The results of the 2016 presidential elections in the United States were a shock to many. Few, at least on the liberal side of the political spectrum, had predicted a Trump victory. Nonetheless, when the poling results showed a map of the United States with only a few dots of blue amidst a sea of red; it was clear that many on the left had underestimated the power of capital accumulation in facilitating political success in the current economic landscape (Prokop, 2016). Four years later, America’s democracy still stood, though not without having been subject to numerous threats and dangers under Trump’s guidance. The capital riot of 2021 represented the most obvious manifestation of these threats, and the clearest indication of Trump and his supporters’ plans for America’s democracy (The January, 2023). With a rematch between Biden and Trump on the horizon in 2024, examining the repercussions of another Trump presidency is of paramount importance. Based on Trump’s first four years in the White House, should the 2024 election end with a similar result as in 2016, the consequences could be even more dangerous, with serious ramifications for the future of America’s democracy and the relationship of the United States to the world at large.
We can evaluate Trump’s policies across a variety of different areas by measuring their effectiveness and overall impact during his time in office and continuing on into the Biden administration. Initially, beginning with the Trump administration’s attitude towards climate change, we can see that Trump and his colleagues took an aggressive stance on deregulating industries affected by climate regulations, removing major restrictions on carbon emissions and pollution in a variety of sectors. Some specific changes Trump implemented included withdrawing from the Paris Climate Agreement, cancelling Obama’s Clean Power Plan, and reneging on several agreements related to fuel emissions in California (Gross,2023). Trump’s withdrawal from the Paris Climate Agreement, made between the U.S and 187 other countries in 2015 with the goal of maintaining rising global temperatures below a threshold of 2 Celsius, was symbolic of his administration’s attitude toward climate change (Gross,2023). Subsequently, repealing legislation related to Obama’s Clean Power Plan and replacing it with the Affordable Clean Energy rule had a real tangible impact on the level of carbon emissions in the U.S. Specifically, experts estimate that as a result of this change, the ability of the U.S to transfer to a clean energy economy will be slowed greatly (Gross, 2023). Trump has also reacted unfavourably to various attempts to reduce dependency on fossil fuels in the transportation sector. His rollback of several agreements relating to the implementation of Electric Vehicles in California represents this most clearly (Gross, 2023). Clearly, Trump isn’t too worried about fossil fuel consumption, encouraging us to “drill, baby, drill” (Climate Crisis, 2024). He should be. Based on current estimates, we could run out of fossil fuel reserves by 2060 if we continue at our current usage rate (When Will, 2019). With this in mind, we should be looking for ways to implement clean energy solutions while slowly reducing our dependency on fossil fuels, merging environmental initiatives with smart economic policies. In general, activists note that the Trump administration undid a lot of the progress that was made on climate change during the Obama administration (Gross, 2023).
Trump himself has made clear he doubts the science of climate change, remarking “It’s freezing in New York, where the hell is global warming?” (Climate Crisis, n.d.). He has also referred to climate change as a “hoax” and a “scam” on multiple occasions, also postulating it may all be a plot by the Chinese to keep American industries uncompetitive (Cheung, 2020). However, the reality of climate change is not really up for debate. Based on scientific evidence, it’s clear that human activity is impacting the composition of the ozone layer of the Earth and causing the temperature of the globe to rise at an accelerated rate. Specifically, gases released from industrial facilities and the vehicles we use for transportation are becoming a larger part of the composition of the atmosphere, impacting the process of light and heat absorption that occurs when light from the sun’s rays hits the earth. As a result of the increased presence of these gases, more heat is being refracted down towards the earth surface by the atmosphere, leading to an increase in global temperatures, a phenomenon known the “greenhouse effect”. As a leader in the world, it is the job of the United States to take the mantel on serious issues that affect our country and the world at large, employing scientific evidence to inform our decision-making processes. In this vein, we should be collaborating with other countries to find the best ways to combat these problems together and trusting the insight of scientific experts. Thus, withdrawing from these types of international agreements contrary to the advice of these experts is clearly a dangerous precedent. On a positive note, Trump softened his rhetoric towards climate change in his final years in the Oval Office, during which time he described himself as an “environmentalist,” and stated that he supports an initiative to plant 1 trillion trees globally (Cheung, 2020). Still, projections for another Trump presidency with regards to climate justice look grim. Experts predict Trump could take further actions to roll back climate protections, resulting in serious consequences (Gross, 2023).
In another part of his domestic and foreign policy, Trump and his administration have also waged a war on reproductive rights. Specifically, Trump reduced financing for abortion clinics and reproductive rights associated services access across the board. In the U.S, Trump assembled a cabinet of intensely anti-abortion members, also filling the Supreme court with justices who hold similar views, actors who have worked to defund Planned Parenthood and restrict access to contraceptives domestically (In One Year, 2019). In April of 2019, Trump signed a motion forcing Planned Parenthood to close several of its clinics. Subsequently, he cut funding for teen pregnancy prevention programs across the country as well as access to birth control for over 60 million women (In One Year, 2019). These same policies applied internationally as well, with funding cuts resulting in the closure of family planning centre in countries like Kenya (In One Year, 2019). In the past, Trump has been somewhat lukewarm towards abortion and birth control, remarking that he is “very pro-choice” (In One Year, 2019). But, similar to the Trump administration’s attitude toward climate change, actions speak louder than words. Whether as a result of his personal beliefs or desire to appease the more conservative members of the political party he represents, another Trump term would likely resort in further rollbacks for reproductive rights for women, at home and abroad.
But why does it matter? The answer is simple. Access to abortion and the advancement of reproductive rights for women through family planning programs are among the main methods by which poverty is addressed internationally. Specifically, when women are allowed to have more control over their reproductive cycle, the number of children per family decreases, which in turn places less financial stress on families. Conversely, when families, often as a result of religious teachings, have an exorbitant number of children, they don’t have enough money to feed them, let alone educate them. This leads to a cycle of generational poverty, where children grow up without an education, and hence, without the means to lift themselves and their families out from destitution (Reproductive Health, 2016). Trump doesn’t seem to know very much about this either, instead seeming to ascribe to the long-disproven religious belief that a recently fertilized zygote has acquired an immortal soul, let alone has acquired any degree of consciousness (Sanders, 2023). Again, none of these ideas have any type of base in scientific research. Additionally, aside from his policy decisions, Trump has been accused of sexual assault by multiple different women. Writer E Jean Carrol has successfully sued Trump for defamation and rape, and there are others who have made similar accusations (Weiser et al, 2024). In general, based on his statements and actions, Trump has made it clear he views women as disposable objects and from whom consent for sexual relations is viewed as a bonus, not a necessity. As Trump himself says, just “grab em by the pussy” (Transcript: Donald, 2016).
Moving on to Trump’s attitude toward immigration, during his campaign, Trump famously proclaimed his desire to “build a wall” on the border between Texas and Mexico in order to stop illegal immigrants from entering the country (Trump, 2016). In fact, this was one of the cornerstones of his original campaign, an idea he was able to implement only in part before stepping down. Trump has cited the desire to protect domestic jobs as the primary motivation for this idea. However, this policy has very limited support from economists and intellectuals who have studied this subject in any depth. Academics are very clear on the matter; migration is highly beneficial for a country’s economic development. Specifically, according to the Rybczynski theorem, over time, migrants in a new country allocate themselves to jobs and industries that favour their specific skillset, typically labour-intensive jobs. In so doing, they expand the economic productivity of the economy as a whole, creating more jobs and economic growth (Rybczynsk, 2024). This has been well exemplified by the American economy itself, where Mexican immigrants have helped facilitate economic growth through entrepreneurship and hard work. (The positive economic, n.d.). Obviously, well thought out policies need to be implemented to optimize the role of migrants in a given country’s economy. However, the basic point still stands that migration, on the whole, is beneficial.
Nonetheless, it’s clear that, based on these comments, Trump doesn’t really know that much about economics, aside from having a reputation as a good “businessman”. Furthermore, with a civil fraud conviction now under his belt, it appears even this reputation as a “businessman” was earned through dishonest means (ABC News, n.d). As another justification for his policies, Trump has also referred to Hispanic people migrating to the U.S as “criminals” and “rapists”, an accusation that’s also not supported by any empirical data (Donald Trump, 2015). Trump clearly is not a big fan of empirical forms of analysis, that or Trump applies the same philosophy to crime statistics for immigrants as he does to his property valuations, probably electing to describe them both as “huge” (Yuuuge, 2018). Furthermore, and more generally, the United States itself is, and has always been, a country made up of migrants. Nonetheless, Trump still continues to appeal to the idea of a white ethno-nationalist utopia that never has really been applicable in the history of the country.
Another significant domestic issue that came to the forefront during Trump’s presidency was African Americans’ continuous fight for equality, especially with regards to the American judicial and policing system. After the Charlottesville protest in Louisiana in 2017, during which several protesters were run over by a white nationalist driving a van, Trump’s main comment on the ordeal was that there were “very fine people on both sides” (Trump Defends, n.d.). While one might consider this to be a well-intentioned statement, it actually reflects a disturbing lack of depth of understanding of the history of Black Americans in the United States and the pervasiveness of racism in modern society. Reading any history book on the Civil Rights movement and racism in the United States could grant one the ability to provide a more in-depth level of insight on the issue. It also reflects Trump’s his unwillingness to distance himself from white nationalist groups who repeatedly paste Trump stickers on the back of their cars and wave “Make America Great Again” flags outside their home. The association of the Trump administration with white nationalism is alarming, and it goes far beyond passive acceptance of their support.
In fact, Trump has embraced these groups at multiple points during his presidency. During one campaign rally in 2015, after being heckled by a Black Lives Matter protester, Trump remarked that back in the “good old days” the protestor would have left on a “stretcher” (Donald Trump, 2016). The “good old days” he was most likely referring to are when African Americans could be beaten and thrown in jail for just for protesting being forced to sit in segregated seats on buses and in restaurants (Mackey, 2016). Needless to say, Black Americans don’t look upon this period of history fondly. Still, Trump says he thinks he can get African American voters to empathize with him by taking more “mugshots” during his various civil and criminal trials (Sullivan, 2024). Trump clearly thinks of African Americans as nothing more than uneducated criminals, ironic, considering he has already been convicted twice, and has consistently exhibited a lack of basic knowledge for most subjects that should be considered as prerequisites for someone in such a significant position of power.
The dangerous precedent also extends to Trump’s foreign policy ideas as well. During his initial tenure as head of state, Trump forged closer ties with Russian dictator Putin, and with fascism in general. In fact, Trump’s allies in Congress are still blocking aid to Ukraine in their war against Russia and in general, they don’t seem too concerned about a dictator with an expansionist agenda gaining power in Europe. Trump has also remarked he will not defend NATO countries in the future if they “don’t pay up” (Trump Says, n.d.). Clearly, Trump and his colleagues haven’t learned much from history, especially World War II. If they did, they would know that fascist dictators typically don’t stop after their first conquest. The implications of Trumps allegiance with fascism are important not only for Europe, but for America domestically.
While allying himself with other fascist leaders, Trump has also repeatedly tried to undermine and overthrow America’s own democratic system. As mentioned previously, during the capital riot of 2021, with the encouragement of Trump, a group of white nationalists stormed the Capitol Building in Washington D.C, resulting in thousands of dollars in property damage and numerous injuries (The January 6, 2023). While Trump’s role in the riot itself has been debated, it’s clear that he at least wasn’t opposed to what took place, motivating protestors to “take back their country” prior to the event and to “show strength”, also spreading the narrative that he had been “robbed” during the election (Independent Digital, 2024). There are also much more obvious examples of Trump’s interference with the American democratic system, such as when, during the 2020 elections, he made a call to an election official asking him to “find 11,000 votes” (Independent Digital, 2024). That same year, there was also the “fake” elector’s scheme, during which Trump and his colleagues tried to overturn Biden’s victory in a number of states (Independent Digital, 2024). Furthermore, during the 2016 election, several of Trump’s aids were accused of collaboration with Russia, including national security advisor Michael Flynn (A Timeline, n.d.). Obviously, the intervention of a foreign power in the electoral process of the United States should be taken very seriously. Apart from the election, during his time in office, Trump employed his fortune to his full advantage, reworking the American political system to suit his fancy. Specifically, he appointed several new justices to the Supreme Court and other close allies to important positions in American politics, despite several of them having limited experience (Trump’s Judges, 2021). This strategy has already worked out well for him, as these Supreme Court justices have recently rejected claims to take Trump off the ballot in several different states (Fritze, 2024). It’s clear that Trump knows that money can buy loyalty, and that through placing allies in the right places, he can rig the American justice system, and any other part of the American governing body he chooses. Americans should be paying close attention. This is more than a veiled threat. Trump has already taken concrete steps to abolish America’s democracy and establish an autocracy, a trend that would likely only continue with a second Trump term in office.
The implications of the establishment of a fascistic regime in place of one of the world’s longest standing democracies are serious. Widely recognized by social scientists as some of the most oppressive forms of government in history, Fascistic governments are known to severely restrict freedom of speech and expression and have an extremely poor track record on a myriad of human rights issues, including LGBT rights. One only needs to view the current situation for LGBT individuals in Russia as an example (Russia: Supreme, 2023). Apart from these pitfalls, fascism represents the antithesis of the ability of citizens within a given state to vocalize their beliefs and advocate for their rights in any type of political arena. Without any mechanism to elect leaders or political representatives, the policies and directives of fascistic states are generally solely a by-product of the prejudices and desires of their leaders. Examples of these types of states include, but are not limited to, Stalin’s Russia, Hitler’s Germany, Mussolini’s Italy, and others.
Another one of Trump’s major foreign policy ideas was embarking on a “tit for tat” trade war with China. After assuming power, Trump cited the sizable trade deficit between the U.S and China as evidence that the economic relationship between China and the United States needed to change (Hass & Denmark, 2022). Specifically, Trump tried to negotiate with China for the country to open up more to American companies. The discussions stalled, and Trump responded by applying tariffs to Chinese goods with the hope of bringing China to the negotiating table. Instead, China responded by applying tariffs of their own, resulting in serious consequences (Hass & Denmark, 2022). Initially, this policy might have seemed like a good idea. However, the results of this policy, based on numerous studies, have been negative. The U.S job market has suffered. Specifically, some 300,000 jobs have been lost as a result of the trade war (Hass & Denmark, 2022). U.S farmers have also been affected as well as the manufacturing and freight transportation sectors (Hass and Denmark, 2022). Experts estimate that as much as 17 billion dollars has been lost as a result of this policy, and the fundamental issue of the trade deficit with China remains largely unchanged (Hass & Denmark, 2022). Quite the “businessman” indeed. Furthermore, viewing foreign policy with China primarily through an economic lens also has potential disadvantages. As a result of this trade war, the political side of the relationship between China and the U.S has been deemphasized, with China now feeling more empowered in the South Pacific, where they feel they can exert their influence more aggressively (Hass & Denmark, 2022).
Aside from his poor policy ideas, Trump has never really demonstrated the proper attitude or disposition of someone who should be president. Quotes like “grab em by the pussy” and “drill baby drill” are not from an SNL sketch, these are really things the former president has said (Transcript: Donald, 2016). Trump’s lack of decorum and professionalism was on full display at other points during his first tenure as head of state as well. For example, during the height of the Covid-19 outbreak, in a White House Press conference, Trump repeatedly referred to the virus as the “China virus” and repeatedly made accusations that it had been created artificially in a lab in Wuhan, despite no evidence of this having taken place (Brewster, 2021). The lack of professionalism is not something anyone would accept from a doctor, a lawyer, or a public serviceman, so why should it be accepted for the man holding the nuclear codes for the most powerful country in the world? Defenders of Trump will say that it’s just “political manoeuvring” as part of his large policy of a trade war with China, but the reality of the situation for those Trump has targeted with his vitriol has been anything but hypothetical. Stoked by Trump’s violent rhetoric, instances of violence perpetuated against Asian Americans increased significantly during this time, regardless of whether they have been Chinese, Korean, or Japanese Americans. Trump and his colleagues have also not really taken any meaningful action to curb these acts of violence (How Trump, n.d.). The reality is that Trump probably doesn’t really know that Chinese, Japanese and Korean people are actually all from different countries, and that China (or should I say “Chai-Naah”) isn’t some monolithic phrase that refers to all of East Asia (Trump’s Claim, n.d.).
Based on this paper, one can see that the prospect of another Trump presidency is indeed a frightening one. Trump’s policies represent a sharp diversion for what most in the field of the biological sciences and economics consider basic, elementary knowledge. Anthropomorphic activity is expediating climate change, women should have access to reproductive care, migration is beneficial for economic development, Fascistic regimes are bad and Black Americans deserve equality of opportunity in America. On each of these issues, Trump’s position stands in contrast to evidence accumulated from painstaking research completed by experts in each of these respective fields. Clearly the power of capital has been a powerful form of compensation for Trump’s lack of knowledge and expertise in the past. However, if America is up to it, the next election can prove that the acquisition and accumulation of capital should not be a valid criterion by which we determine our political leaders and state representatives.
References
“A Timeline of How Michael Flynn’s Interactions with Russia Cost Him His Job”. ABC News, ABC News Network, abcnews.go.com/Politics/timeline-michael-flynns-interactions-russia-cost-job/story?id=45456031. Accessed 25 May 2024.
“Climate Crisis Ignored by Republicans as Trump Vows to ‘Drill, Baby, Drill.’” The Guardian, Guardian News and Media, 18 Jan. 2024, www.theguardian.com/us-news/2024/jan/18/trump-republican-rivals-climate-crisis.
“Donald Trump Faces Backlash for Calling Mexican Immigrants Rapists.” YouTube, YouTube, 17 June 2015, www.youtube.com/watch?v=1syqkd1uf8w.
“How Trump Fueled Anti-Asian Violence in America.” The Diplomat, thediplomat.com/2021/06/how-trump-fueled-anti-asian-violence-in-america/. Accessed 9 Apr. 2024.
“In One Year, Trump Dismantled Reproductive Rights around the World.” PeaceWomen, 29 Jan. 2018, peacewomen.org/resource/one-year-trump-dismantled-reproductive-rights-around-world.
“Reproductive Health Is Part of the Economic Health of Women and Their Families.” National Women’s Law Center, 19 Feb. 2016, nwlc.org/resource/reproductive-health-is-part-of-the-economic-health-of-women-and-their-families/.
“Russia: Supreme Court Bans ‘LGBT Movement’ as ‘Extremist.’” Human Rights Watch, 30 Nov. 2023, www.hrw.org/news/2023/11/30/russia-supreme-court-bans-lgbt-movement-extremist.
“Rybczynski Theorem.” Wikipedia, Wikimedia Foundation, 8 Feb. 2024, en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rybczynski_theorem.
“The January 6 Attack on the U.S. Capitol.” American Oversight, 26 Sept. 2023, www.americanoversight.org/investigation/the-january-6-attack-on-the-u-s-capitol.
“Trump Defends 2017 Fine People Comments Calls Robert E. Lee A Great General.” ABC News, ABC News Network, abcnews.go.com/Politics/trump-defends-2017-fine-people-comments-calls-robert/story?id=62653478. Accessed 7 May 2024.
“Trump Says He Would Not Protect NATO Allies Who Do Not Pay Bills.” BBC News, BBC, www.bbc.com/news/av/world-68266651. Accessed 9 May 2024.
“Trump’s Judges Will Call the Shots for Years to Come. The Judicial System Is Broken | Shira a Scheindlin.” The Guardian, Guardian News and Media, 25 Oct. 2021, www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2021/oct/25/trump-judges-supreme-court-justices-judiciary.
“Yuuuge: President Trump Brings Back the ‘Yuge’ (Huge) Statement (FNN).” YouTube, YouTube, 8 Jan. 2018, www.youtube.com/watch?v=QupdLdBbrr4.
ABC News, ABC News Network, abcnews.go.com/US/live-updates/trump-fraud-trial/?id=103642561. Accessed 13 May 2024.
Brewster, Jack. “Trump: ‘I Have Very Little Doubt’ Covid Came from Wuhan Lab.” Forbes, Forbes Magazine, 24 May 2021, www.forbes.com/sites/jackbrewster/2021/05/24/trump-i-have-very-little-doubt-covid-came-from-wuhan-lab/?sh=695219a0539a.
Cheung, Helier. “What Does Trump Actually Believe on Climate Change?” BBC News, January 23, 2020. https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-51213003.
Encyclopedia Britannica, inc. (n.d.). Russia investigation of Donald Trump. Encyclopedia Britannica. https://www.britannica.com/biography/Donald-Trump/Russia-investigation
Fritze, John, et al. “Supreme Court Keeps Trump on Colorado Ballot, Rejecting 14th Amendment Push | CNN Politics.” CNN, Cable News Network, 5 Mar. 2024, edition.cnn.com/2024/03/04/politics/trump-supreme-court-colorado-14th-amendment/index.html.
Goodbye, clean power plan: Stanford researchers discuss the new energy rule. Stanford News Service. (2019, June 21). https://news.stanford.edu/press-releases/2019/06/21/goodbye-clean-power-plan-understanding-new-energy-rule/
Gross, Samantha, et al. “What Is the Trump Administration’s Track Record on the Environment?” Brookings, 22 June 2023, www.brookings.edu/articles/what-is-the-trump-administrations-track-record-on-the-environment/.
Hass, R., Denmark, A. (2022, March 9). More pain than gain: How the US-china trade war hurt America. Brookings. https://www.brookings.edu/articles/more-pain-than-gain-how-the-us-china-trade-war-hurt-america/
Independent Digital News and Media. (2024, March 6). The federal investigation into Trump and January 6, explained. The Independent. https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/us-politics/trump-jan-6-insurrection-investigation-b2474075.html
Mackey, Robert. “Trump Concerned His Rallies Are Not Violent Enough.” The Intercept, 15 Mar. 2016, theintercept.com/2016/03/11/trumps-good-old-days-when-battering-protesters-was-celebrated-in-the-white-house/.
Miller, Brandon, and Judson Jones. “Analysis: Climate Is Not Weather: Trump Continues to Get the Two Conflated.” CNN, Cable News Network, 16 Sept. 2020, edition.cnn.com/2020/09/15/weather/global-warming-vs-weather-trump/index.html.
Prokop, Andrew. “Few Predicted Trump Had a Good Shot of Winning. but Political Science Models Did.” Vox, Vox, 9 Nov. 2016, www.vox.com/2016/11/9/13571872/why-donald-trump-won.
Sanders, Laura. “5 Misunderstandings of Pregnancy Biology That Cloud the Abortion Debate.” Science News, 26 May 2023, www.sciencenews.org/article/abortion-roe-v-wade-pregnancy-biology-supreme-court-ruling.
Sullivan, Kate. “Trump Suggests His Mug Shot and Indictments Appeal to Black Voters | CNN Politics.” CNN, Cable News Network, 25 Feb. 2024, www.cnn.com/2024/02/23/politics/trump-biden-racist/index.html.
The New York Times. (2016, October 8). Transcript: Donald Trump’s taped comments about women. The New York Times. https://www.nytimes.com/2016/10/08/us/donald-trump-tape-transcript.html
The positive economic impact of immigration. FWD.us. (n.d.). https://www.fwd.us/news/immigration-facts-the-positive-economic-impact-of-immigration/
Trump’s Claim That Korea ‘Actually Used to Be a Part of China’ ..., www.washingtonpost.com/news/fact-checker/wp/2017/04/19/trumps-claim-that-korea-actually-used-to-be-a-part-of-china/. Accessed 19 Mar. 2024.
Voss, News. “When Will Fossil Fuels Run Out?” Infinity Renewables, 21 Mar. 2019, infinity-renewables.com/162-2/#:~:text=So%2C%20if%20we%20continue%20at,t%20want%20that%20to%20happen.
Weiser, Benjamin, et al. “Jury Orders Trump to Pay Carroll $83.3 Million after Years of Insults.” The New York Times, The New York Times, 26 Jan. 2024, www.nytimes.com/2024/01/26/nyregion/trump-defamation-trial-carroll-verdict.html.
YouTube. (2016, February 10). Trump: “we will build a wall.” YouTube. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1e_7hZOdsxo
YouTube. (2016, February 25). Donald Trump says he’d like to punch a protester in the face. YouTube. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1es9MZyyPOA