America Gets What It Deserves!
Nicholas A. Owoyemi
Global Moderates Forum, Inc., D/B/A/ Moderate Voices of America.
The American electorate made a historic choice in the last presidential election. For the first time in Trump's political career, Donald Trump secured the popular vote and dominated the Electoral College. This unprecedented mandate granted him control of the White House and both houses of Congress, paving the way for significant change in America, for better or worse. As Trump prepares for this new phase, I urge him: Bring it on. Please be sure to exercise your unbound authority however you deem fit, as the nation rightly deserves it. However, amidst this turbulent political storm, it's crucial to remember an adage: if the earth were to collapse beneath us, it would not discriminate; we would be swept up in the chaos together. This shared experience could perhaps offer America valuable lessons for its future.
In the 234-year history of the United States, no sitting or former president has faced indictment until former President Trump was charged with 86 felony counts in four cases, leading to one criminal conviction. Despite his flaws, Trump regained support from different groups, particularly suburban white women, who had primarily rejected him in the 2020 election. This shift occurred even as he maintained controversial views that had previously alienated them.
The Latino community experienced a noteworthy shift in their voting patterns, with many supporting Trump despite his derogatory comments and threats of mass deportation aimed at their families. Similarly, a significant number of black men, feeling alienated by his rhetoric, also extended their support during this heated election. This unexpected backing provided Trump with a crucial lifeline and highlighted a complex evolution in voter sentiment amidst the controversies surrounding his presidency. These changes prompt questions about voter behavior and how opinions can shift over time.
Donald Trump entered the political arena not to serve the American people but as a strategic move to address his escalating legal challenges—a reality many Americans recognize. His candidacy was announced amid multiple indictments, marking a tumultuous period in his political career. With a second term secured, Trump can wield more extraordinary presidential powers, operating in an environment with inadequate checks and balances, allowing him to pursue ambitions he couldn't achieve during his first term. This enhanced authority could shift the balance of power in the U.S. government, with the executive branch gaining more influence over the legislative and judicial branches. The potential risks of this power shift include:
These risks underscore the urgent need for voters to critically evaluate Trump's actions and statements and consider their implications for the future of democracy.
Like many well-intentioned individuals who were once close to Trump during his initial tenure, we felt a pressing need to raise concerns about his significant threat to our democratic Republic. Our choice not to endorse him in the last election stemmed from a deep worry about the dangers he represents to our democratic ideals and institutions. As an Independent voter, our support for Kamala Harris was not a full endorsement of her policies but a conscious decision rooted in our recognition of Trump's alarming disregard for the rule of law. This disregard undermines the foundational principles of democracy essential for justice and equality, highlighting the urgent need to protect our democratic values amid rising challenges.
Throughout his campaign, Trump offered few or no innovative policies or constructive plans, instead focusing on a narrative of vengeance against his political adversaries with the mantra, 'I am your retribution.' He boldly declared in interviews, 'I will have the right to go after them...' In the context of his legal battles and political opponents, this statement emphasized a campaign driven by animosity rather than a commitment to governance or national progress.
Trump denied any ties to "Project 2025," a conservative initiative aimed at reshaping U.S. institutions to align more with right-wing ideals. However, his cabinet nominations raise serious concerns about his governance approach. Appointing inexperienced individuals like Matt Gaetz as U.S. Attorney General and talk-show host Pete Hegseth as Defense Secretary suggests a lack of seriousness. Additionally, selecting RFK Jr., known for conspiracy theories, as Health and Human Services Secretary, and Tulsi Gabbard, criticized for her views on U.S. adversaries, implies that Trump's focus may be more on avenging political rivals than effective leadership.
Like the first time, Trump had the chance to appoint qualified individuals to his government but chose those who would strictly follow his orders. This troubling decision stems from two key factors. First, Trump aims to defy the established U.S. norms, using his electoral mandate to assert his authority and reshape the administration on his terms. Second, learning from his first term, Trump favors loyalists who will not challenge his potentially unlawful directives. By prioritizing allegiance over expertise, Trump raises severe concerns about governance and the rule of law, suggesting a problematic direction for his administration and this country.
The US Economy in Retrospect
In the 2020 presidential election, Americans voted for Joe Biden. However, in surprising events, they brought Donald Trump back to replace Biden in 2024. This switch seems unbelievable at first glance. Many voters pointed to two key issues, inflation and border security, as their main reasons for supporting Trump. While it's true that Biden hesitated to take decisive action on the ongoing border crisis—a situation that many felt warranted a change in leadership—it's essential to understand that factors outside his control primarily drove inflation.
Recommended by LinkedIn
Having lived in this country long enough, I can feel the electorate's mood before and after an election. The voters' sentiments leading into the last election did not match the economic reality. In retrospect, COVID-19 significantly impacted the U.S. economy during Trump's presidency. In response, Trump initiated economic stimulation efforts, even printing his name on the stimulus checks sent to the public to take credit. Many people received payments for months to stay home to avoid catching COVID-19. President Biden continued these efforts to stimulate the economy when he took office.
The stimulus funding during the pandemic helped the economy avoid a recession and recover quickly, making the U.S. the most robust economy globally. Individuals and businesses from different political backgrounds received billions in aid and generally praised the Biden administration, with even conservative recipients accepting the funds without objections.
The pandemic triggered a rise in consumption without a proportional increase in production, resulting in supply constraints and inflation. Consequently, many American voters expressed frustration with the Biden administration, often overlooking the broader context. Both the current and previous administrations faced the significant challenges posed by COVID-19 and implemented measures to stimulate the economy, a decision endorsed by numerous economists. This situation highlights the intricate relationship between government actions and economic outcomes, emphasizing the importance of a nuanced understanding of economic issues rather than reducing them to simplistic narratives.
The Biden economy was recovering swiftly, with inflation dropping dramatically from over 10% to just 2.6% and the unemployment rate down to 4.1% by the election period. Gas prices also saw a significant decline during this time. The effects of the unprecedented infrastructural stimulus began taking hold, contributing to this positive economic turnaround that Trump will benefit from going into his first term in 2025 like he did when President Obama handed him a rapidly growing economy in 2016.
Any economist would tell you that fiscal policy is a lagging indicator. It takes time to implement, and the effects often manifest after an economic change has already begun. President Obama inherited the financial crisis of 2008. The US Congress approved $831 billion to stabilize the economy, compared to the unprecedented $3 trillion spent on the COVID-19 economic crisis. Most economists also agreed that insufficient fiscal relief during the Great Depression 2008 prolonged the economic recovery.
The economy began to recover in Obama's second term and only started growing toward the end of his second term. The growth dividend spread into the first two years of Trump's administration. Republicans have inaccurately portrayed the economic growth as solely attributable to former President Trump, a perception that many American voters reference as a reason for their support for Trump in the 2024 election. Therefore, the electorate must adopt a more rational and informed approach to voting moving forward. America will be better for it.
Please visit our website to read similarly informative articles: www.moderatevoices.org
Nicholas A. Owoyemi
President & CEO (Author)
Moderate Voices of America (MVA)
30 Wall Street, 8th Floor
New York, NY 10005
(212) 406-1958