will have a direct impact on these events. Added to that is the management of the climate crisis, the regulation of artificial intelligence, and the future of the US-China relationship, among other structural issues.
For Latin America, the election will also be momentous. For issues as diverse as the search for international financing, migration governance, especially in Central America, and security coordination (an increasingly prominent issue in the south), a change of administration would also imply direct changes. A Trump win would add more instability to an already politically convulsive region, and in some specific areas such as migration, the approach promises to be even more radical [15] than that of his first administration, although there has been a continuity of those policies in the Biden era.
A Trump victory would embolden the Latin American ultra-right, and especially those who are in government. Brancoli points to the coexistence of Trump and Bolsonaro until 2020 as an example of the kind of support and protection that can be expected from a White House taken over by radical leadership. In a context where the transnational platform of the far right is on the rise, with increasingly fluid links between Latin America and Europe, the reincorporation of the United States into the power map could give it a strong boost. Moreover, while Biden has not been noted for his policies in the region, his administration has helped deflate destabilizing movements in elections such as in Brazil in 2022 and Guatemala in 2023. With Trump, the threat of military or other coups – as Bolivia suffered in 2019 – may return.
Without anticipating the outcome, the development of what remains of the campaign will also be a case study for different political forces. It will test the messages and the strategy of progressivism in the face of an extreme right-wing force, whose power has not been deflated but in some regions has increased.
Is it possible to defeat the extreme right with a narrative of resistance? What are the lessons of a government – the most powerful of all – that has defeated this force electorally but has not taken away its power or social influence?
Update on the US Election Situation
Since the debate on June 4, the US campaign has experienced dramatic twists and turns.
On June 26, in the first candidate debate unofficially organized by CNN, Biden had a disastrous performance. The Democrat stumbled several times and was unable to convey a coherent message. As soon as his appearance ended, doubts and questions about his viability as a candidate were raised as never before. Journalists, analysts, and donors close to the party establishment, along with a handful of congressmen and leading figures, including Nancy Pelosi herself, spoke out publicly on the issue. Opinion columns directly calling on the president to drop out of the race multiplied. Despite the pressure, Biden has since repeated that he will remain. Biden’s camp had hoped that the debate would settle questions about his age and that the focus of the campaign would be on Trump and his radical agenda, but the result has been the opposite.
Additionally, a few days after the debate, the Supreme Court issued a ruling granting Trump broad criminal immunity for actions taken during his tenure, a move that promises to ease his judicial burden while potentially setting a precedent for the exercise of presidential power. “The president is now a king above the law,” denounced Sonia Sotomayor, one of the progressive justices, in her dissenting opinion.
As if that were not enough, a week later, on July 13, Trump survived an assassination attempt while speaking at an event in Pennsylvania. A 20-year-old named Thomas Crook shot the former president from a nearby rooftop. The bullet passed close to his ear. Trump ended up with blood on his face and had to drop to the ground, escorted by the Secret Service. He left the scene waving to the crowd with a raised fist, an image that will long be remembered. The incident reignited the narrative of victimization that accompanies the Republican in his third campaign, which has acquired tones of tension and violence similar to those of other turbulent periods in the United States. The drama, already high, increased considerably. According to most analysts, recent events favor Trump, although the outcome of the election is still in the balance.
Notes:
1 In conjunction with this cycle of debates, SPW’s periodic newsletters will also devote attention to the 2024 election cycle. The first covers elections that have taken place between January and June 2023 and is available at https://sxpolitics.org/sexual-politics-from-january-to-june-2024-part-1/23162 The second notes sexual policy trends in that changing landscape and is available at https://sxpolitics.org/es/politica-se- xual-from-January-to-June-2024-part-2/5890.
2 https://www.nytimes.com/2024/05/13/us/politics/biden-trump-battleground-poll.html
3 https://www.project2025.org/
4 https://today.yougov.com/politics/articles/48354-how-americans-feel-about-trumps-proposed-policies
5 https://www.nytimes.com/2024/05/14/upshot/polling-robert-kennedy-trump-biden.html
6 https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-65956103
7 https://newrepublic.com/post/181625/republicans-more-abortion-restrictions-defy-voters
10 https://today.yougov.com/politics/articles/48354-how-americans-feel-about-trumps-proposed-policies
12 https://www.nytimes.com/2024/01/10/opinion/shadow-war-trump-transition.html
13 https://www.politico.com/news/2024/02/20/donald-trump-allies-christian-nationalism-00142086
14 https://inthesetimes.com/article/project-2025-protego-trump-huber-abortion
15 https://www.cbsnews.com/news/trump-immigration-proposals-2024-deportations/
Brief biographies of the presenters and the author of the report
Anat Shenker-Osorio is the host of the “Words to Win By” podcast and a director at ASO Communications. She has conducted research on issues such as unionization, clean energy, immigrant rights, and criminal justice reform. Her original approach through experiments and polling has contributed to progressive electoral and policy victories around the world. Anat has presented her findings in a variety of forums, including the Congressional Progressive Caucus and the Ford Foundation. Her work appears in The New York Times, The Atlantic and The Guardian. She is the author of Don’t Buy It: The Trouble with Talking Nonsense about the Economy.
Françoise Girard is an author, advocate, and expert on women’s health, human rights, sexuality, HIV/AIDS, and feminist movements. For more than 20 years, she has collaborated with feminist activists around the world to advocate for women’s rights and gender justice. Her work focuses on bodily autonomy and sexual and reproductive health, including abortion rights. Girard’s efforts have influenced global policy frameworks at the UN. Previously, she served as president of the International Women’s Health Coalition (IWHC) for 8 years.
Heidi Beirich is an expert on right-wing extremism in the US and Europe, including white supremacist and anti-Semitic movements. In 2020, she co-founded the Global Project Against Hate and Extremism (GPAHE). Beirich has testified before Congress on extremism and advised on how to combat hate speech and domestic terrorism. She has written numerous academic publications and co-edited Neo-Confederacy: A Critical Introduction. Beirich holds a Ph.D. in political science from Purdue University and previously directed the Southern Poverty Law Center’s Intelligence Project.
Fernando Brancolli is an associate professor of international relations, defense, and security and political risk analysis at the Federal University of Rio de Janeiro (UFRJ). He also teaches in the MBA program at the Getulio Vargas Foundation and is a fellow at the Institute for Advanced Study at Princeton (2021-2023). In addition, he is a research associate at the Orfalea Center for Global Studies at the University of California, Santa Barbara.
Juan Elman is a political scientist and journalist specializing in international politics. He currently covers the Americas for Cenital and other outlets. He is the author of Nada será como antes: ¿Hacia dónde va Chile? (Ediciones Futurock, 2022).
