[ad_1]
at Donald Trump the day of the first judgment of electorate on his presidency. the United States they are called to vote for the elections of half term. Renewal is renewed bedroom representatives as a whole (435 members), one third of the senate (33 senators plus two special elections for two alternates) and 36 Governors States. An election that can mark a turning point. If the gop (Great old party), the Republican Party, should lose the majority in the House, I Democrats would increase their bargaining power to draft the federal budget and they would have a greater power of inquiry into the economic activities of the president's family. But what else is at stake? Lettera43.it he asked the professor Richard Steigmann-Gall, teacher at Kent State University, historian of American and European fascism, evaluates the first two years of Trump and tries to propose an badysis of the future of the Republican party, which, in the opinion of the scientist, is more than ever linked to extremist groups right.
APPLICATION. Professor, a historic judgment: Trump's presidency is truly a unique?
REPLY. Of course. Trump is unprecedented.
What does it mean?
We have had episodes of anti-Semitism in America and Islamophobia in the past, even from politicians. If we make a list of all the ingredients of his "recipe" of the government, taken individually are familiar. Just as anti-Semitism was common in Germany in 1932, just before the rise of Nazism. What is dangerous and unprecedented is the fact that we had never had a demagogue in the White House before. We have never had a president so familiar with white nationalism.
Who approached him before him?
Thomas Jefferson, the third president, owned slaves, but was not a member of the Ku Klux Klan. He did not develop a violent policy against minorities. The resentment and hatred that Trump uses in his political speech is not new. Novelty is the way they are exploited. Fascists of the past were certainly not the first anticommunist politicians. But their way of understanding anti-communism has certainly opened a new path. There was a detour from a path already laid out. The same can be said of Trump and Trumpismo.
What could happen if the Democrats won, as seems likely, the majority of the seats in the House in the midterm elections?
For starters, Trump can be impeachment by the badembly. But at this point, if the Senate is controlled by the Republicans, the effort would be useless. Democrats, however, could create investigation committees to shed light on the initiatives taken by the Trump administration. And they could block government-run bills. Maybe they can not reverse the president's policy, at least they can slow it down.
The Republican Party should instead retain control of the Senate. And with that, the power of appointment of federal judges. But if the losses in the House were mbadive, would the party remain united with the president despite his political decline?
The Senate group of the Republican Party will present itself to its constituents as the only embankment for the rise of Democrats and the left of the party. They are fortunate that this year most competitions are held in conservative states, which should facilitate the maintenance of the status quo. In a few years, however, Democrats could win additional elections, which could create divisions: Republicans might begin to wonder if they would completely eliminate the extremes of what the Tea Party was.
In contrast, state governor elections attracted less media attention. Can you explain their importance?
I think American public opinion is "nationalizing". Voters believe that national politics is more exciting and more important than local politics. The media play a role in this process, but still give their audience what they want. This is reflected in the way Americans think "nationally" for some time. But there are exciting challenges that attract attention, first and foremost Florida. But the reason for this media coverage is that commentators like to predict future presidential candidates. And normally, these candidates are former governors.
In some Republican-ruled states, tactics have been implemented to make it very difficult for ethnic minorities to vote. But this ploy should be neutralized by the strong voter turnout millennium. If the trend remains the same, will they abandon this system?
I think that the efforts to limit minority voting can only end if they do their best to vote anyway. Let's not forget that many young people voted for Trump in 2016. I think that ethnic identity can better predict the outcome of elections than the generational vote. For Democrats, increasing the number of these voters may be crucial to consolidate future success.
In case of heavy defeat, what will happen between the political leaders and the voters of the Republican Party? Will they stay with Trump or will they start thinking about an internal challenger for the 2020 presidential elections?
At the present time, many Republicans are "fervent believers", while others are only "opportunists" who want to stay in the wagon of the winner without giving any importance to the 39; ideology. One of the reasons why Trump organizes rallies across the country is to give key congressional Republicans the impression that voters remain very popular and make sure no one dares challenge him. It might be interesting to see the scope of the adjustments in case of defeat. For the moment, Republicans are comfortable with the politics of resentment. And this is also used to impose obedience in their ranks. In any case, it will not be a good show.
She lives in Ohio, which is considered the state in the balance par excellence. Democratic Senator Sherrod Brown is a popular popular representative and should be elected without problems. With regard to the election of the governor? If the Democrats were to win, what will end the political legacy of the outgoing governor, the moderate John Kasich?
There are several good reasons to ask questions about John Kasich's legacy. A solid image of Republican hostile to the President was created, a "Never Trump". Many are convinced that it is only a strategy to position themselves as a future Republican presidential candidate.
And the Democratic candidate Richard Cordray, former head of the Federal Office of Consumer Protection?
It was not very incisive to attack Kasich's results and politics, but he will certainly try to govern differently if he wins a majority in both state bademblies. In the last days leading up to the election, Cordray seems to have won praise and could even win by chance, an event that seemed distant just two weeks ago. Do not forget that the so-called Democratic governor is neither a socialist nor a supporter of Bernie Sanders. On the contrary, he is well known for his moderate positions.
[ad_2]
Source link
