Trending Now
We have updated our Privacy Policy and Terms of Use for Eurasia Group and its affiliates, including GZERO Media, to clarify the types of data we collect, how we collect it, how we use data and with whom we share data. By using our website you consent to our Terms and Conditions and Privacy Policy, including the transfer of your personal data to the United States from your country of residence, and our use of cookies described in our Cookie Policy.
{{ subpage.title }}
Donald Trump
How Trump won – and what it means for the world
America has spoken. Donald Trump will become president of the United States again. And I can’t say that I’m surprised.
This election comes at a time when people all over the world are unhappy with where their countries are going, and they don’t trust their political institutions to right the ship. Some of that is a product of the deepening geopolitical recession, which is in part driven by a backlash against globalization and the globalist elites who promoted their own economic and political interests at the expense of their populations. Some of it has to do with the economic and social disruption caused by post-pandemic surges in inflation and immigration.
As a result, what was historically an electoral advantage in democracies has become a liability in the current cycle: incumbency. Over the past year, most incumbents around the globe have either been forced out of office or seriously underperformed at the ballot box (e.g., in the United Kingdom, Japan, France, Germany, Austria, India, South Africa, etc.). Those who haven’t faced voters yet are deeply unpopular and expected to lose power soon (e.g., Canada, Germany, Norway, etc.).
The fact that Kamala Harris couldn’t escape this fate after four years as vice president to an unpopular administration was therefore hardly unexpected. No party has ever retained the White House when incumbent approval is as low as it is. Over 70% believe the country is on the wrong track, and Americans have little confidence in their government’s handling of the top issues they care about: inflation and immigration.
Sure, inflation – the average rate at which prices in the economy increase over time – has come way down from its pandemic-induced highs and is now near the Fed’s target. But prices themselves are still high owing to years of above-target inflation, and those prices aren’t coming down absent a recession (not to mention the fact that Trump’s plans promise to increase inflation). Fair or not, the party in power gets blamed for that. Similarly, illegal immigration has also been coming down, but crossings are still at elevated levels, and most illegal immigrants find ways to stay in the country. Many illegal immigrants also moved (or were moved) from red states to blue states, making the issue more important to more of the country than before.
Democrats had hoped to counter these headwinds with messages about access to abortion, the economy, and Trump’s threat to democracy and general unfitness for office. But a problem got in their way: a hyperpolarized information environment that makes it difficult for either side to reach across the aisle to the other half of the country. There are two radically different information spaces in the US, and the gap between these algorithmically boosted, media-driven bubbles is only growing. It’s increasingly difficult to have a single conversation on any policy issue, let alone to find compromise on solutions, when we don’t even agree on basic facts about what the problems are. That’s a very dysfunctional place to be for our civic democracy.
Ultimately, though, the American people looked at the two candidates and found Trump’s message more compelling, and they handed him as resounding a national victory as either candidate could’ve hoped for in today’s polarized environment. Trump shattered his previous ceiling of national support and made gains across the board relative to 2020. He is on track to sweep every swing state and become the first Republican to win the popular vote in 20 years on the back of a broad-based shift to the right in almost every geography – from rural areas to my very own New York City – and with nearly every demographic group, including young, female, Black, and Hispanic voters.
The Republican Party also took control of the Senate, with at least 52 and as many as 56 seats in the 100-seat chamber – enough to confirm Trump’s appointees, but not enough to get away with repealing the legislative filibuster or confirming obviously unqualified nominees. Republicans are favored to win a narrow House majority, too, though the exact margin may not be known for several weeks due to slow counting in states like California and close races elsewhere. A unified government – along with an already friendly judiciary – will make it significantly easier for Trump to enact his domestic policy priorities, from tax cuts and defense spending increases to immigration overhauls.
And if you think Trump’s return will have a profound impact on the United States (fact-check: true), it will matter even more for the rest of the world.
The biggest loser is Ukraine. Trump has repeatedly said he will end the war there in 24 hours. Of course, what he really means is that he wants to freeze the conflict along the current territorial lines, with Russia de facto getting to keep the land it has conquered. The war is already going badly for the Ukrainians, with Western military and economic support past its peak. Trump will try to unilaterally cut a cease-fire deal with Zelensky and President Vladimir Putin even before the lame-duck period ends, using military aid to Kyiv as leverage over both sides without coordinating with America’s European allies. If Trump calls Zelensky first and demands a cease-fire (and the de facto cession of territory), and Zelensky refuses, the ball will then shift to Putin’s court.
Regardless of the election outcome, Ukraine would have been forced to negotiate sooner or later. The difference is that Harris would have coordinated that negotiating position with Ukraine and the EU. Trump doesn’t want to be responsible for “losing” Ukraine, nor does he take issue with Ukrainian self-defense. But he thinks Ukraine’s defense should be paid for primarily by the countries that have the biggest stake in it: the Europeans. Trump’s bargaining approach may succeed at ending the war … or it may not.
Either way, Europe will have a big problem on its hands. Trump’s Ukraine policy will put a lot of strain on the trans-Atlantic relationship. The Europeans, many of whom are already struggling economically, will also be facing higher tariffs from the Trump administration. Will they take a stronger, more consolidated position on Ukraine, or will they fragment? Will they continue to align closely with the US on trade with China, or will they start to hedge more? Will the European Union crack under the pressure, or will it be galvanized by Trump to finally build a stronger, more strategically autonomous union? Those are all huge question marks.
Then there’s the Middle East. Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu was already riding high politically on the back of a string of military wins. He was a big winner yesterday as well, as he can expect greater support from Trump than he could have from Harris. The vice president was not going to end the special relationship with Israel, but Trump is going to make even more of a push to support the Israelis and the Gulf States – another group of winners. Trump and Netanyahu are also aligned in their enmity toward Iran. Will Trump’s blank check embolden Bibi to take even more aggressive actions in the region, potentially against Iranian nuclear facilities? That’s a very dangerous situation that bears close watching.
And let’s not forget China. The world’s second-largest economy is already underperforming, and Beijing is feeling increasingly defensive about the tariff threats coming from hawks like former Trump trade czar Robert Lighthizer. The Chinese are going to be frantically trying to establish back-channels to China-friendly Trump allies like Elon Musk, hoping they can facilitate a less confrontational relationship. Will Trump support that, or will his hawks get the upper hand and push for an even more confrontational approach? Beijing will move cautiously and slowly in this environment.
To be sure, just as he did in his first term, Trump will be able to get some foreign policy wins just by virtue of being the president of the most powerful country in the world. But the potential for things to go sideways is much greater in this environment. Geopolitics are in for a volatile and unpredictable ride, and the United States is about to become the epicenter of it.
So take a deep breath and strap in, folks. It’s going to get bumpy.
EXCLUSIVE: Iran VP denies plot to kill Trump
Donald Trump on Wednesday accused Iran of being behind plots to kill him.
Citing information reportedly given to him a day earlier by US intelligence, he said, “If I were the president, I would inform the threatening country, in this case, Iran, that if you do anything to harm this person, we are going to blow your largest cities and the country itself to smithereens. We're going to blow it to smithereens.”
There have, of course, been two known plots to kill Trump, one in July and one earlier this month.
But what do Iran’s leaders have to say about the matter?
“We don’t send people to assassinate people,” Iran’s Vice President for Strategic Affairs Mohammad Javad Zarif told GZERO Media President Ian Bremmer on Wednesday during an interview for our nationally televised program GZERO World.
“I think that’s a campaign ploy in order to get former President Trump out of the not-so-favorable situation he’s in in the elections,” he said.
He also maintained that Iran doesn’t intervene in the internal affairs of other countries.
“It’s not for me to decide who is going to win in the American elections. That’s for the American people to decide. And Iran doesn’t have a preference in this election,” Zarif said.
Pressed by Bremmer about allegations that Iran was behind recent efforts to hack into US presidential campaigns, Zarif conceded that while the attacks may have originated from within the Islamic Republic, it was “hackers operating in Iran,” but “not on behalf of Iran.”
“We are ourselves victims of hacking,” he said.
Watch the clip here, and tune in next week for Ian Bremmer’s full interview with Zarif in the next episode of GZERO World, airing on PBS stations around the country. Check local listings.
GZERO World with Ian Bremmer, the award-winning weekly global affairs series, airs nationwide on US public television stations (check local listings).
New digital episodes of GZERO World are released every Monday on YouTube. Don't miss an episode: subscribe to GZERO's YouTube channel and turn on notifications (🔔).
Robert F. Kennedy Jr at Supreme Court in Mineola, New York to appeal a ballot suit.
What can RFK Jr. do for Donald Trump?
Third-party candidate Robert F. Kennedy Jr. is expected to exit the presidential race and endorse Donald Trump at his rally in Arizona on Friday. Trump is also holding a rally in Phoenix today, and the choice of location is no accident: Arizona is famous for its independent voters, whom both Democrats and Republicans are desperate to win over ahead of an inevitably close election.
Potential quid pro quo. On Tuesday, Kennedy’s running mate, Nicole Shanahan, told an interviewer the campaign was weighing whether to “join forces” with Trump and suggested that Kennedy would do an “incredible job” as secretary of health and human services, a controversial choice given that Kennedy is a vocal supporter of the anti-vaccine movement. Trump later confirmed that he would probably “consider” appointing Kennedy to some role.
Election impact. Five percentof the voting population prefers Kennedy, and an August NPR/PBS/Marist poll found that that breaks down into 2% of Democrats, 3% of Republicans, and 12% of independents. Since voters who identify as Republican or Democrat would likely vote for their party’s preferred candidate in a two-way race, most of the votes up for grabs are independents.
“Trump will benefit marginally from Kennedy’s exit and endorsement,” says Eurasia Group’s US analyst Noah Daponte-Smith,as he will “likely gain one or two percentage points, but unlikely anything more. Many of Kennedy’s supporters either won’t vote or will vote for another third-party option.”
The US is the world's most dysfunctional major democracy
Ian Bremmer's Quick Take: Hi, everybody. Ian Bremmer here and a Quick Take to kick off your week. I want to talk about US elections and democracy.
This has been the year 2024 of elections all over the world. And most of them are going just fine. I mean, pretty much almost all of them. Okay, Russia is not a democracy. So you shouldn't really talk about elections because it's not like the people actually have a choice. It's Putin or it's Putin. But everywhere else, we've had elections that are free and fair and peaceful, and they've led to stable transitions, whether they're voting people out, or whether they're clipping their power or whether they're doubling down on them. And that's been true in Indonesia and Mexico and South Africa, India, the European Parliament. And soon it will be true in the coming weeks, first in France and in the United Kingdom. So it's not like democracy all over the world is in crisis or is about to fall apart. It's not like most countries can't have normal elections.
But the United States is an outlier. it's of course, the most powerful country in the world, but it's also the most dysfunctional major democracy. It's a democracy in crisis, and it's getting worse. In 2020, of course, there was an election that was very seriously contested. Former President Trump claimed the vote was rigged. It wasn't. But he continues to push forward that narrative. And it has been supported by pretty much the entire Republican Party leadership because he's in charge of the party and as a consequences believed by a strong majority of Republican voters. That is unique among advanced industrial democracies.
And indeed, you see Trump continuing to say the only way the election could be legitimate this time around is if he wins. If he loses, it's obviously rigged. That's clearly problematic for a former president and a presidential candidate in a democracy. But it's worse than that because this time around, you have questions of legitimacy that are beyond the vote, but about the nature of the election itself. Trump's view, whether he believes it or not, is sort of immaterial, but certainly it's what he is promoting, is that the indictments against him, the criminal cases against him, now the 34 convictions against him are politicized by the Democratic Party, by President Biden to make it impossible for him to win a legitimate election. In other words, using the political power of the incumbent party and leadership to delegitimize the election.
That's what he's saying. Again, it's not true, but to the extent that that is the case that implies that, if Trump loses, it's not just because of a rigged vote, it's because of a rigged system. It's because, you know, he was undermined by these illegitimate cases, by the criminalization of the entire judiciary, the capture of the one branch of government by another branch of government, and it's politicization. So that that's the way that Trump is running, Biden is running, saying that Trump is a clear and present danger to democracy, that the country could become authoritarian, that you could lose your democracy if he becomes president. So everything is at stake.
And also the fact that he has been impeached twice, the fact that he has faced these indictments, including convictions, means that he is illegitimate, shouldn't be allowed to run for president, never mind be elected president. That is the Democratic view that Trump is not legitimate as a candidate. So it goes beyond who wins the vote.
It's the reality that Trump and Biden are now portraying the other as illegitimate in terms of the way that the election is being conducted itself. The very reality of a democratic election in that regard no longer holds for the messaging coming from the Democratic and Republican leadership. So is this about Trump? And the answer is only partially, he is a major symptom of the dysfunction and the crisis that US democracy is presently facing.
But it is also very important to recognize a deeper problem, which is that, many Americans believe that their country, my country, is no longer a representative democracy. That powerful, moneyed, special interests, across the board, whether we talk about the defense complex or, pharmaceutical companies or big finance or, you name it, the NRA or the teachers lobby or the police lobby or you name it, that powerful interests are able to capture the political system policies, the regulatory system, and ensure that government does not reflect the interests of the average American.
And it is true that the US is far more captured by special interests. And you see this with the Citizens United ruling by the Supreme Court. You see this with the ungodly amount of money that goes into campaigning for American elections from the presidency all the way down to the House of Representatives. You see this across the board in the way policy can and cannot be made in the United States.
And this is why you have people talking about a uniparty or the blob in foreign policy or even the deep state. And a lot of this is conspiracy theory, and it's certainly not true that there was a shadowy group of people that are actually forming, you know, sort of policy and controlling the president. But the reality, in a sense, is more disturbing than that. It is that the system is so structurally weak and so controlled by money and power of people that are not voted for office that it feels like an non-representative, non-democracy to large numbers of Americans who no longer share the values that America was founded on. They don't see that the country reflects that.
And to the extent the US is unique among G7 countries in being unrepresentative in governance of its people, you see a lot of that in Trump support, that people out there want someone who is angering the establishment, angering the mainstream media, someone that says he's going to break the system, he's going to bring a corrupt system to heel. And certainly you see a little bit of that in Trump's stated policies, like on wanting to end wars, for example, and why Trump doesn't support free trade and instead wants more subsidy, more industrial policy in the US, Trump's China policy, which precedes Biden's China policy but is largely similar, focused much more on that. But of course, it's also true that Trump's “drain the swamp” mantra only makes sense if you don't look at a lot of Trump's domestic policies.
I mean, Trump was the leader in my life who was most aligned to ensuring that rich people get richer, was most aligned with big finance and hedge funds and major corporations and big oil and fast food and manufacturing and, you know, pro-dumping all of these things. I mean, you look at his cabinet with Sonny Perdue as the secretary of agriculture, and Elizabeth DeVos as the secretary of education, and on and on and energy and treasury and you name it.
What you see the reality of Trump's cabinet was the swampiest, of pro special interests, pro very powerful people. And that's why Trump was so welcomed when the Business Council last week invited him to go and speak, as soon as he said yes, (and Biden was invited too, didn't make it, sent an representative), immediately far more CEOs, went to watch. Why? I mean, one, because they want to make sure that they're connected with someone who can be president. But two, because a lot of Trump's policies, will benefit the wealthiest and the most powerful people in the country. And so in that regard, you know, Trump can throw things like, you know, build the wall, identity politics, anti-DEI. But the reality is that the most powerful will do the best, at least in the short term. Under a Trump administration, that's the revealed preference we've seen, with the alignment that he has with those that give the big money.
So, anyway, that is a little bit for me, a little bit of the state of democracy is challenged as it is. I'm not looking forward to this election, in part because it's horrible to see your country go through this identity crisis and not align itself with the values that I think a lot of people around the world, and a lot of people in the US would like to see America do a better job with. That's it for me, and I'll talk to you all real soon.
Will Trump's criminal conviction cost him votes?
Just days after former President Donald Trump’s historic felony conviction, Ian Bremmer sits down with the New Yorker’s Susan Glasser and former US Attorney Preet Bharara to discuss the impact of the verdict conviction on the 2024 election and democracy itself.
What does Donald Trump’s historic criminal conviction mean for the 2024 election and for democracy itself? As the first US president to be convicted of a crime, Trump’s 34 felony counts have stirred significant political and legal turmoil, with many in his party faithful choosing the former president over the justice system. "The GOP's revisionist history on the trial has already begun," Glasser tells Bremmer. Bharara also underscores the trial’s legitimacy, stating, "It was an open and fair proceeding. There was a judge who ruled often for the prosecution, but often as well for Donald Trump's side."Bharara addresses the allegations of political motivation behind the trial, telling Ian, "The accusations that some folks on the Trump side are making about how this was a politicized witch hunt, it was preordained, all of that" is a dangerous game. Bharara also highlights the gravity of the situation, saying, "There are people on the progressive side, on the Biden side who think that democracy is in danger. I'm one of those people." Glasser echoes this concern, reflecting on Trump's impact on elections, "What Trump tried to do in 2020 as well as 2016 was to nullify the votes of an election and therefore of the people, the masses' votes, not the individuals."
Both guests underscore the critical crossroads at which American democracy stands and the profound consequences of Trump's conviction for the upcoming election. Whether or not Trump wins in November is an open question. So, too, is the fate of our democratic institutions.
Catch GZERO World with Ian Bremmer every week on US public television (check local listings) and online.
Will Trump's criminal conviction ruin his campaign - or American democracy? Insights from Susan Glasser and Preet Bharara
Listen: On this episode of the GZERO World Podcast, Ian Bremmer discusses the political and legal implications of Donald Trump’s felony conviction for the 2024 election and for democracy itself with the New Yorker’s Susan Glasser and former US Attorney Preet Bharara.
He’s the first US president to be convicted of a crime. Donald Trump’s 34 felony counts have upended the 2024 Presidential election (for now) and exposed the vulnerability of core democratic institutions like the justice system.
"The GOP's revisionist history on the trial has already begun," The New Yorker’s Susan Glasser tells Bremmer. Former US Attorney Preet Bharara also underscores the trial’s legitimacy, stating, "It was an open and fair proceeding. There was a judge who ruled often for the prosecution, but often as well for Donald Trump's side."
"The [Republican] party” Glasser adds, “has essentially mortgaged itself to the fate of one individual."
Both guests underscore the critical crossroads at which American democracy stands and the profound consequences of Trump's conviction for the upcoming election. Whether or not Trump wins in November is an open question. So, too, is the fate of our democratic institutions.
Subscribe to the GZERO World Podcast on Apple Podcasts, Spotify, or your preferred podcast platform, to receive new episodes as soon as they're published.
- Biden vs Trump foreign policy: Political scientist Stephen Walt weighs in ›
- Preet Bharara on the legal troubles of former President Trump ›
- Trump has been found guilty. Will voters care? ›
- What the Trump trial circus is missing ›
- Donald Trump is a convicted felon ›
- Ian Bremmer on Trump's guilty verdict ›
- Will foreign policy decide the 2024 US election? ›
Trump trial: How would a conviction hurt his reelection bid?
Ian Bremmer shares his insights on global politics this week on World In :60.
How would a conviction in his hush money trial impact Trump in the 2024 election?
At least a little bit at the margins. And certainly that's the reason why Biden and the White House campaign are now working to pay attention to it, to get people down there in front of the courthouse where the media is located and talk about Trump as a criminal. Of course, could backfire on them, especially if it's a hung jury. But if he's convicted, while Republicans aren't going anywhere, there are a lot of independents that have consistently said that they are less willing to vote for Trump. Of course, this conviction comes in the lowest stake of the cases that are being presently pursued against the former president. This isn't the case on the insurrection and this isn't the case even on the classified documents being obscured, mishandled. And so as a consequence, I suspect at the end of the day, if you get a conviction, it's not going to matter much. But in a very, very close election, which is all about swing states and turnouts, it could hurt with getting independents to turn out for Trump.
Is Iran's emergency presidential election really about who will eventually succeed as supreme leader?
A little bit. This is my week of “a little bit” answers, in the sense that it's going to reveal who the Iranian supreme leader wants, what kind of a character he wants as president, an important position in terms of consensus policy execution going forward, how much of a hardliner, how close to the IRGC, how close to the Basij? In other words, you know, just how much are you going to see someone who has the ability to play to the audience, the masses a little bit, is a bit of a technocrat, or is someone that is truly going to be a theocratic dictator on every issue with very little wavering, to the extent that it's the latter of the next Supreme leader is likely to follow those steps. So that is certainly worth watching.
How will Mexico's presidential election reshape its relations with the United States?
Almost not at all. Claudia Sheinbaum, overwhelmingly likely to win. Not likely to get a supermajority, which means that López Obrador is going to have a hard time seriously changing the Constitution, undermining checks and balances in the country before he leaves. But he's still going to have an awful lot of influence, slightly more technocratic government, more focused on renewables and transition energy, but overwhelmingly focused on making sure that the relationship with the US is better. The one thing that I would say is important about Sheinbaum is, López Obrador traveled almost nowhere, didn't go to the G20 meetings, didn't go to UNGA, United Nations high level week, didn't go to the COP summits, just didn't travel, traveled around Mexico. Sheinbaum will go everywhere and will travel to the United States a lot, will travel to Canada, too. And I think that ultimately matters. So Mexico is going to have a higher priority at the presidential level on foreign policy, and especially in a relationship that can be tricky if Trump wins, for example, come next January. That's going to be at the margins, useful for the Mexicans.
- Optimism about Mexico's political and economic future ›
- Why Mexico is a key issue in the 2024 US election ›
- This man will be Iran’s next president. Who is he? ›
- Graphic Truth: How will Trump's hush money trial end? ›
- What the Trump trial circus is missing ›
- Trump has been found guilty. Will voters care? - GZERO Media ›
- Ian Bremmer on Trump's guilty verdict - GZERO Media ›
Trump's NYC hush-money trial: What to watch for
Jon Lieber, head of Eurasia Group's coverage of political and policy developments in Washington, DC, shares his perspective on US politics.
This is what we are watching in US Politics this week: Trump's trials.
Former President Trump faces or faced six civil or criminal actions against him in 2024, an election year. Two of which, civil finds that he was already found liable for. He's had to pay significant sums of money. Two of which, a case in Georgia and one in Florida, are very unlikely to start in this year, and one of which could start later this summer, this federal trial against Trump for election interference in Washington, DC. The final trial is set to begin next week. A trial in Manhattan for business records frauds related to hush money payments he made to a woman he was having an affair with before the 2016 election.
The key witness in this trial is Michael Cohen, Trump's former attorney, who Trump's going to try to discredit the testimony of by saying, “He's a liar, he's out for publicity. But the evidence against Trump is pretty damning here. There's almost no, it sure looks like he committed this crime. However, the allegations will have to be proven in court. Trump could win this case and the jury could decide to throw out the corroborating evidence. There's a lot of ways this could still go in Trump's favor. And if it does, that will be a significant win for Trump, because a significant portion of the electorate is telling pollsters today that if Trump is found guilty of a crime before the election, they would be less likely to vote for him.
Trump support drops by about ten percentage points in a New York Times poll from earlier in the year, based on whether or not he's found guilty. And these are really high stakes, drama for Trump. One of the key political inoculates Trump has is that the trial could be over quickly. He also is going to make the case that this is a politically motivated witch hunt and that Alvin Bragg, the Manhattan DA, is out to get him and stop him and undermine him because he's a Democrat. That message is certainly resonating with Republicans. The key question for Trump's election campaign is, “Does that message resonate with independents, or do they continue to see the criminal charges against Trump as being disqualifying?”
The trial starts next week. We'll find out what happens.
- The Supreme Court throws Trump a bone ›
- Trump's Jan. 6 trial could now hurt his re-election bid ›
- Jane Harman: Trump trial a distraction away from urgent global crises ›
- Two major Trump trial decisions this week ›
- What happens if Trump can’t find $454 million? ›
- Trump has been found guilty. Will voters care? - GZERO Media ›