With just three days left until the US presidential election, early voting has already started, though reports indicate that turnout in key constituencies has been slower than expected. The 2024 race, featuring Vice President Kamala Harris against former President Donald Trump, presents two contrasting ideologies on governance and global relations, making the outcome increasingly unpredictable. Now may be the time to examine each candidate’s strengths, weaknesses, and policy visions, and consider how their potential leadership could shape both national and international landscapes
Kamala Harris brings significant experience, having served as California’s Attorney General and the current Vice President. Her campaign focuses on social justice, civil rights, and addressing systemic inequalities, marking her as an advocate for progressive change. Her track record highlights efforts to advance equity, welfare, and a more inclusive governance model responsive to evolving societal needs.
However, Harris’s close alignment with Democratic power figures, including Barack Obama and Joe Biden, raises questions about her autonomy. Critics suggest her leadership may reflect party directives more than independent decision-making, limiting her ability to enact transformative change without bipartisan support. This perception of limited autonomy poses a challenge, with some wondering if her presidency would represent continuity rather than innovation.
As a former President, Donald Trump is familiar with the demands of executive office. Known for his bold “America First” policies, Trump’s administration emphasized deregulation, tax cuts, and prioritizing American economic interests. His straightforward, business-centric approach appeals to conservatives and those valuing economic independence over traditional diplomacy.
Nonetheless, Trump’s leadership style brought unpredictable decisions and heightened polarization. His confrontational stance toward alliances like NATO and institutions such as the UN strained international relations, leading to concerns over future diplomatic stability. Another Trump term could deepen internal divides and challenge democratic norms, with critics warning of potential risks to both domestic cohesion and global partnerships.
Election Dynamics: The Role of Elite Influence
The 2024 election is shaping up to be a tight race influenced by voter sentiment, key issues, and campaign strategies. Harris’s progressive stance resonates with voters focused on social reform, while Trump’s economic priorities appeal to those valuing a business-focused, conservative agenda.
Beneath the surface lies the influence of powerful entities shaping the electoral process. Since the 1980s, institutions like the Pentagon, CIA, and corporate interests have played a role in steering elections toward candidates aligned with elite goals. Harris’s campaign, in particular, seems to benefit from such endorsements, portraying her as a candidate aligned with established power structures. The media’s portrayal of Harris as a favorable candidate underscores these influences.
Trump Presidency: Economic Focus, Diplomatic Concerns
A Trump administration would likely continue policies favoring deregulation, tax incentives, and reduced foreign obligations. His focus on protecting national borders and prioritizing American interests—exemplified by his stance on immigration and the border wall—has strong appeal among voters seeking a leaner government.
However, Trump’s unpredictable leadership raises concerns about potential international instability. His challenges to traditional alliances could strain global relations, and while his policies may drive short-term economic growth, there’s a risk of long-term volatility if his administration struggles to balance domestic goals with global economic complexities.
Harris Presidency: Progressive Policies and Re-engagement
A Harris presidency would likely emphasize social justice, environmental sustainability, and healthcare access. Her administration would aim to restore traditional alliances and re-engage with institutions like the UN and NATO, addressing issues like climate change and human rights. Domestically, Harris’s policies may focus on reducing income inequality and expanding social safety nets through accessible healthcare, education, and income support.
However, achieving these goals may prove challenging in America’s polarized political climate. Some argue that Harris’s alignment with elite interests might limit her capacity for substantial change, potentially making her presidency more symbolic than transformative.
Amidst the election, there is growing concern about the erosion of democratic norms in the United States. Unlike India, which has an independent Election Commission, the US lacks an unbiased electoral oversight body, allowing for potential manipulation by influential entities. Instances such as the burning of postal votes and delays in vote counts in key states highlight vulnerabilities within the electoral system, fueling speculation about intentional delays to influence outcomes. Media narratives further shape public perception, often reflecting elite preferences rather than the genuine pulse of the American public.
The 2024 election between Kamala Harris and Donald Trump highlights a broader narrative of power dynamics in the US. While Trump’s business-driven approach may bring economic gains, his leadership lacks a nationalistic fervor, often prioritizing profitability over patriotism. In contrast, Harris’s alignment with powerful interests suggests a more compliant stance within the established political order.
Ultimately, the 2024 election may reveal more about elite influence than the will of the American people. With this in mind, a Harris victory appears likely unless a stronger economic revival becomes the priority, in which case Trump could emerge as the preferred candidate. The outcome will offer insights into the deeper power structures shaping America’s political landscape.