Lessons from the US 2016 Presidential Polls

LESSONS FROM THE US 2016 PRESIDENTIAL POLLS

        The last time I checked, history was indeed made in the United States (US) on 9^th November 2016, the day that ushered a new political dawn in the country. On that fateful day, the renowned global business mogul, Mr. Donald J. Trump emerged as the 45^th democratically elected President of the country under the Republican Party otherwise known as the Grand Old Party (GOP) having defeated his closest rival, Mrs. Hillary Clinton who contested under the platform of the Democratic Party.

        History, in the sense that Mr. Trump’s emergence was to the utmost surprise of hundreds of millions of onlookers across the globe; in the sense that he would be the first President of the US who had never served in any political position in the past; in the sense that he would be the fifth person to emerge as American President despite losing the popular vote; in the sense that he emerged victorious in spite of the fact his candidature was denounced by most of his allies prior to the election. In fact, I’ve lost my count. The reasons that make such feat historic are countless.

        This is a clear indication that there’s a lot to learn from the just concluded electoral outing. Whatever that happened in America has the tendency of influencing other countries in the world, because it’s undoubtedly a world power. Hence, the US election remains an event that’s supposed to be closely examined by any nation that means well for itself, and Nigeria isn’t exceptional.

        The election has taught us, and indeed the entire world, that there’s a large dichotomy between politics and perception. The former is one’s ability to influence people’s thoughts or actions towards achieving his/her goal, whilst the latter is the ability to see, hear, or become aware of something through the senses, or the way in which something is regarded, understood, or interpreted. Perception merely represents one’s view over something/someone. But, politics is how able are you to influence people’s mindset.

       Prior to the election, public perception showed that Mr. Trump would, or was likely to, lose it; this was why most people far and near were seemingly taken unawares by the outcome of the polls. However, politics transcend perception. Mr. Trump’s victory has proven that politics isn’t based on what the public think of you, but your ability to employ a viable political strategy. The said victor used every means to capture the minds of every existing class/race in America, including the whites, blacks, working class, elites, and of course the religious faithful - particularly the Christians who constitute the dominant religion in the US. Mind you; power is taken, not given. So, you’re expected to deploy all tactics towards influencing the mindset of the electorate.

        Mr. Trump understood that an average white in America wants to see the blacks leave the country, thus he assured them that if he became the US president he would see their (blacks’) repatriation. And the whites who occupy over 70% of the US population were convinced by this campaign promise. Similarly, Mr. Trump comprehended that the blacks were mainly Christians - Catholics precisely, who remained ardent supporters of Pro-life movement, thus he assured them that if he became the president he would revisit the abortion and homosexuality laws.

         He was equally able to capture the minds of the working and middle classes by promising to cut their tax by 30% and 35%, respectively. Among all, he knew his closest rival was a woman, hence, he thought it wise to remove his former Campaign Manager, Mr. Paul Manafort and replace him with a woman in the person of Mrs. Kellyanne Elizabeth Conway. If asked, I would say categorically that Mr. Trump played his politics very well. In other words, he got the result of what he laboured for. If not that America is known for fair and credible elections, considering public perception, none of the onlookers would have believed that Mr. Trump really won the polls.  

         Do you think Mr. Trump would redeem all his campaign pledges? Politics and governance are as well two parallel lines. The latter, which signifies dividend of democracy, can only be implemented when other institutions that make-up the government had agreed to the president’s proposal. America’s democratic terrain, likewise Nigeria’s, constitutes both the Senate and the House of Representatives; the president cannot implement any project without the consent of these authorities. So, it’s not as easy as we presume.

        During President Mohammadu Buhari’s campaign tour prior to the Nigeria’s 2015 presidential polls, he pledged that every unemployed youth in the country would be entitled to #5,000 monthly allowance. When he became the Nigerian President, he said that it was his party - the All Progressives Congress (APC) that made the promise. So, who is President Buhari, and who is APC? How do you reconcile these? The factual point is that politics is politics, while governance remains governance. They’re two different factors. You’re required to use any tactics to gain power but don’t resort to violence, then if you won and consequently assumed duty, try and implement those that are needful.

        Another pertinent lesson to learn from the US presidential elections is concerning the two-way electoral system of the country – the popular vote and the Electoral College. The popular vote pattern, which has been in existence ab intio, allows each eligible voter from each state across the federation to decide who would govern the country.

        The Electoral College, which constitutes only 538 electors to be drawn from the existing political parties in each state, was introduced thereafter as a supplement. History has it that its introduction was informed by the need to make the elites the major determinant of electoral victory in America, since an average voter/citizen was not fully informed and enlightened, thus wasn’t in good position to determine who would suit the White House.

        The number of electors to be delegated by each of the 50 states in the US depends solely on the state’s capacity as regards population. The method through which they would emerge varies from state to state. The electors are just like party delegates. Worse still, the electoral vote (Electoral College) constitutionally supersedes the popular vote. This implies that for anyone to emerge as the US President, he/she must win the Electoral College; and to win in the College, he must obtain up to 270 electoral votes.

        This provision indicates that the popular vote, which represents the real wish of the people, is seemingly useless. It would interest, perhaps shock you to note that Mrs. Clinton won the popular vote but lost the Electoral College, thereby making Mr. Trump who won the latter to emerge victorious. This nature of defeat puts Mrs. Clinton on track to become the fifth US presidential candidate to win the popular vote but lost the election. Even though I strongly wanted Mr. Trump to win, the process through which he acquired the triumph wasn’t very impressive.

        From all indications, it’s high time the US abolished the Electoral College because it doesn’t reflect the real wish of the people. Think about it!

Comr Fred Doc Nwaozor

Follow: @mediambassador