Connect with us

News

As Kamala Harris Faces Political Turmoil, Will Hope Prevail Over Fear In The US Election?

Published

on

As Kamala Harris Faces Political Turmoil, Will Hope Prevail Over Fear In The US Election?

As Kamala Harris Enters The US Election Danger Zone, We Are About To See If Hope Trumps Fear

BY ARTHUR SINODINOS


As an Australian onlooker, the pageantry of American politics – party conventions in particular – can seem like a spectacle compared with the austerity of Australian elections.

But after the DNC celebrations in Chicago wind down, the Democratic party is facing the hard reality of a serious fight ahead of November’s presidential election.

At this stage of the campaign, it’s better to be in Kamala Harris’ shoes than Donald Trump’s. But she has some work to do yet and is maybe a couple of points off a genuine lead.

She is now entering the danger zone. The home stretch traditionally kicks off on Labor Day on the first Monday in September, when everyone returns to work. Most voters are locked into their choice by now but must be motivated to stay engaged and cast their vote. Ballot papers will start going out soon in some states.

The few undecideds now start to focus on the campaign. By this stage, candidates should have honed their messages down to a few key points that they will repeat ad nauseam until election day. By the end of it, the candidates will have very little fuel left in the tank.

The major events to come are the debate(s), where a misstep could cost the election. If Trump behaves himself and sticks to the key issues (immigration and the economy) he is positioned to win the debates and possibly the election. The pressure on Harris is to show she can go toe to toe with Trump and is in command of not only broad themes but policy, without getting lost in the weeds.

Trump has struggled to get his line and length on Harris. He is still mourning the loss of Joe Biden. He went through a similar grieving process in 2020 when Covid-19 derailed his election campaign. Trump began 2020 confident that the strong economy and incumbency would result in a comfortable reelection, but Covid completely changed the election landscape. He struggled to adjust his message, veering between Churchillian statesmanship and partisan brawling. He took over Vice President Pence’s daily briefings, which were rating highly, and made the election a referendum on himself.

Biden, meanwhile, kept to his basement and pounded out messages that highlighted Trump’s negatives. He detached enough non-college-educated white voters to swing the election. That was the calculation behind backing Biden in 2020. In this election, Biden became a handbrake on voter enthusiasm, so the Democrats cancelled him. Trump underestimated the ruthlessness of the Democrats and Biden’s party loyalty; he is above all an institutionalist, the quintessential insider.

Read also : The Potential Return of Donald Trump and Its Global Impact

Trump presents himself as the outsider, seeking to appeal to those let down by the cosy Washington insiders looking after themselves and Wall Street but not main street. Insiders are cosmopolitans and globalists; he is America First.

Trump is simultaneously courting the big end of town and the libertarians in Big Tech with promises of lower taxes and less regulation. Tech bros such as Elon Musk and Peter Thiel also see themselves as outsiders, breaking through the business establishment and setting their own rules. Trump is OK with that if they fund him and provide support in the media.

A strong suit for Trump is the economy, which did well during his tenure, driven by tax cuts and a burgeoning deficit. Biden’s strong economy has been undermined by inflation stoked by supply side shortages and continued growth in government spending. Trump’s policy proposals for higher tariffs will add to costs as will the desire to artificially lower the dollar, impacting interest rates and undermining market confidence. The Republicans cannot agree on a plan to rein in the fiscal deficit, with defence spending set to go


Harris is turning the Republican mantra of freedom on its head – freedom over your own body if you are a woman, freedom from gun violence and the freedom to get ahead. She has reenergised young people and women generally. She is leaning into the changing face of America, positioning Trump as yesterday’s man


higher and Trump having promised tax cuts all round and ruled out cuts to Medicare and social security.

Trump’s other strong suit is immigration, which has surged in the last four years. His attacks on immigration are also a proxy for how quickly America is changing in demography, and racial and ethnic complexion. This is linked to fears about safety and security in sections of the population. This was exemplified by a recent Trump ad that contrasted a traditional American house with a flag out the front, next to a hellscape of a neighbourhood overrun by dark-skinned immigrants and intruders. This is not a time for subtlety.

But Harris has transformed the race. She is proof that, above all, politicians are purveyors of hope. That was Michelle Obama’s message to the Democrat faithful: “The contagious power of hope.”

Harris is turning the Republican mantra of freedom on its head – freedom over your own body if you are a woman, freedom from gun violence and the freedom to get ahead. She has reenergised young people and women generally. She is leaning into the changing face of America, positioning Trump as yesterday’s man.

She remains a policy chameleon, straddling the divide between moderate and progressive Democrats, and deftly distancing herself from some Biden-era policies including the self-described broken immigration system. She has junked inconvenient policy positions. She no longer supports single payer government-run healthcare, for example.

The Trump team is reprising previous policy positions to define her as a far-left candidate. This may stick if Harris is unable to define herself, although the Trump/Vance team has shifted positions over time, too.

Democrat strategists are wary of tying her down with too many details – that is for after the election. Her positions now are meant to paint a picture of her as the anti-Trump while neutralising his populist themes. She matched his promise not to tax tips (important to hospitality workers in Nevada). Her major economic speech last week was a populist feast, dealing with inflation by going after price gouging by corporations and offering a housing grant program to the middle class (proxy for the aspirational working class).

If Trump continues to bait her by targeting personality rather than policy, she may just get away with policy lite.

We are about to see if hope trumps fear.

Arthur Sinodinos is a former Australian ambassador to the US. He is the partner and chair of The Asia Group’s Australia practice and was a former minister for industry, innovation and science

Continue Reading
Click to comment

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

News

Israeli PM Netanyahu Seeks Presidential Pardon Amid Ongoing Corruption Trials

Published

on

Israeli PM Netanyahu Seeks Presidential Pardon Amid Ongoing Corruption Trials

 

Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu has formally requested a pardon from President Isaac Herzog over multiple corruption cases that have been ongoing for the past five years.

 

According to a statement from the President’s office, Herzog will consider the request only after receiving opinions from justice officials, noting that the matter “carries with it significant implications.” No timeline has been given for a decision.

 

Netanyahu has been standing trial on charges of bribery, fraud, and breach of trust in connection with three separate cases.

 

He denies any wrongdoing and has repeatedly described the legal proceedings as a “witch hunt” by his political opponents.

 

In a video message released on Sunday, Netanyahu stated that while he would have preferred to see the judicial process through to the end, “national interest demanded otherwise.”

 

He argued that the trials were straining the nation and said a pardon could help restore national unity.

 

“I am certain, as are many others in the nation, that an immediate end to the trial would greatly help lower the flames and promote broad reconciliation—something our country desperately needs,” Netanyahu said.

 

He described the court’s requirement for him to testify three times a week as “an impossible demand.”

 

The allegations against the prime minister date back to 2020, when he became the first sitting Israeli leader to stand trial.

 

In the first case, prosecutors alleged that he received gifts, including cigars and bottles of champagne, from influential businessmen in exchange for favours.

 

In a second case, he was accused of offering to assist in improving the circulation of an Israeli newspaper in exchange for positive media coverage.

 

In the third, Netanyahu allegedly promoted regulatory decisions favourable to the controlling shareholder of a telecom company in return for favourable online coverage.

 

Opposition parties have strongly criticised Netanyahu’s move.

 

Yair Lapid, a former Prime Minister and current opposition leader, said that a pardon would require an admission of guilt, a demonstration of remorse, and Netanyahu’s immediate retirement from political life.

 

Left-wing politician Yair Golan described the pardon request as “only what the guilty would seek.”

 

Despite the opposition, Netanyahu’s right-wing Likud party and supporters have long backed a pardon for their leader.

 

Some international observers note that granting such a pardon, especially before a conviction, would be highly controversial in Israel’s democratic context.

 

Israel’s Basic Law allows the president to pardon criminals or reduce their sentences.

 

The High Court of Justice has previously ruled that the president can issue a pardon before a conviction if it serves the public interest or addresses extreme personal circumstances.

 

The issue is further complicated by Netanyahu’s political and security context.

 

Last year, the International Criminal Court issued an arrest warrant for Netanyahu and former Defence Minister Yoav Gallant over alleged war crimes and crimes against humanity committed during the Israel–Hamas conflict.

 

Netanyahu has condemned the ICC move as “antisemitic.”

 

Netanyahu’s request comes amid persistent public debates in Israel over judicial reform and governance.

Continue Reading

News

Tinubu Sends 32 Additional Ambassadorial Nominees to Senate for Confirmation

Published

on

Nigeria's Patriots Urge President Tinubu To Enact New Constitution

Tinubu Sends 32 Additional Ambassadorial Nominees to Senate for Confirmation

 

President Bola Ahmed Tinubu has forwarded the names of 32 additional ambassadorial nominees to the Senate for confirmation, days after sending the first batch of three nominees.

 

In two separate letters addressed to Senate President Godswill Akpabio, President Tinubu requested the Senate to consider and expeditiously confirm 15 nominees as career ambassadors and 17 nominees as non-career ambassadors.

 

The lists include ten women, four in the career ambassador category and six in the non-career category.

 

Among the non-career ambassadorial nominees are notable personalities such as Barrister Ogbonnaya Kalu from Abia, a former presidential aide; Reno Omokri (Delta); former Chairman of the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC), Mahmud Yakubu; former Ekiti First Lady, Erelu Angela Adebayo; and former Enugu Governor, Ifeanyi Ugwuanyi.

 

Other nominees include Tasiu Musa Maigari, former Speaker of the Katsina House of Assembly; Yakubu N. Gambo, former Plateau State Commissioner and former Deputy Executive Secretary of the Universal Basic Education Commission (UBEC); Professor Nora Ladi Daduut, former Senator from Plateau; Otunba Femi Pedro, former Deputy Governor of Lagos State; Chief Femi Fani-Kayode, former Aviation Minister from Osun State; and Barrister Nkechi Linda Ufochukwu from Anambra State.

 

The list also features former First Lady of Oyo, Fatima Florence Ajimobi; former Lagos Commissioner, Lola Akande; former Adamawa Senator, Grace Bent; former Governor of Abia, Victor Okezie Ikpeazu; Senator Jimoh Ibrahim from Ondo State; and former Nigerian Ambassador to the Holy See, Paul Oga Adikwu from Benue State.

 

Nominees for career ambassadorial and high commissioner positions include Enebechi Monica Okwuchukwu (Abia), Yakubu Nyaku Danladi (Taraba), Miamuna Ibrahim Besto (Adamawa), Musa Musa Abubakar (Kebbi), Syndoph Paebi Endoni (Bayelsa), Chima Geoffrey Lioma David (Ebonyi), and Mopelola Adeola-Ibrahim (Ogun).

 

Other career ambassadorial nominees are Abimbola Samuel Reuben (Ondo), Yvonne Ehinosen Odumah (Edo), Hamza Mohammed Salau (Niger), Shehu Barde (Katsina), Ahmed Mohammed Monguno (Borno), Muhammad Saidu Dahiru (Kaduna), Olatunji Ahmed Sulu Gambari (Kwara), and Wahab Adekola Akande (Osun).

 

According to the State House, the new nominees are expected to be posted to countries with which Nigeria maintains strategic and robust bilateral relations, including China, India, South Korea, Canada, Mexico, the United Arab Emirates, Qatar, South Africa, Kenya, as well as Permanent Missions such as the United Nations, UNESCO, and the African Union.

 

Confirmed nominees will learn of their diplomatic assignments after Senate approval.

 

Last week, President Tinubu had sent three ambassadorial nominees for screening and confirmation: Ambassador Ayodele Oke (Oyo), Ambassador Amin Mohammed Dalhatu (Jigawa), and Retired Colonel Lateef Kayode Are (Ogun).

 

The three are slated for postings to major diplomatic missions, including the United Kingdom, United States, or France, upon confirmation.

 

President Tinubu assured that additional nominees for ambassadorial positions would be announced in due course.

Continue Reading

News

US–South Africa Rift Deepens Over G20 Boycott and Diplomatic Snubs

Published

on

US–South Africa Rift Deepens Over G20 Boycott and Diplomatic Snubs

 

Diplomatic relations between the United States and South Africa have hit an unprecedented low, culminating in a series of public snubs, policy escalations, and accusations that threaten to reshape both nations’ global standing.

 

The latest flashpoint emerged following U.S. President Donald Trump’s decision to boycott the November 2025 Group of 20 (G20) summit in Johannesburg and his subsequent announcement that South Africa would be excluded from the 2026 G20 summit in Miami.

 

Trump’s absence from the Johannesburg summit was not merely a scheduling issue.

 

According to reports, the boycott was a deliberate protest, justified by his claim that South Africa persecutes its Afrikaner white minority, a charge that Pretoria has consistently denied.

 

The move left global observers questioning the United States’ commitment to multilateralism, especially at a forum tasked with addressing global challenges such as climate change, economic inequality, and security threats.

 

Marc H. Morial, president of the National Urban League, noted that “the G20 is a forum where the world’s largest economies confront shared challenges… For the U.S., participation is not optional—it is a solemn duty.” Skipping the summit, he argued, signals that America’s engagement in global affairs is increasingly negotiable.

 

The diplomatic rift, however, predates the summit.

 

In May 2025, President Trump reportedly showed South African President Cyril Ramaphosa doctored videos in the Oval Office, claiming they depicted anti-white discrimination in South Africa.

 

The videos, widely condemned as false, were described by critics as an “assault on truth and an affront to a nation that has stood as a beacon of democratic progress on the continent.”

 

Tensions escalated further on November 29, 2025, when Trump announced South Africa’s exclusion from the 2026 Miami G20 summit.

 

The U.S. president cited alleged human rights violations and revived claims of attacks on white farmers, describing it as a “campaign of dispossession—and even deadly persecution—targeting white farmers.”

 

Trump added on Truth Social that South Africa had “demonstrated to the world they were not a country worthy of membership anywhere.”

 

South Africa’s response was swift and firm. Pretoria rejected the allegations as misinformation and emphasized that the G20 presidency handover in Johannesburg had occurred properly despite the U.S. absence.

 

President Ramaphosa also bypassed protocol by refusing to hand over the G20 presidency to a junior U.S. official, instead conducting the handover at the foreign affairs ministry level, a move widely interpreted as a subtle diplomatic snub.

Continue Reading

Trending