adplus-dvertising
Connect with us

Politics

Trump may be on his way out — but Trumpism marches on – CBC.ca

Published

 on


One very important thing — maybe the most important thing — changed in American politics this week. But several other important things seem to have stayed the same.

So Justin Trudeau and millions of other Canadians can now look forward to relaxing a bit come January 20, when Joe Biden is expected to be inaugurated as the 46th president of the United States — notwithstanding the recent fuss and fury from the 45th president and whatever else the incumbent might try to do to protest this result over the next two months.

But neither Trudeau, nor anyone who aspires to be prime minister at some point in the foreseeable future, can allow themselves to believe that the last four years were just a strange aberration.

The implicit promise of Biden’s candidacy was a return to normalcy — or at least to the way things were before Donald Trump descended the escalator at Trump Tower in New York and launched his candidacy for president with a speech that promised to build a wall along the American border with Mexico to keep “drugs,” “crime” and “rapists” from entering the United States.

WATCH | Biden supporters celebrate in Pennsylvania:

Moments after major TV networks determined Joe Biden had enough electoral college votes to secure the U.S. presidency, his supporters in Philadelphia celebrated in the streets and described what his win means to them following a tight race. 10:45

After four years of panic, a little peace

As far as Canada is concerned, Biden should be able to fulfill that promise. For at least the next four years, there should be no reason to worry about what the American president might tweet. There should be no reason to think he might try to tear up the North American Free Trade Agreement on a whim or launch a trade war premised on the idea that Canadian-made aluminum presents a national security threat to the United States.

It’s unlikely that Biden will throw a public tantrum if Trudeau publicly disagrees with him at an international summit — or that one of Biden’s senior advisers will condemn Trudeau to hell for doing so. It’s hard to imagine Biden would call Trudeau and rant about how much he dislikes Chrystia Freeland and refer to her as a “nasty woman” — as Trump did during a phone call in June 2018.

“It is as difficult a moment as we have ever faced as a country,” Bob Rae, now Canada’s ambassador to the United Nations, wrote that same month, at the height of this country’s battle with the Trump administration over a new trade deal.

It’s also possible that Canada will be able to count on a better response to the COVID-19 pandemic, at least after January 20 — and the United States getting itself in order would surely help Canada’s recovery.

WATCH | Biden and Trump supporters in Atlanta react to Biden win:

Pro-Trump and anti-Trump protesters are gathering and, at times, jeering each other on an Atlanta street in the open-carry state amid projections for a Joe Biden presidency from major networks. 5:41

What Trumpism did for Trudeau

There are any number of things that Donald Trump might still try to do between now and January 20. But Trudeau can take comfort from the fact that he and Canada seem to have gotten through these last four years with modest injuries. The time and energy the Trudeau government previously spent thinking about Donald Trump can now be put towards literally anything else.

It might also be argued that the Trump years gave new purpose and relevance to the political project Trudeau started when he ran for leadership of the Liberal party in 2012. The election of a populist nationalist who campaigned on xenophobia, provoked racial division and denied the science of climate change put into stark relief a Liberal agenda that promised to pursue economic inclusion, lower greenhouse gas emissions, diversity and pluralism.

President Donald Trump speaks about early results from the 2020 U.S. presidential election in the White House in Washington on Nov. 4, 2020. There are a number of things that Trump could still try to do between now and January 20. (Carlos Barria/Reuters)

Trudeau might have benefited politically from that contrast. But historians also might judge him now on how well he navigated what feels like a pivot point for the future of liberal democracy.

Trudeau will now (and once again) have an American president whose stated worldview is broadly similar to his own. They will not agree on everything. The Keystone XL pipeline might die again. Softwood lumber seems destined to be a bilateral issue forever. But Canada should have a more helpful ally with whom he can readily cooperate.

Biden is likely to restore many of the environmental regulations that the Trump administration rolled back and rejoin the Paris accord on climate change. The United States presumably will now recommit to the world’s other multilateral institutions — or at least stop trying to tear them down. Biden might still promote “Buy American” policies, but he’s unlikely to target this country in a trade war.

WATCH | What Canada can expect from a Biden presidency:

If Joe Biden wins the U.S. presidential election, Canadians could feel the impact in areas like energy, trade and defence. 6:42

A nation at odds with itself

But the verdict that American voters have delivered is not a wholesale repudiation of the last four years.

Biden’s advantage in the popular vote likely will surpass that of Hilary Clinton in 2016. He will have flipped at least a few states that voted for Trump four years ago. When all the ballots are counted, Biden’s victory probably will look not insignificant — on par perhaps with Barack Obama’s win over Mitt Romney in 2012. And Biden now becomes one of the few candidates in recent American history to defeat a one-term incumbent.

But this was not a landslide. Biden’s margin of victory is unlikely to match Obama’s breakthrough in 2008 and it will fall well short of historic blowouts like Ronald Reagan’s triumph over Walter Mondale in 1984 or Lyndon Johnson’s defeat of Barry Goldwater in 1964. Control of the Senate remains up in the air, though the final standings will depend on run-off elections in Georgia.

After everything that has happened over the last four years, that might seem astounding. But this election result confirms that the United States is not the country it was in 1964 or 1984. It is profoundly polarized — so much so that not even the deaths of more than 225,000 Americans in a public health emergency could crush the incumbent’s support.

A Republican-controlled Senate would make it much harder for Biden to implement his campaign commitments and might completely forestall any meaningful political reform. But the larger result is evidence that the forces that created a Trump presidency will not go away easily. 

And now, because the result is close enough, Trump and his campaign are doing everything they can to cast doubt on the process — an effort that could do untold damage to America’s institutions and social fabric.

The next four years might be quieter — at least for Canadians.

But there will be another presidential election four years from now. Canadians can’t assume that someone like Donald Trump won’t become president again, with everything that entails for continental trade, the global order and American democracy.

WATCH | How he got here: The life and politcal career of Joe Biden:

President-elect Joe Biden started out in Scranton, Pa., and has experienced tragedies and triumphs in his long journey to the White House. 3:03

Let’s block ads! (Why?)

728x90x4

Source link

News

Beyoncé channels Pamela Anderson in ‘Baywatch’ for Halloween video asking viewers to vote

Published

 on

 

NEW YORK (AP) — In a new video posted early Election Day, Beyoncé channels Pamela Anderson in the television program “Baywatch” – red one-piece swimsuit and all – and asks viewers to vote.

In the two-and-a-half-minute clip, set to most of “Bodyguard,” a four-minute cut from her 2024 country album “Cowboy Carter,” Beyoncé cosplays as Anderson’s character before concluding with a simple message, written in white text: “Happy Beylloween,” followed by “Vote.”

At a rally for Donald Trump in Pittsburgh on Monday night, the former president spoke dismissively about Beyoncé’s appearance at a Kamala Harris rally in Houston in October, drawing boos for the megastar from his supporters.

“Beyoncé would come in. Everyone’s expecting a couple of songs. There were no songs. There was no happiness,” Trump said.

She did not perform — unlike in 2016, when she performed at a presidential campaign rally for Hillary Clinton in Cleveland – but she endorsed Harris and gave a moving speech, initially joined onstage by her Destiny’s Child bandmate Kelly Rowland.

“I’m not here as a celebrity, I’m not here as a politician. I’m here as a mother,” Beyoncé said.

“A mother who cares deeply about the world my children and all of our children live in, a world where we have the freedom to control our bodies, a world where we’re not divided,” she said at the rally in Houston, her hometown.

“Imagine our daughters growing up seeing what’s possible with no ceilings, no limitations,” she continued. “We must vote, and we need you.”

The Harris campaign has taken on Beyonce’s track “Freedom,” a cut from her landmark 2016 album “Lemonade,” as its anthem.

Harris used the song in July during her first official public appearance as a presidential candidate at her campaign headquarters in Delaware. That same month, Beyoncé’s mother, Tina Knowles, publicly endorsed Harris for president.

Beyoncé gave permission to Harris to use the song, a campaign official who was granted anonymity to discuss private campaign operations confirmed to The Associated Press.

The Canadian Press. All rights reserved.

Source link

Continue Reading

News

Justin Trudeau’s Announcing Cuts to Immigration Could Facilitate a Trump Win

Published

 on

Outside of sports and a “Cold front coming down from Canada,” American news media only report on Canadian events that they believe are, or will be, influential to the US. Therefore, when Justin Trudeau’s announcement, having finally read the room, that Canada will be reducing the number of permanent residents admitted by more than 20 percent and temporary residents like skilled workers and college students will be cut by more than half made news south of the border, I knew the American media felt Trudeau’s about-face on immigration was newsworthy because many Americans would relate to Trudeau realizing Canada was accepting more immigrants than it could manage and are hoping their next POTUS will follow Trudeau’s playbook.

Canada, with lots of space and lacking convenient geographical ways for illegal immigrants to enter the country, though still many do, has a global reputation for being incredibly accepting of immigrants. On the surface, Montreal, Toronto, and Vancouver appear to be multicultural havens. However, as the saying goes, “Too much of a good thing is never good,” resulting in a sharp rise in anti-immigrant sentiment, which you can almost taste in the air. A growing number of Canadians, regardless of their political affiliation, are blaming recent immigrants for causing the housing affordability crises, inflation, rise in crime and unemployment/stagnant wages.

Throughout history, populations have engulfed themselves in a tribal frenzy, a psychological state where people identify strongly with their own group, often leading to a ‘us versus them’ mentality. This has led to quick shifts from complacency to panic and finger-pointing at groups outside their tribe, a phenomenon that is not unique to any particular culture or time period.

My take on why the American news media found Trudeau’s blatantly obvious attempt to save his political career, balancing appeasement between the pitchfork crowd, who want a halt to immigration until Canada gets its house in order, and immigrant voters, who traditionally vote Liberal, newsworthy; the American news media, as do I, believe immigration fatigue is why Kamala Harris is going to lose on November 5th.

Because they frequently get the outcome wrong, I don’t take polls seriously. According to polls in 2014, Tim Hudak’s Progressive Conservatives and Kathleen Wynne’s Liberals were in a dead heat in Ontario, yet Wynne won with more than twice as many seats. In the 2018 Quebec election, most polls had the Coalition Avenir Québec with a 1-to-5-point lead over the governing Liberals. The result: The Coalition Avenir Québec enjoyed a landslide victory, winning 74 of 125 seats. Then there’s how the 2016 US election polls showing Donald Trump didn’t have a chance of winning against Hillary Clinton were ridiculously way off, highlighting the importance of the election day poll and, applicable in this election as it was in 2016, not to discount ‘shy Trump supporters;’ voters who support Trump but are hesitant to express their views publicly due to social or political pressure.

My distrust in polls aside, polls indicate Harris is leading by a few points. One would think that Trump’s many over-the-top shenanigans, which would be entertaining were he not the POTUS or again seeking the Oval Office, would have him far down in the polls. Trump is toe-to-toe with Harris in the polls because his approach to the economy—middle-class Americans are nostalgic for the relatively strong economic performance during Trump’s first three years in office—and immigration, which Americans are hyper-focused on right now, appeals to many Americans. In his quest to win votes, Trump is doing what anyone seeking political office needs to do: telling the people what they want to hear, strategically using populism—populism that serves your best interests is good populism—to evoke emotional responses. Harris isn’t doing herself any favours, nor moving voters, by going the “But, but… the orange man is bad!” route, while Trump cultivates support from “weird” marginal voting groups.

To Harris’s credit, things could have fallen apart when Biden abruptly stepped aside. Instead, Harris quickly clinched the nomination and had a strong first few weeks, erasing the deficit Biden had given her. The Democratic convention was a success, as was her acceptance speech. Her performance at the September 10th debate with Donald Trump was first-rate.

Harris’ Achilles heel is she’s now making promises she could have made and implemented while VP, making immigration and the economy Harris’ liabilities, especially since she’s been sitting next to Biden, watching the US turn into the circus it has become. These liabilities, basically her only liabilities, negate her stance on abortion, democracy, healthcare, a long-winning issue for Democrats, and Trump’s character. All Harris has offered voters is “feel-good vibes” over substance. In contrast, Trump offers the tangible political tornado (read: steamroll the problems Americans are facing) many Americans seek. With Trump, there’s no doubt that change, admittedly in a messy fashion, will happen. If enough Americans believe the changes he’ll implement will benefit them and their country…

The case against Harris on immigration, at a time when there’s a huge global backlash to immigration, even as the American news media are pointing out, in famously immigrant-friendly Canada, is relatively straightforward: During the first three years of the Biden-Harris administration, illegal Southern border crossings increased significantly.

The words illegal immigration, to put it mildly, irks most Americans. On the legal immigration front, according to Forbes, most billion-dollar startups were founded by immigrants. Google, Microsoft, and Oracle, to name three, have immigrants as CEOs. Immigrants, with tech skills and an entrepreneurial thirst, have kept America leading the world. I like to think that Americans and Canadians understand the best immigration policy is to strategically let enough of these immigrants in who’ll increase GDP and tax base and not rely on social programs. In other words, Americans and Canadians, and arguably citizens of European countries, expect their governments to be more strategic about immigration.

The days of the words on a bronze plaque mounted inside the Statue of Liberty pedestal’s lower level, “Give me your tired, your poor, your huddled masses yearning to breathe free…” are no longer tolerated. Americans only want immigrants who’ll benefit America.

Does Trump demagogue the immigration issue with xenophobic and racist tropes, many of which are outright lies, such as claiming Haitian immigrants in Ohio are abducting and eating pets? Absolutely. However, such unhinged talk signals to Americans who are worried about the steady influx of illegal immigrants into their country that Trump can handle immigration so that it’s beneficial to the country as opposed to being an issue of economic stress.

In many ways, if polls are to be believed, Harris is paying the price for Biden and her lax policies early in their term. Yes, stimulus spending quickly rebuilt the job market, but at the cost of higher inflation. Loosen border policies at a time when anti-immigrant sentiment was increasing was a gross miscalculation, much like Trudeau’s immigration quota increase, and Biden indulging himself in running for re-election should never have happened.

If Trump wins, Democrats will proclaim that everyone is sexist, racist and misogynous, not to mention a likely White Supremacist, and for good measure, they’ll beat the “voter suppression” button. If Harris wins, Trump supporters will repeat voter fraud—since July, Elon Musk has tweeted on Twitter at least 22 times about voters being “imported” from abroad—being widespread.

Regardless of who wins tomorrow, Americans need to cool down; and give the divisive rhetoric a long overdue break. The right to an opinion belongs to everyone. Someone whose opinion differs from yours is not by default sexist, racist, a fascist or anything else; they simply disagree with you. Americans adopting the respectful mindset to agree to disagree would be the best thing they could do for the United States of America.

______________________________________________________________

 

Nick Kossovan, a self-described connoisseur of human psychology, writes about what’s

on his mind from Toronto. You can follow Nick on Twitter and Instagram @NKossovan.

Continue Reading

Politics

RFK Jr. says Trump would push to remove fluoride from drinking water. ‘It’s possible,’ Trump says

Published

 on

 

PHOENIX (AP) — Robert F. Kennedy Jr., a prominent proponent of debunked public health claims whom Donald Trump has promised to put in charge of health initiatives, said Saturday that Trump would push to remove fluoride from drinking water on his first day in office if elected president.

Fluoride strengthens teeth and reduces cavities by replacing minerals lost during normal wear and tear, according to the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. The addition of low levels of fluoride to drinking water has long been considered one of the greatest public health achievements of the last century.

Kennedy made the declaration Saturday on the social media platform X alongside a variety of claims about the heath effects of fluoride.

“On January 20, the Trump White House will advise all U.S​. water systems to remove fluoride from public water,” Kennedy wrote. Trump and his wife, Melania Trump, “want to Make America Healthy Again,” he added, repeating a phrase Trump often uses and links to Kennedy.

Trump told NBC News on Sunday that he had not spoken to Kennedy about fluoride yet, “but it sounds OK to me. You know it’s possible.”

The former president declined to say whether he would seek a Cabinet role for Kennedy, a job that would require Senate confirmation, but added, “He’s going to have a big role in the administration.”

Asked whether banning certain vaccines would be on the table, Trump said he would talk to Kennedy and others about that. Trump described Kennedy as “a very talented guy and has strong views.”

The sudden and unexpected weekend social media post evoked the chaotic policymaking that defined Trump’s White House tenure, when he would issue policy declarations on Twitter at virtually all hours. It also underscored the concerns many experts have about Kennedy, who has long promoted debunked theories about vaccine safety, having influence over U.S. public health.

In 1950, federal officials endorsed water fluoridation to prevent tooth decay, and continued to promote it even after fluoride toothpaste brands hit the market several years later. Though fluoride can come from a number of sources, drinking water is the main source for Americans, researchers say.

Officials lowered their recommendation for drinking water fluoride levels in 2015 to address a tooth condition called fluorosis, that can cause splotches on teeth and was becoming more common in U.S. kids.

In August, a federal agency determined “with moderate confidence” that there is a link between higher levels of fluoride exposure and lower IQ in kids. The National Toxicology Program based its conclusion on studies involving fluoride levels at about twice the recommended limit for drinking water.

A federal judge later cited that study in ordering the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency to further regulate fluoride in drinking water. U.S. District Judge Edward Chen cautioned that it’s not certain that the amount of fluoride typically added to water is causing lower IQ in kids, but he concluded that mounting research points to an unreasonable risk that it could be. He ordered the EPA to take steps to lower that risk, but didn’t say what those measures should be.

In his X post Saturday, Kennedy tagged Michael Connett, the lead attorney representing the plaintiff in that lawsuit, the environmental advocacy group Food & Water Watch.

Kennedy’s anti-vaccine organization has a lawsuit pending against news organizations including The Associated Press, accusing them of violating antitrust laws by taking action to identify misinformation, including about COVID-19 and COVID-19 vaccines. Kennedy is on leave from the group but is listed as one of its attorneys in the lawsuit.

What role Kennedy might hold if Trump wins on Tuesday remains unclear. Kennedy recently told NewsNation that Trump asked him to “reorganize” agencies including the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, the National Institutes of Health, the Food and Drug Administration and some agencies under the Department of Agriculture.

But for now, the former independent presidential candidate has become one of Trump’s top surrogates. Trump frequently mentions having the support of Kennedy, a scion of a Democratic dynasty and the son of former Attorney General Robert Kennedy and nephew of President John F. Kennedy.

Kennedy traveled with Trump Friday and spoke at his rallies in Michigan and Wisconsin.

Trump said Saturday that he told Kennedy: “You can work on food, you can work on anything you want” except oil policy.

“He wants health, he wants women’s health, he wants men’s health, he wants kids, he wants everything,” Trump added.

Source link

Continue Reading

Trending