The presidential election and Muslim dilemma

It is one of the most comprehensive articles on the Muslim dilemma. Most Muslim groups are painfully going through these discussions. I have flipped-flopped a few times. The following article by Dr. Basheer Ahmed is an eye-opener,  and I urge the readers, if they agree, to share this article. Ultimately, you have to decide whom you vote for. I welcome any piece in support of Trump to be posted here. It is always good to be fully informed about both sides. 

Article link is https://centerforamericanpolitics.blogspot.com/2024/10/the-presidential-election-and-muslim.html

Mike Ghouse

# # # 

The presidential election and Muslim dilemma

M. Basheer Ahmed, M.D.

The American Muslim 2024 Election Task Force, a coalition of national 501(c)4 political organizations, calls on all American Muslim voters to turn out in the 2024 election and vote for candidates, including a presidential candidate who endorses a permanent ceasefire in Gaza and an arms embargo on the Israeli government, such as a third-Party nominees Dr. Jill Stein, or Dr. Cornel West. These two presidential candidates also choose the Muslim vice-presidential nominees. The coalition cannot endorse Vice President Kamala Harris' candidacy because she refused to consider imposing the arms embargo on the Israeli government as required by U.S. laws, and she failed to promise any other changes.

I understand that the intelligent people who run a coalition of national political organizations made such an unwise decision due to extreme sadness and anger due to the genocide in Palestine. Unfortunately, they are misguiding the Muslim community and making sure that their recommendation will help Trump in winning this election. (Although they vehemently oppose Trump). The vote for any 3rd party candidate is a waste and ensures Trump wins. They overlook that for 96% of Americans, this is not the primary criterion to vote for a presidential candidate.

I have decided to write this article to elaborate on this dilemma. I am sad and angry as all Muslims in U S and around the world for U S blind support of Israel, which is committing genocide and has resulted in the death of 186000 innocent Palestinians (according to LANCET - British Medical Journal), more than 50% were women and children. I am trying to control my anger and share what I think is a rational approach to deciding our choices for selecting a candidate and party to vote for in the incoming election. Politicians determine political positions based on the constituent's needs and demands. Trump chose the issues related to banning immigration from nonwhite, non-Christian countries to make America a GREAT" White Christian country and support wealthy Americans. He is pleasing his constituents.

Kamala is running to represent the whole country, not just Muslims. Suppose Muslims have only one demand for arms supplies to Israel and support an immediate ceasefire. In that case, it looks like Muslims are a foreign agent supporting Palestine (although you are doing this for humanitarian reasons). What about other issues this country is facing? All of us are U.S. citizens, and we must be concerned about many issues, to name a few: Affordable Healthcare, Abortion, gender equality, Inflation, unemployment, Education, Taxes, Climate change, religious freedom, Social justice, Immigration reforms, Combating hate crimes, as well as foreign policy such as Ukraine and peace in the middle east and indiscriminate support to Israel. You will not find any candidate 100% supporting Palestinian issues.

It is pertinent to ask why Jews and AIPAC have so much influence. It seems that 3 million Jews are controlling America. They own significant businesses, high-tech industries, and higher educational institutions (They are instrumental in asking for the resignations of presidents of Harvard, Columbia, Pennsylvania, and other universities). They have nine senators and 26 congressmen. AIPAC is the most influential lobbying organization in U.S. history. Nearly 2% of the population are Muslims, whereas Jews are only less than 1%; how do they achieve such influence and power? Americans did not give this influence and power in a silver platter. When Jews started migrating to this country in the 1940s and 1950s, they were discriminated against and faced a lot of prejudice due to antisemitism. They had difficulty in getting admission to universities and getting jobs and even faced humiliation, such as signs on the country clubs saying, " Dogs and Jews are not allowed."

During the 50s and 60s, Jews who suffered a massacre in Germany and faced antisemitism in the U.S. decided to combat this by taking the following steps.

1)They concentrated on educating their children highly in every field, including science, business, politics, etc.

2) They assimilated with Americans and did not remain isolated. Supported African Americans for " fighting for civil Rights."

3) Despite their Multiple sects and ideologies, they united on national causes.

4) Started participating in political activities very early in the 1950s. Established AIPAC in 1954 to counter adverse international reactions to Israel's atrocities in Palestine.

They are united and work hard to achieve their status. We can certainly learn from them. Let's focus on how to be " influential and powerful. Muslims started immigrating to the U.S. in the late 60s. We faced less discrimination than Jews. Muslims were busy making a living, were not united, and were not involved in politics. Even in the 1980s and '90s,

Imams discouraged Muslim involvement in Politics. It was after 9/11 that we woke up and started paying attention to politics. My observation is that only 30% of Muslims are paying attention to current affairs and politics, and 70% are still busy making a living for themselves, enjoying big parties with Biryani, Kebobs, and falafel. We contribute towards political funds of about $25M vs Jews who spend 1 billion. We have only three congressmen and no senators. How can they influence the President?

Now, let us focus on whom we should vote.

We must decide whether to vote for Trump or Kamala in this election. If you give a vote to the 3rd party, it is wasted. If Trump wins, you have no choice but to accept the demise of Palestine. Donald Trump wants to expel all Palestinians not only from Gaza but from the West Bank as well. He was the one who recognized the Israeli embassy move from Tel Aviv to Jerusalem, which is a blatant disregard for U.N. and international laws. Trump wants to ban Muslim immigration in the U.S.

He is asking for votes from Christians only.

My concerns about Mr Trump:

He has made it very clear that he is not trying to win the votes of a majority of Americans. He and his loyalists are trying to intimidate his opponents to keep them from voting.

Many of those arrested for attacking the U.S. Capitol on January 6, 2021, told the court they believed they were defending American democracy from those (immigrants) who were destroying the country and had stolen the election. Trump called them "patriots" who have been"treated unfairly" and "have shown incredible courage and sacrifice,"

He met Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and said, "I was very good to Israel, better than any president" ever been. He went before Black journalists in Chicago to proclaim that I had been the best president for the Black population since Abraham Lincoln. He is saying to everybody, Listen up, Christians, Jews, and Black people. I am the solution,

Trump glorifies his endeavors on behalf of Christians. "I'm a Christian. I love you. You got to get out and vote. You don't have to vote in four years, and we will soon be a great nation again. Trump says, " If I don't get elected, it will be a blood bath.". Not a single loyal Republican official has objected to that statement. Trump will do whatever he can to gain power, and once in power, he will do all he can to keep the power. Supreme Court has granted him immunity. Presidents usually meet with opposition leaders and listen to their views.

Mr. Trump wants to put away those who disagree or oppose him.

I am not surprised that JD Vance quoted from a Book " That Progressives (Democrats) are Subhuman, and Leftists don't deserve the status of human beings and that they are waging a shadow war against all that is good and decent, which will end in apocalyptic slaughter. Trump said Vance should fire every single mid-level bureaucrat and every civil servant and replace them with our people."

It isn't reassuring to see what trump loyalists are saying. In North Carolina, Robinson's offensive writings on a pornography website upset many when he declared himself a "black NAZI&quot and that he would like to enslave people.

Mike Lindell, a Trump loyalist, said, " We must secure the existence of our people and a future for white children " Trump had an event stop at a grocery store in Kittanning, Pennsylvania, where he chatted with supporters, handed a $100 bill to a customer, and promised, We 39;ll do that for you from the White House. Vice presidential candidate J.D. Vance has doubled down on his insistence that a Trump administration will deport legal as well as undocumented immigrants. The Dayton [Ohio] Daily News editorial board called Vance " an embarrassment not only to himself but to Ohio."

I am concerned that Trump will not accept defeat in November any more than he did when he lost four years ago. Trump believed that he was the legitimate President, and those who refuse to accept this fundamental fact are the true deniers. Trump is more erratic, impulsive, and self-interested than any presidential candidate, Republican or Democratic. A second Trump administration would escalate the threat of authoritarian governance, most notably by sanctioning politically motivated prosecutions.

If Trump wins, he will assume control of the White House in 2025 with far more power and fewer restraints than when he took office in January 2017. Trump says he wants to go after his political enemies and lock up refugees in camps. Implicit in all this, he will appoint cabinet members and high-level officials who support what he wants to do instead of the last cabinet who constrained him at every turn during his presidency.

Republicans want to pass something called the SAVE Act, Donald Trump crafted a fascist piece of legislation that will decimate voting rights in America. The Republican proposal suppresses the voting rights of women, Black, Latino, and Indigenous Americans, Veterans, and active-duty service members. GOP's suppression of voters is entirely inconsistent with democracy.

We need to select a president who supports democracy and is dedicated to uniting us and restoring our faith in America.

The best option is to vote for Kamala and Walz. Kamala is running to represent the whole country, not just Muslims. Once she is elected, a united Muslim group can put as much pressure as possible on legislators and the President to pay attention to the Palestinian issue. Palestinian problems will not disappear by November. At this stage, I'm not looking for Kamala's record for supporting Palestine; I'm looking for what is good for this country and Muslims. Kamala agrees to consider a ban on arms supply to Israel. Democrats will be listening if we support Kamala Harris. There is a good possibility of change happening in the Middle East. If Trump wins, you have no choice but to accept the demise of Palestine. You want to elect a president who will listen to you. Who do you think you may have access to and listen to you: Kamala OR Trump? If Kamala wins without Muslim votes, we will lose that opportunity. We will never have this opportunity if Trump is elected. You are not voting or voting for 3rd party only benefits Trump, who does not care for

Palestinians. Kamala has stood against powerful AIPAC three times. She refused to attend a Congress joint session when Netanyahu was getting standing ovations from all Republicans and a few Democrats. Many Democratic members of Congress did not participate in Netanyahu's speech to Congress. She stated that she would not stay silent on the abuses against Palestinians and support for a ceasefire. She did not pick Josh Shapiro as her V.P., which was a courageous defiance of AIPAC. Her meeting with the Palestinian leadership in Michigan, giving them time, and sympathizing with their platform was commendable. The Democratic Caucus adopted a ceasefire resolution on its platform, which they took to the national DNC. Many cities in the country decided to divest from Israel.

Kamala emphasized the need to close the wealth gap by increasing access to homeownership, decreasing childcare costs, decreasing healthcare costs, decreasing taxes on the middle class, increasing taxes on billionaires, increasing the living wage for working people, improving police funding and immigration reform. Walz repeatedly and rightly declared, " You don't have to agree with each other on everything to get along and work together. This philosophy has kept the Democrats at the forefront of expanding civil rights, immigration rights, LGBTQ rights, and women's rights to ensure each demographic enjoys equal justice and humanity in the United States. Georgia State Representative Ruwa Romman, a Palestinian American, unequivocally stated to electing Vice President Harris and defeating Donald Trump.

We have multiple Muslims in elected positions who are part of the Democratic party. How many Muslims are in Congress from the Republican Party or Green Party? Although we were unable to "influence" Biden to stop the genocide in Gaza … it does not mean that we cannot influence Harris. We need to increase our vote share by a considerable margin compared to all the polls from previous years.

There are over 25 Muslim employees currently in the White House—multiple appointments given to Muslims in higher positions than ever before. Biden's valuable Muslim appointees, including Lina Khan, the head of the FTC, are in critical positions. Rashad Hussain is an ambassador and advisor to the President on religious freedom conditions and policy. He and many others have put countless hours behind building bridges and working on implementing an Islamophobia act. If Trump wins, there will be no appointments of Muslims in advisory positions.

Most Muslims Who candidly say that in good conscience cannot support Kamala clearly stated that they do not want Trump in the White House, except Hamtramck Mayor Amer Ghalib, who endorsed Donald Trump. Concluding remarks. This election is a choice between severe leadership and narcissistic power grabbing. It is a choice between democracy and authoritarianism. Vice President Harris defends America's democratic ideals, while former President Donald Trump endangers them. We have the money and the votes, but we are not united and well-organized. Please think seriously and rationally and support

Kamala unanimously. Muslim vote for Kamala will ensure Muslims 's voice and a place in the White House. Even if Kamala loses, democrats will support when Trump comes after the Muslims. They have done that during MUSLIM BAN in the last Trump administration. If Kamala wins without Muslim support, why should we expect our presence in the Kamala White House? Although Muslims are only 1.5% of the population, our united support is vital. Only a difference of a few thousand votes wins some elections.

Dr M.Basheer Ahmed is a former professor of Psychiatry at Western Medical School in Dallas, Texas, chairman emeritus of the Muslim Community Center for Human Services North Texas, and president of American Muslims for Human Rights. He can be reached at mbahmed05@yahoo.com

A tale of three demagogues – and why Modi is the most dangerous to his country

It is a good analysis by Ramachandra Guha 

Ramachandra Guha: A tale of three demagogues – and why Modi is the most dangerous to his country

All demagogues are bad for democracy, but some are worse than others.

Courtesy of Scroll.in

Four years ago, as the last American presidential elections were being held, I was asked to chair a talk in Bengaluru by Strobe Talbott. At that time the head of the well-known Washington think-tank, the Brookings Institution, Talbott had previously served as deputy secretary of state in the administration of President Bill Clinton. In that capacity, he had played a crucial role in tilting America’s policy away from its traditional bias in favour of Pakistan towards a position more congenial to the interests of India.

The talk of Strobe Talbott’s that I was scheduled to chair was to be held in the third week of November 2016. By then the presidential elections would be over. Hillary Clinton was the favourite to win. In the event she lost and, instead of coming to Bengaluru in a mood of jubilant anticipation, Talbott arrived looking (and feeling) utterly crushed. In our conversation before the talk he spoke bitterly about the fact that a pathological liar had befooled the American electorate. I agreed with Talbott that Donald Trump had told a lot of lies during his campaign. But, I said, he did utter, again and again, two words that were true. These were “Crooked Hillary”.

Donald Trump had portrayed Hillary Clinton as the quintessential Washington insider, her past record replete with instances of networks used and abused, favours given and received. Four years later the situation is very different. It is now Trump who looks corrupt and compromised, as well as inefficient and incompetent. His gross mishandling of the pandemic has exposed his administrative weaknesses, while the evasiveness about his tax returns has cast doubt on his integrity as well.

His abusive and misogynist ways have alienated a large number of women who voted for him in 2016. By just appearing to be a plain, decent man, one who will listen to the experts rather than foist his own nutty views on public policy, Joe Biden is (at the time of writing) the clear front runner in the race to be the next president of the United States of America.

A vain demagogue

Democracies are meant to be governed in a collegial and collaborative manner. Donald Trump, however, is a vain demagogue, interested only in publicity and self-promotion. To be sure, there have been charismatic American presidents before, who presented themselves as larger than their office. They have included such figures as John F Kennedy and Theodore Roosevelt in the 20th century, and Andrew Jackson in the 19th century. Yet none of them remotely approached Trump in their self-love.

If Trump has not done more damage than he has, that is largely due to the resilience and inner strength of American institutions. The media, the universities, the defence establishment, the scientific community have by and large maintained their integrity. They have all pushed back, albeit with varying degrees of success, against his attempts to control and manipulate them to fulfil his own personal agenda. If Trump were to be defeated by Biden next month, then these institutions will all play a vital role in rebuilding America, in helping it heal the wounds within as well as in constructively reasserting its role in the world.

Narendra Modi and Donald Trump in Ahmedabad in February. Credit: Francis Mascarenhas/Reuters

Like the world’s richest democracy, the world’s oldest democracy, the United Kingdom, is also governed by a self-obsessed demagogue. Boris Johnson’s path to power was not dissimilar to Trump’s. Within his own party, he was seen as a dashing alternative to the dull, staid figure of Theresa May. The Conservatives won the general elections of 2019 in part because of the wit and intelligence of their leader and because his rival, Jeremy Corbyn of the Labour Party, was seen by many voters as a dogmatic (as well as humourless) socialist absolutely unfit to run the government.

Compared to Donald Trump, Boris Johnson is perhaps more maverick than malign, an ambitious opportunist rather than a proto-racist with autocratic tendencies. It took the last year of Trump’s term for his weaknesses to be exposed; whereas the turning of the public mood away from Johnson has come rather sooner. His attitude towards the pandemic and the Brexit endgame has shown him to be more an incompetent bungler than a fascist-in-the-making.

Meanwhile, Labour, having dumped Corbyn for a leader with greater intelligence and administrative ability, has also weakened the prime minister’s case. An increasing number of British voters now see Keir Starmer in more favourable terms than they ever saw Jeremy Corbyn. Within his own Conservative Party, there are those who say that the chancellor of the exchequer, Rishi Sunak, is more fit for the office of prime minister than Johnson himself.

Degraded by not destroyed

The next general election in Britain is three-and-a-half years away. Johnson being defenestrated by his party even before then remains a distinct possibility. But, as with Trump, whenever he goes, the damage he has done will be undone by the institutions he has degraded but not destroyed – such as the Parliament, the courts and, not least, the media. Indeed, for all his faults and fraudulent behaviour, history may judge that it was David Cameron who, by calling for a referendum on Brexit when one was not needed, hurt the UK far more than Johnson.

Since 2016, the world’s richest democracy has been sought to be run into the ground by a demagogue. Meanwhile, the world’s oldest democracy is also currently misgoverned by a demagogue. So we come, finally and inevitably, to the world’s largest and most populous democracy, our own. Narendra Modi came to power two-and-a-half years before Trump; and a full five years before Johnson. He, too, is a demagogue, a politician who thinks he is bigger than his party and his government, and who will not shrink from using deceit and falsehood in order to consolidate his power.

There are some ways in which Modi is similar to Trump and Johnson, but there may be more ways in which he is different. For one thing, he has been a full-time politician for far longer than they, with much greater experience of how to manipulate public institutions to serve his own purposes. Second, he is far more committed to his ideology than Trump and Johnson are to theirs. He lives and embodies Hindu majoritarianism in a much fuller (and hence more dangerous) manner than Trump lives white supremacy or Johnson embodies xenophobic Little Englandism. Third, in the enactment and fulfilment of his ideological dream, Modi has as his instrument the Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh, whose organisational strength and capacity for resource mobilisation far exceeds any right-wing organisation in the US or the United Kingdom.

Boris Johnson and Narenda Modi in 2017. Credit: @PMOIndia

There is a final reason why Modi is more dangerous to the interests of his country than Trump and Johnson are to theirs. This is that the institutions of Indian democracy are so much weaker. Trump cannot command the Federal Bureau of Investigation to do his bidding, whereas Modi can direct our tax authorities and investigative agencies to do his. Sections of our judiciary seem to have lost their nerve; large sections of our media have certainly lost their spine. They are unwilling, or unable, to keep the prime minister in check, to hold him accountable for his errors and his excesses.

In his desire to extend his lease on power, Narendra Modi is also much luckier than either Donald Trump or Boris Johnson. His luck lies in the unchanging nature of his Opposition. Trump will certainly find it far more difficult to defeat Joe Biden than he did Hillary Clinton. Keir Starmer is a more credible challenger to Johnson than Jeremy Corbyn ever was.

On the other hand, despite suffering two humiliating defeats in the general elections of 2014 and 2019, despite the burden of nepotism and inexperience that he carries, and despite even his failure to retain the family pocket borough of Amethi, Rahul Gandhi is still being presented by the Congress as the prime ministerial alternative to Narendra Modi in 2024.

All demagogues are bad for democracy, but some demagogues are worse than others. If Donald Trump loses next month, America may recover relatively soon from his depredations. Great Britain was shrinking into itself even before Boris Johnson became prime minister; his impact on the history of his country will turn out to be relatively negligible. However, the destruction that Narendra Modi can wreak, indeed has already wreaked, on Indian democracy is immense. It will take decades to repair.

Ramachandra Guha is the author most recently of Gandhi: The Years That Changed the World.

This article first appeared in The Telegraph.

Support our journalism by subscribing to Scroll+. We welcome your comments at letters@scroll.in.

Presidential Debate Biden V Trump

 Debate night Thursday, October 22, 2020

PRESIDENTIAL DEBATE :: TRUMP V BIDEN

Disclosure: I am not a Republican or a Democrat, I am an Independent voter.

I would say, the debate was good.
Trump was worked up, Joe was calm.
Trump was a good attack dog.

Trump interrupted so many times.
Joe should have shot him “Man, learn to listen, and follow the rules.”
Kristen did not control Trump! She should have asked him to shut up.
Finally, she got some control of about 15 minutes before closing.

Biden was weak in responding to the question, why did you not do it (criminal reforms).

Trump said 3 Million people would have been dead, he saved so many lives
Biden should have shot him, why don’t you say 330 Million Americans were saved?

Biden was good, when he said, “we are learning to die with it” when Trump said, “We are learning to live with it.”

Biden – I am the president for the United States, and not for Red or Blue States
Trump knew about the pandemic in January but did not tell the truth to the Americans.

Trump said, he has paid tens of millions in Taxes
Biden missed the opportunity to repeat to present the Tax returns

Trump lied that the FBI had the Taxes
Kristen did not question him, nor did Biden

Trump had some positive points about race relations over Biden
Trump said he is reuniting children – really for 3+years?

Joe was good on the oil industry in Delaware

Trump said he will present the taxes – really? BS for four years now  Kristen should have asked Trump; would you say the same thing tomorrow?

Joe had the best closing statement, Trump bungled up.

Mike Ghouse

Zakaria - I was wrong that Trump would lose in 2016. I’m doubling down in 2020.

 This is a bold piece by Fareed Zakaria. we will share both Republican and Democrat-leaning posts here.  Mike Ghouse

Courtesy of Washington Post 

Opinion by 

Fareed Zakaria

Columnist

Oct. 22, 2020, at 6:25 p.m. EDT

Add to list

In 2016, I was one of those people who didn’t think Donald Trump could win the presidency. Like many, I studied the polls and believed they showed a comfortable margin voting against him. I thought people would see through him. He was just too weird, too vulgar, utterly ignorant about most policy issues, and pathologically incapable of telling the truth, even about trivial things. During the 2016 campaign, for example, he claimed that he had met Vladimir Putin, something that was easy to disprove.

But I think what convinced me most that Trump would lose was that I believed in a different America. Trump had catapulted himself onto the political stage with birtherism — a shameless effort to exploit White prejudice against the first Black president, Barack Obama. Trump announced his campaign for the White House by making slurs against Mexicans. He proposed a “total and complete shutdown” of the nation’s borders to all Muslims from anywhere in the world. Throughout the campaign, his rhetoric toward foreigners and minorities was insulting.

I didn’t believe Americans would go for this. I arrived in the United States in 1982, in the midst of a deep recession, as a brown-skinned student on a scholarship with a strange name, no money and no contacts. I found a country that welcomed me with open arms. I still remember being stunned at how friendly and genuinely warm people were to me. I had been more aware of being Muslim in India than I was in America.

Perhaps I lived a sheltered life in New England college towns and New York City, but I saw very little of Trump’s brand of naked racism. I knew that it existed, of course, had read about it in books and newspapers, seen it on television and in movies, but I didn’t truly understand the magnitude of the phenomenon. So I placed less weight on the evidence for Trump’s victory than I should have. I simply couldn’t believe someone with his racially charged worldview could win over the nation.

And here’s the thing: I still don’t. First, many Americans voted for Trump despite his race-baiting, not because of it. But more important, a majority of Americans disapprove of Trump and have for almost his entire presidency. His average approval rating throughout his term is the lowest of any president since we started counting. As the New York Times’s Nate Cohn has said, Trump’s luck was that he ran against the second-most unpopular presidential candidate in modern American history (after him). Because of the electoral college and small margins in three states, he was able to capture the White House.

There are parts of Trump’s coalition who are anxious about the country’s future — and their own place in it — and are thus susceptible to the snake oil being peddled by a clever salesman. The United States is changing. If you consider the core of Trump’s support — Whites without a college degree — you see that they are shrinking as a share of the adult population. If you take the core of Joe Biden’s support — Whites with a college degree and minorities — they are growing in even greater measure. The New York Times analyzed the data and found that in Florida, the core Trump voting bloc of non-college-educated Whites has fallen by 359,000 since 2016, while the Biden coalition has grown by 1,579,000 people. In Pennsylvania, Trump’s base shrank by 431,000, while Biden’s grew by 449,000.

If Biden wins, his challenge will be to make all Americans understand that the country has always been a grand experiment, an attempt to create the first universal nation. Today, living up to that ideal means embracing all kinds of people — Black and White, native-born and immigrant, gay and straight, and many more. It’s a messy process, and it can seem disruptive and disorderly. It sometimes gets bogged down in squabbles over terminology and political correctness. But it is all part of a noble effort to ensure that everyone in this country finally feels they are included in the American Dream. Ever since the nation’s birth, it has gradually expanded the idea of liberty and democracy, making America great by surging forward into the future rather than lapsing back into nostalgia for the past.

Meanwhile, I will take my chances and once again predict that Trump will lose this election. Humbled as I am after these four years, I would still rather bet on — and believe in — the best in America.

Read more from Fareed Zakaria’s archive, follow him on Twitter or subscribe to his daily newsletter.

Read more:

Jennifer Rubin: How big a Republican wipeout are we looking at?

Helaine Olen: Will senior citizens finally abandon Trump?

Michael Gerson: Trump wants parts of the country to secede — at least in their minds

Eugene Robinson: Do we tolerate the kidnapping of children? This election is our chance to answer.

These people told us in 2016 why they voted for Trump. Here’s how they’re voting in 2020.

Updated October 22, 2020

Election 2020: What to know

The last debate is tonight; follow live updates on the Biden-Trump debate and the election here.

In the latest Washington Post-ABC News poll, Democratic nominee Joe Biden leads President Trump, with 54 percent of likely voters favoring him vs. 42 percent for Trump.

How to vote: Find out the rules in your state. Some states have already started sending out mail ballots; see how to make sure yours counts. Here’s how many people have already voted. Absentee and mail ballots are two terms for the same thing, mostly used interchangeably. Are you running into voting problems? Let us know.

Wondering if that thing you saw about voting is true? Check out news, analysis and fact checking about allegations involving the voting process here.

Electoral college map: Who actually votes, and who do they vote for? Explore how shifts in turnout and voting patterns for key demographic groups could affect the presidential race.

Policy: Where Biden and Trump stand on key issues defining the election.

Battlegrounds: These are the 50 political states of America. Dive into Michigan, Wisconsin, North Carolina, Florida, Pennsylvania, Minnesota, Arizona, Georgia, Texas, and Ohio, and sign up for The Trailer and get more states, plus more news and insight from the trail, in your inbox three days a week.

Have questions about the election process? Ask us here.

633 Comments

Fareed Zakaria

Fareed Zakaria writes a foreign affairs column for The Post. He is also the host of CNN’s Fareed Zakaria GPS and a contributing editor for the Atlantic. 

Biden Finally Gets it

The article is at https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/how-joe-biden--yes-joe-biden--could-revolutionize-american-politics/2020/10/14/b5d6abf2-0e4d-11eb-8074-0e943a91bf08_story.html


 "Now, he is launching direct appeals to working-class whites, particularly those who voted for President Barack Obama in 2008 and 2012 but shifted to Trump in 2016. “A lot of white working-class Democrats thought we forgot them and didn’t pay attention,” Biden told reporters during a visit to Pennsylvania this month. “I want them to know . . . I get it. I get their sense of being left behind.”

Indeed, Hillary's biggest mistake was that - she did not appeal to the white voters. 

I wrote a speech for Hillary Clinton, here it is,  "I am committed to restoring justice to my fellow Americans who lost their jobs in manufacturing, to fellow Americans who live on farms, to fellow Americans who do not have an education or technical skills, to men and women who are plumbers, electricians, repairmen, drivers, janitors, and small business owners, and taking care of them is a priority of my administration. We will restore our glory days, and in the end, no American will be left out. " 

Here is the link for the full speech 

https://www.huffpost.com/entry/hillarys-last-ditch-effort-the-final-speech_b_581f90f8e4b0102262411963

Mike Ghouse

A record number of Indian Americans look to expand influence in US administration

 By Dr. Frank Islam 

Courtesy - South Asia Monitor 

The Indian American community has propelled its way to relevance in American politics over the past two decades. The representation of the community has increased at every level with each election cycle, writes Frank F. Islam for South Asia Monitor

Much of the focus of the US election coverage in the Indian and Indian American media has been about how both presidential nominees, President Donald Trump and former Vice President Joe Biden, have been courting Indian American voters. A less written about the fact is there are dozens of Indian American candidates in this election cycle running for federal, state, and local offices.

If Joe Biden defeats President Trump in November, Senator Kamala Harris will be leaving the Senate to serve as the Vice President of the United States.

Indian Americans a rising political force

But that will probably not end the Indian American representation in the US Senate next January. 

Democrat Sara Gideon, who is half Indian American, like Harris, has an excellent chance of ousting incumbent Senator Susan Collins in Maine. Gideon, Speaker of the Maine House of Representatives, currently leads Collins, one of the most endangered GOP (Grand Old Party) senators by 6.5 percentage points in RealClearPolitics average of polls.

 

Gideon is not the only Indian American on the ballot for US Senate this November. Republican Rik Mehta, a biotech entrepreneur, and lawyer, is taking on Senator Cory Booker in New Jersey. Mehta is a heavy underdog against Booker, a popular senator, and former presidential candidate.  His candidacy, however, indicates the rising importance of Indian Americans in the electoral process.

In the US Congress, four Indian American members are seeking re-election - Representatives Ami Bera, Ro Khanna, Pramila Jayapal and Raja Krishnamoorthi - they are expected to retain their seats. 

Two Democrats, Sri Kulkarni in Texas and Hiral Tipirneni, in Arizona, are in tight congressional races, each vying to become the first Indian American to get elected from their respective state.

Kulkarni, a former US diplomat, is running for the 22nd congressional district in Texas, which is an open seat in suburban Houston. Two years ago, he narrowly lost the district to the Republican incumbent, who is retiring from the House at the end of this year. 

Tipirneni, a medical doctor, is similarly engaged in a competitive race in Arizona’s 6th district. Like Kulkarni, she made an unsuccessful run two years ago. 

According to the Cook Political Report, an independent group that rates various races, both districts are toss-ups.  This means that they are highly competitive contests in which any candidate can win.

Rise of Indian Americans in public offices

For further proof of the coming of age of the Indian American community in electoral politics, one doesn’t need to go beyond Tipirneni’s district. The candidate the Mumbai-born doctor defeated to win her party’s nomination was also an Indian American, Anita Malik. 

 

At the state level, more than half a dozen Indian American state lawmakers across the country are seeking re-election. 

They include - New York Sen. Kevin Thomas, Washington State Sen. Manka Dhingra, North Carolina Sen. Jay Chaudhuri, Vermont Sen. Kesha Ram, Washington State Rep. Vandana Slatter, Kentucky Rep. Nima Kulkarni, Michigan Rep. Padma Kuppa and Arizona Rep. Amish Shah. All these legislators are Democrats.

In Ohio, Republican Niraj Antani, who was first elected to the House of Representatives in 2014, at the age of 23, is running for the state senate, and is expected to win.

Additionally, more than half a dozen Indian Americans are seeking positions in various statehouses. Some of them, such as Jeremy Cooney, a candidate for the New York state senate, are veterans of previous races. Others are newcomers gunning for state legislatures for the first time.  They include young and highly accomplished candidates like Rupande Mehta (New Jersey Senate), Nikil Saval (Pennsylvania Senate), and Jenifer Rajkumar (New York House). 

Indian Americans are not just running for state and federal legislative offices.  From coast to coast, they are also making beelines for various state and local executive offices, ranging from state agencies and county positions to mayoral offices and school boards. 

For example, Duke University professor and the former US President Barack Obama's economic advisor Ronnie Chatterji is running for treasurer in North Carolina. And, in Virginia, Republican Puneet Ahluwalia just announced his candidacy for the lieutenant governor.

The Indian American community has propelled its way to relevance in American politics over the past two decades. The representation of the community has increased at every level with each election cycle. The substantial number of Indian American candidates who are on the ballot this year is proof of progress that has been made. 

Shaping US politics and policies

Why does it matter that a much larger number of Indian Americans are holding and seeking political offices? What is its significance?

It is significant because in democratic society participation and representation in the political process matters.  It matters enormously in terms of the shaping and structuring of policies and programs and how they are implemented.

The Indian American community is one of the more recent immigrant groups in the United States. It is also one of the fastest-growing communities. It is important for the community to participate in the political process and make sure its voices are heard.

Politicians make the decisions on a myriad number of issues such as war and peace at the national level to resource allocation for education and infrastructure maintenance and development at the local level.  Therefore, it is important to be at the table where decisions are made. As the old saying goes, “If you are not at the table, you will be on the menu.”

Indian Americans need to be at the table not just for Indian Americans but for the future of America. 

 

They need to be at that table to contribute to the strengthening of American democracy.  They need to be at that table to contribute to the forming of a “more perfect union” which will have seats at the table for all regardless of race, religion, or country of origin.

(The writer is an entrepreneur, civic and thought leader based in Washington DC. The views expressed are personal)

Trump doctrine on foreign policy - ‘We’re America, Bitch’

Trump is worried sick with his misdeeds, the only support he has is his base, and all the statements he makes are to keep that loyalty. He does not care about America or his base, he is seeking his own sanity and self-balancing acts.

Thanks to Jeffrey Goldbert and the Atlantic, you can read the re

Mike Ghouse

Abstracts from the article

"But what is mainly interesting about “We’re America, Bitch” is its delusional quality. Donald Trump is pursuing policies that undermine the Western alliance, empower Russia and China, and demoralize freedom-seeking people around the world. The United States could be made weaker—perhaps permanently—by the implementation of the Trump Doctrine."



"The second-best self-description of the Trump Doctrine I heard was this, from a senior national-security official: “Permanent destabilization creates American advantage.” The official who described this to me said Trump believes that keeping allies and adversaries alike perpetually off-balance necessarily benefits the United States, which is still the most powerful country on Earth. When I noted that America’s adversaries seem far less destabilized by Trump than do America’s allies, this official argued for strategic patience. “They’ll see over time that it doesn’t pay to argue with us.”

The third-best encapsulation of the Trump Doctrine, as outlined by a senior administration official over lunch a few weeks ago, is this: “No Friends, No Enemies.” This official explained that he was not describing a variant of the realpolitik notion that the U.S. has only shifting alliances, not permanent friends. Trump, this official said, doesn’t believe that the U.S. should be part of any alliance at all. “We have to explain to him that countries that have worked with us together in the past expect a level of loyalty from us, but he doesn’t believe that this should factor into the equation,” the official said.  

Thanks to Jeffrey Goldberg and the Atlantic, you can read the full article at https://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2018/06/a-senior-white-house-official-defines-the-trump-doctrine-were-america-bitch/562511/?utm_source=atlfb

A Senior White House Official Defines the Trump Doctrine: ‘We’re America, Bitch’

The president believes that the United States owes nothing to anyone—especially its allies.

JEFFREY GOLDBERG

10:18 AM ET