The 2024 Election Crossroads: Trump, Harris, and the Future of American Democracy

Hall, Amy. “Why the Candidate with the Most Votes May Not Become the Next US President.” SBS News, October 27, 2024.

The 2024 U.S. presidential election is not simply a vote between two candidates but a referendum on America’s future. Former President Donald Trump represents a return to nationalist conservatism, while Vice President Kamala Harris champions progressive reform. Both campaigns are contentious, revealing deep-seated divisions within American society. As voters weigh their options, allegations of voter suppression, debates over economic philosophy, and discussions on international alliances have emerged, prompting citizens to reflect on the essence of American democracy and global influence (Pew Research Center, 2023).

I. Ideological Divide: Governance and Democracy

The philosophical contrasts between Trump and Harris reflect broader questions about governance in a democratic society. Trump’s ideology aligns with classical liberalism, emphasizing individual liberties, market-driven economics, and minimal government intervention (Locke 1689). For Trump’s supporters, these principles are essential for personal freedom and economic prosperity. Drawing from thinkers like Adam Smith, Trump’s platform posits that free-market capitalism maximizes opportunity and, by extension, individual freedom (Smith, 1776).

On the other hand, Harris follows a more progressive liberal approach, promoting social equity, regulatory oversight, and government intervention in addressing societal challenges. Influenced by John Stuart Mill’s utilitarian philosophy, Harris’s vision prioritizes collective welfare and advocates redistributing wealth to balance inequalities (Mill, 1859). This divide underscores a fundamental question: Should the government limit itself to protect freedoms, or should it actively work to secure equal opportunities for all?

II. Allegations of Voter Suppression and Electoral Manipulation

In 2024, election integrity remains a focal point of contention, with Republicans and Democrats claiming irregularities. Trump’s supporters cite concerns over e-voting systems in Democratic-majority cities, alleging that the design of some systems may inadvertently or deliberately complicate the selection of his name (Federal Election Commission, 2024). Moreover, claims have surfaced about mail-in voting procedures being less transparent in certain areas, fueling distrust. Similar to concerns about election security in countries with fledgling democracies, U.S. voters are reminded of the need for transparency to uphold public trust (Brennan Center for Justice, 2024).

On the flip side, Democrats argue that restrictive voter ID laws and limited polling hours, particularly in predominantly Democratic and minority communities, constitute voter suppression. This is a contentious issue, as proponents of these measures argue they prevent fraud, while critics claim they disproportionately impact marginalized voters (Brennan Center for Justice, 2024).

III. Trump vs. Harris: Domestic Policy and Social Divides

In domestic policy, Trump and Harris offer markedly different approaches:

• Economic Strategy: Trump advocates for tax cuts, deregulation, and bolstering the fossil fuel industry, arguing that reducing government intervention stimulates economic growth and job creation. His supporters point to a free-market approach as a driver of economic resilience, particularly for middle-class Americans (U.S. Department of the Treasury, 2024).
• Social Programs and Economic Equity: Harris proposes increasing taxes on the wealthiest Americans and expanding social services. Her supporters argue that such policies must correct systemic inequalities and provide fair opportunities for historically marginalized communities. Rooted in Keynesian economics, her policies emphasize government spending as a stabilizer during economic downturns (Keynes, 1936).

This ideological divergence poses a complex question: Should the U.S. focus on free-market growth or take a more interventionist approach to address income inequality? While each approach has merits, the choice reflects voters’ values regarding individualism versus collective responsibility.

IV. International Diplomacy: Competing Visions of American Power

Trump’s “America First” foreign policy has redefined traditional alliances and emphasized national sovereignty. For example, his administration’s stance on NATO funding insists that member countries contribute more to their defense, which some view as a necessary recalibration of burden-sharing (U.S. Department of State, 2024). Trump has argued that a strong America requires focusing inward to achieve a balanced global stance, positioning him as a realist in international relations (Mearsheimer, 2001).

Conversely, Harris emphasizes the importance of global cooperation, especially on issues like climate change and human rights. Her foreign policy resembles Woodrow Wilson’s liberal internationalism, advocating for alliances and collective action (Wilson, 1917). Harris’s supporters argue that diplomatic engagement and strengthening alliances are critical in a world of shared challenges, from environmental crises to cyber threats.

Critical Debates in Diplomacy:

1. China and Economic Competition: Trump’s confrontational stance on China aligns with a realist framework, viewing China as a strategic rival. While acknowledging the competitive relationship, Harris supports collaboration on global challenges like climate change, reflecting a more liberal approach to foreign policy (Council on Foreign Relations, 2024).
2. Global Institutions and International Law: Harris endorses engagement with institutions like the United Nations, arguing that multilateralism promotes stability. Trump’s camp contends that such institutions often impose undue constraints on American sovereignty (Council on Foreign Relations, 2024).

V. Neglected Issues: Overlooked by the Campaign Trail

1. Election Security: While both parties emphasize election integrity, neither has sufficiently addressed the vulnerabilities in electronic voting systems. Experts warn of cyber risks and emphasize the need for bipartisan support for secure voting infrastructure (Federal Election Commission, 2024).
2. Media Accountability and Public Trust: Media bias continues to polarize public opinion, with each side accusing the other of misinformation. Independent media watchdogs emphasize that an informed electorate requires balanced reporting, yet media narratives often reflect ideological biases.
3. National Debt and Inflation: Though inflation and national debt are pressing issues, candidates have largely refrained from discussing sustainable solutions. Economists warn that unchecked spending could lead to a financial crisis, impacting future generations (Krugman, 2007).
4. Border Security and Immigration Reform: Immigration remains a divisive issue, with minimal progress on comprehensive reform. Trump’s approach centers on strict border security, while Harris advocates for a more humane policy, including pathways to citizenship for undocumented immigrants (U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services, 2024).
5. Judicial Appointments: Judicial appointments have a profound impact on American society, shaping decisions on issues like reproductive rights, environmental regulations, and individual freedoms. Trump’s conservative appointments contrast with Harris’s likely liberal appointees, and the outcome of this election will determine the judicial landscape for decades.

The Stakes for Democracy and the Future

The 2024 election encapsulates profound ideological, economic, and diplomatic questions. As Americans head to the polls, they are tasked with a choice that will define the nation’s character and position on the global stage. This election tests not only the candidates but also the resilience of American democratic institutions, the rule of law, and the nation’s commitment to principles of freedom and equality.

Ultimately, the decision before voters is not merely between Trump and Harris but between two visions of America’s future. By engaging in informed discourse, citizens ensure the health of democracy and the continuation of a republic that serves all Americans.

References

• Brennan Center for Justice. “Ensure Every American Can Vote.” Accessed October 31, 2024. https://www.brennancenter.org/issues/ensure-every-american-can-vote.
• Council on Foreign Relations. “The Future of U.S. Foreign Policy.” Accessed October 31, 2024. https://www.cfr.org.
• Federal Election Commission. “Election Integrity and Public Confidence.” Accessed October 31, 2024. https://www.fec.gov/updates/election-integrity/.
• Keynes, John Maynard. The General Theory of Employment, Interest, and Money. London: Macmillan, 1936.
• Krugman, Paul. The Conscience of a Liberal. New York: W.W. Norton & Company, 2007.
• Locke, John. Two Treatises of Government. London: Awnsham Churchill, 1689.
• Mearsheimer, John J. The Tragedy of Great Power Politics. New York: W.W. Norton & Company, 2001.
• Mill, John Stuart. On Liberty. London: John W. Parker and Son, 1859.
• Pew Research Center. “Public Trust in Government: 1958–2023.” Accessed October 31, 2024. https://www.pewresearch.org/politics/2023/05/17/public-trust-in-government-1958-2023/.
• Smith, Adam. An Inquiry into the Nature and Causes of the Wealth of Nations. London: W. Strahan and T. Cadell, 1776.
• U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services. “Immigration Pathways and Policies.” Accessed October 31, 2024. https://www.uscis.gov.
• U.S. Department of State. “U.S. Relations with NATO Allies.” Accessed October 31, 2024. https://www.state.gov/u-s-relations-with-nato-allies/