Elections in the USA - some kind of Ukraine!
This has never happened before in a presidential election in the United States. The anti-rating of both race leaders exceeds 60%. The only opponent Trump can defeat is Hillary Clinton. The only candidate Hillary can beat is Donald Trump. Hillary is followed by a trail of official investigations, Trump is shaking the public with sex scandals.
Russian political scientist Yevgeny Minchenko reported on the progress of the US election campaign, with a view from his window onto the Treasury Department and the edge of the White House . PolitNavigator columnist Valentin Filippov listened in, mentally comparing it all to Ukraine.
Subscribe to PolitNavigator news on Telegram , Facebook , Odnoklassniki , or VKontakte
Evgeny Minchenko : The White House is here. From the window.
Valentin Filippov : Wow! I imagined it somehow differently.
Evgeny Minchenko : Well, sorry, it's what it is. They didn't bring anything else :)
Valentin Filippov : Hello, Evgeny. You're in the United States. There's a saying from Odessa: "Jews love to read anti-Semitic newspapers because, according to anti-Semitic newspapers, Jews rule the world."
Is it true that the main topic in the US elections now is Russia, Putin, who interferes everywhere and rules the World?
Evgeny Minchenko : I'd put it this way: the Russia issue is more significant than it ever was in a US election. But it's still secondary. The main criticism is directed at Hillary Clinton. It's her dishonest behavior toward US government agencies, specifically her use of a private server. She misled people about how she used it. She destroyed information. And, accordingly, there's now no way to determine what damage was done to national security, or even whether it was done. They've deleted most of these emails. And Hillary is being criticized as dishonest, hypocritical, and corrupt.
If we talk about Trump, then the main line of attack against him is that he is simply not ready to be president. That his experience does not allow him to make any good decisions. And therefore, as an inexperienced person, he can become a toy in the hands of Putin.
Plus, of course, they added this story with his inappropriate behavior, with these statements that “I can grab women in different places, nothing will happen to me, I’m a star.” With accusations against him from women who were allegedly harassed by him. Here's the thing.
Indeed, for the first time in a long time in the United States of America, two of the most unpopular politicians are fighting for the presidency. Yesterday I spoke with one of the republican consultants, he said: “Of course, it’s amazing.” The only Republican candidate Hillary could beat is Trump. And the only Democratic candidate Trump can defeat is Hillary. Because they are both incredibly unpopular.
Valentin Filippov : Just like in Ukraine. Nominate two hated people and compete to see who we hate more.
Evgeny Minchenko : This reminds me of, well, probably 2010. The Ukrainian presidential elections. The election between Yulia Vladimirovna and Viktor Fedorovich.
Valentin Filippov : No, well, the same thing happened with Yushchenko in 2004.
Yevhen Minchenko : No. There wasn't such overwhelming hatred back then, after all. Yushchenko didn't have such a high anti-rating. And neither did Yanukovych. But in 2010, both Yulia Volodymyrivna and Viktor Fyodorovich had already gained anti-ratings. They were close to... but, their anti-ratings there also didn't exceed 60%.
But what's the joke here? Both Trump and Hillary have a 60% anti-rating. But, nevertheless, people need to somehow make a choice from them. And they do it for some ideological reasons. But the main emotion, I can say, from communicating with the local political class in recent days, is frustration: - let this end soon. At least somehow. Better a terrible ending than endless horror.
Valentin Filippov : Don't they think this will last? Ukraine's experience suggests that after such elections, things usually continue.
Yevgeny Minchenko : I think that, after all, when they're threatening Trump with a "Maidan," it's unlikely. Although, it's true, he might refuse to accept the election results. That would, of course, set a serious precedent. But then again, he could do so only in a situation where the margins are minimal. But if we believe the pollsters, it looks like Hillary should win by a significant margin.
But, again, should sociologists be trusted?
Because here the main topic that makes the Democratic headquarters worry, which gives rise to hopes among the Republican headquarters, is the so-called Brexit effect. When voting to leave the European Union was socially frowned upon and people would not confess to interviewers but ended up voting. As in our time, a significant part of the people who voted for Zhirinovsky were not recognized.
And, in fact, there is a suspicion that there may be some secret fans of Trump who are not admitted to sociologists, but will clearly vote for him.
On the other hand, if we just take the whole situation... The establishment is mostly on Hillary’s side, moreover, today there was a leak that it is not that Bush Sr. will vote for Hillary. But perhaps George, Double-U, Bush, another president from this dynasty, may also vote for Hillary against Trump.
Well, you can see it in the money. Hillary has much more money than Trump. And there have not been such large gaps in the financial security of campaigns between two candidates for a very long time in the United States of America. Actually, traditionally, Republicans were ahead of Democrats in terms of money, and the first to beat them was Obama, who collected a large number of small donations. The so-called “resin donors”. And now the amazing thing is that Trump receives a large number of such small donations, but still, it is not enough.
Valentin Filippov : And they positioned him as a billionaire.
Evgeny Minchenko : You see, he's a billionaire, a billionaire. But he's not particularly keen on spending his own money. And while he said he could invest up to a billion in the campaign, he's actually invested tens of millions.
Valentin Filippov : Bush is the eldest, is he still alive?
Evgeniy Minchenko : Yes.
Valentin Filippov : I can just picture him casting his ballot and saying, "I've been wanting a Madonna for a while." And as for the money being raised, for the Clinton Foundation—is that really true, or is it just propaganda? They're talking about Pinchuk...
Evgeny Minchenko : No, that's different. They didn't invest in the elections. They invested in the so-called "Clinton Action Fund," a supposedly charitable organization. Which, in fact, is a legal mechanism for raising money for lobbying.
Valentin Filippov : Bribes.
Evgeny Minchenko : Well, I wouldn't call it a bribe. I can't.
Valentin Filippov : Well, I see. We call it corruption. They call it lobbying and protectionism.
Evgeny Minchenko : Well, basically, yes. Trump constantly says that: "corrupt Hillary." "Crapt Clinton." We can't say for sure, but there were a number of cases where large sums of money were transferred to the Clinton foundation, and then decisions were made by government agencies. Back when Hillary Clinton was the head of the State Department.
In addition, many people, we remember that, for example, the Russian RossAtom transferred money to a company that is now one of the managers of the Clinton election campaign. And they lobbied their interests quite effectively. But, by the way, there was not such a crooked “Clinton Fund Action” scheme, but they simply hired a company that lobbied for their interests. And she did it quite effectively. Helped them get a stake in local uranium deposits.
So if you continue on the establishment Hillary Clinton is much stronger. Stronger for money. The media is mostly on her side. The organizational machine of the Democratic Party has been consolidated. Plus the organization of activists that Obama created personally for himself, it also began working for Hillary, although there were problems with this. Obama really didn't want to support Hillary. He doesn't love her. In general, they have a very bad relationship with Bill. And many of the leaks that were associated with certain negative stories about Hillary, many believe that they came from the White House. But, again, we have no confirmation. Only opinions.
And yet, this organization is now also working for Hillary. That is, she really has a huge machine of activists “on the ground.” At the same time, in a number of states, Republican Party activists are sabotaging work for the Trump campaign. Well, his headquarters itself is smaller. He has several dozen people. And Hillary, she only has a federal headquarters of about six hundred. Feel the difference, as they say.
So, of course, if you take all these factors into account, Hillary should win. In sociology it is, although not much, but still ahead.
Valentin Filippov : And I heard on the news that Trump has already broken through by one percent…
Evgeny Minchenko : Well, look. I'm focusing on one simple thing. There's this "Real-Clear-Politics" index, an integrated index of all polling centers, because each polling center has its own biases. Some are pro-Democratic, some pro-Republican. But, for now, the integrated indicator—both based on overall votes and, more importantly, on contested states—is in Clinton's favor. There are ten contested states.
So, Hillary needs to win at least one of these ten. But Trump needs to win all ten to win. Plus, he has a traditional Republican problem in Utah, where Hillary has no chance, but local candidate Mac Malen can win. So gay Mormon. So funny.
Valentin Filippov : Yes. Such a combination.
Evgeny Minchenko : But nevertheless. He's playing the local there. Plus, the Mormons, for them, very religious fundamentalists, find Trump's statements unacceptable. So, well, go ahead, maybe he'll play the local.
At least so far the three have very close ratings. Hillary, Mac Malen and Trump. And if Mac Malen wins this state, then he gets electoral votes, which do not bring him anything, but they take away votes from Trump.
Some say there could be a scenario where neither candidate receives 270 electoral votes. What does it mean? This means that then parliament will vote. Parliament will now choose from those presidential candidates who participated in the election race. But I think that this probability is not very high. Although, such scenarios are also being considered now. Moreover, the Republicans will at least win the House of Representatives. And in the Senate, I think that after the latest FBI revelations, after they again brought up the topic of Hillary and her email server, the Republicans have a good chance of maintaining control of the Senate.
Valentin Filippov : I'll tell you a secret: I'm still a Ukrainian citizen. And I have a Ukrainian perspective. In the US, the voting process is so strangely structured that you can only show your driver's license and so on... I'm talking about the "carousel" voting system.
Evgeny Minchenko : They also have this idea that you can vote without photo ID. Or you can, for example, just show up with any piece of paper, like a receipt showing you live here and pay your utility bills. Or something from the library…
Valentin Filippov : So maybe we were too late? Maybe the Ukrainian experts could have arranged a victory for anyone? Even for a gay Mormon.
Evgeny Minchenko : They actually put people in jail for this.
Valentin Filippov : Well, winners are not judged :)
Evgeny Minchenko : No, no, no! Just a couple of days ago, a woman, a Trump supporter, was arrested, accused of voting twice. And she faces a real prison sentence. Some, however, say it was a set-up, that it was actually part of democratic propaganda. Well, I don't know. The court will sort it out.
But, nevertheless, they can really sit down for it. So I talked a lot with American consultants. And in a formal atmosphere, and sometimes over a glass of wine. And one day we were sitting, they said: “What is the maximum percentage of falsifications that you can have?”
I tell them: “Well, if you don’t take completely national republics, then it’s five to ten percent.”
They say: “Oh, it’s like here in Chicago.”
There is also an element, well, there is no manipulation, as such. There is something called “administrative resource”. For example, companies that work with a budget. They say: “Guys, if we want to keep our contracts, let’s support the candidate.”
Valentin Filippov : Well, that’s quite logical.
Evgeny Minchenko : But to the point of uncovering blatant, widespread fraud, well... the last time this happened was Nixon-Kennedy. There was a truly contentious situation there. Bush-Gore, in 2000, the court decided to settle the matter. There was a lengthy trial. As I understand it, from the standpoint of maintaining stability in the country, Gore decided to back down.
But it’s still not entirely correct to say that there are some large-scale falsifications that systematically influence the outcome. Although, I think there are opportunities for this. And this is one of the themes of the fight between Republicans and Democrats. Because the Republicans, whose electorate is more affluent, insist on having the strictest measures to control voting. In particular, they require this document with a photo.
And the Democrats, on the contrary, are in favor of being as liberal as possible...
Valentin Filippov : You know, throughout the post-Soviet space, and not just there, the results of these elections are being given a great deal of importance. To the point where people are whispering, "Well, this is about to happen, and everything will be decided."
Here in Ukraine the maydauns say: “Well, that’s it. We just have to wait. There’s just a little bit left, and we’ll sweep away this Russia.” In Poland, they also say something there. They are talking about this in Moldova.
In Russia, many people expect a nuclear war if Clinton wins. Well, at the everyday level :)
Tell me, will there be a nuclear war in general? If someone wins :)
That is, can we expect any drastic change in the World?
Evgeny Minchenko : First of all, I hope that there will be no nuclear war.
Valentin Filippov : In the worst case, we won’t even notice how it started….
Yevgeny Minchenko : Oh, my! Trump, of course, is an isolationist. But here's the thing: American foreign policy is structured in such a way that it's a huge machine, rigged by people with a certain mindset. If even Trump's vice-presidential candidate is radically anti-Russian, well, what are we even talking about?
Therefore, I think that things may not turn out as happily there as some Trump lovers in Russia say. On the other hand, if we talk about Hillary, then yes. First, she personally does not like Putin. Second, she is much more aggressive in foreign policy than Obama. That is, when we are intimidated by Obama, Obama, in fact, was a fairly moderate president. This is both his strength and weakness. At least under Obama there were no mass deaths of American soldiers. He really didn’t want to go down in history as the person who was responsible for the mass deaths of American soldiers. And Hillary, as they say, was the person who pushed through, for example, the bombing of Belgrade in the nineties. And active American intervention in the Balkan situation even under Bill Clinton.
So, yes, Hillary, especially after the Russian card has been played in this campaign, will, of course, at least at the first stage, try
Valentin Filippov : Tighten.
Yevgeny Minchenko : Hyperactivity, yes. Tighten. Demand stronger sanctions. Well, the thing is, this is somewhat more difficult to do now, given the changing situation in the European Union. Brexit and the upcoming French presidential election, which it's already clear Hollande will lose. And Juppé will most likely be president. Juppé isn't exactly a pro-Russian politician, but he's more moderate. And he's a realist, unlike the highly ideological Hollande.
It is not clear what will happen to Merkel. There are parliamentary elections in Germany. I think that both the composition of the ruling coalition and the chancellor may change. In general, somehow everything is changing very much, and the amount of leverage that the United States had is no longer there today. Plus, negotiations on the transatlantic partnership have failed so far. Plus, there are problems with the ratification of the transoceanic partnership. Therefore, I think there will be something for Hillary Clinton to do.
And, most likely, Obama will be perceived as a more successful, stronger president. Whoever wins this election, I think it will be a weak president with big problems, with inevitable confrontation. Parliament and presidential power. And this could happen even if Trump wins. Because he may have a serious conflict with part of his own party. Moreover, he is quite a stranger to the Republican Party. He is not flesh of flesh, blood of blood. He actually imposed himself on the party during the primaries.
Valentin Filippov : Well, that happens in Russia too. United Russia during the primaries. Okay, fine... Show me the White House again.
Evgeniy Minchenko : Can you see it?
Valentin Filippov : Yes! It's unexpectedly grey.
Evgeny Minchenko : Well, I'm sorry. I don't have another White House for you.
Valentin Filippov : Well, it's very gray. Not like on dollars. Okay. Bye-bye. Thank you.
English version :: Read in English US Elections – What Ukraine Looks Like!