Sheldin Wolin, a professor of political theory at Princeton University wisely observed that “The experience of democracy is not ultimately about winning but about deliberating and acting together.” In other words, the machinery of democracy does not favour absolute and irreversible conclusions but prefers debate, reconsideration and readjustment. Robust democracies resolve crises through bargains and concessions, they rely on political actors who are willing to engage in dialogue, revisit and revise long-held beliefs and to adopt new ideas where necessary.
Little of this civic spirit is evident on the eve of the American elections. Four out of five Biden voters see President Trump as an aspiring dictator, according to one poll. Another study shows that nine out of ten Trump voters believe Biden would turn America into a socialist country. At least seven out of ten voters believe that if the wrong candidate wins “America will not recover.” As in the 2016 election, both sides have pitched the upcoming vote as the most important in American history, and both are denouncing their opponents with unprecedented fury and contempt.
Four years of hostile press coverage have exposed all of Trump’s weaknesses. His racism, corrupt self-dealing, ignorance, pettiness, recklessness, dishonesty and narcissism have been detailed at such length that it is hard to imagine a voter who is not aware of these flaws. Against this, Trumpists point to the roaring pre-pandemic economy, tax cuts, three Conservative Supreme Court justices and the appointments of more than 200 federal judges. There is also the important fact that he has avoided foreign wars. One of the few endorsements the president has received – from the Spokesman Review newspaper – opens with the memorable line: “Donald Trump is a bully and a bigot” but concludes that “the policies that Joe Biden and his progressive supporters would impose on the nation would be worse.” A provocative article in the National Review calls Trump “the only middle finger available” for Conservatives, the “foremost symbol of resistance to the overwhelming woke cultural tide that has swept along the media, academia, corporate America, Hollywood, professional sports, the big foundations, and almost everything in between.”
Former vice-president Joe Biden, by contrast, has received suspiciously little critical press – except, of course, for the scandalous laptop story in the New York Post which was blocked by Twitter and Facebook because of its dubious sourcing. Despite his long history of gaffes, some evidence of cognitive decline, and support for both the 1994 crime bill and the Iraq war, the all pervading anti-Trump sentiment in the mainstream press has all but muted criticism of Biden. The resignation of Glenn Greenwald from The Intercept, a news outlet he co-founded, after its editors refused to publish an article unless it was stripped of “all sections critical of Democratic presidential candidate Joe Biden” is a rare exception to this groupthink. Greenwald’s wariness of the former military and intelligence officials who have recast themselves as fair-minded anti-Trumpers on cable television has been a constant source of annoyance to progressives, as has his willingness to appear on Tucker Carlson’s primetime show (on the detested Fox News) and be openly sceptical of Trump’s alleged Russian collusion. Nevertheless his allegation of pro-Biden media bias is entirely credible, not least because most of the Republican talking points against Biden were originally critiques that other Democrats used when competing against him in the primaries.
In sum, as with every other election, however feverish the current atmosphere may be, both candidates have well-documented flaws and arguable strengths – notwithstanding Trump’s truly remarkable lack of decency. As importantly, whichever way the elections go, the winner will have to overcome considerable resistance if he is to govern effectively. If the polls are correct and Trump departs in a landslide, Biden will face a huge swathe of citizens who sincerely view him as an existential threat to the country. Should Trump prevail he will have to reckon with an even larger number of resisters. This is a dangerous situation for any democracy, particularly one in the midst of a pandemic and an economic crisis. The personal contrast between the candidates, and the political consequences of their opposed visions, could not be greater, but the true importance of this election may be the way it has highlighted the fragility of America’s basic democratic norms. In many ways the way the election and the potential transfer of power will ultimately reveal more about American democracy than the victory of either candidate or party.