Photograph: Contributed

Mona Charen

“It’s not a difficult choice,” we said. On one side was a candidate who would abide by the Constitution and laws of the United States and accept the election results. On the other side was a candidate who refused to accept defeat in 2024, even though the memories of the 2020 coup attempt were fresh; swearing to punish the “enemy within”; and promises that mass deportations will be “bloody.” This is what we meant by democracy being in danger.

Some are coping by arguing that it is nearly impossible for their party to remain in the White House when an incumbent president is as unpopular as Joe Biden. Perhaps no Democrat could escape Biden’s tide, but it was especially difficult for the vice president.

As for why Biden is so unpopular, some of us (myself included) mistakenly attribute that mostly to his age. But exit polls show that the economy and the border are also anvils chained to his, and then Kamala Harris, ankles. As The American Prospect’s David Dayen notes, 2024 saw half the world’s population go to the polls and “with a few notable exceptions…nearly every party that was in office as inflation began to heat up around the world lost.” ”

Could Harris have done a better job of easing the inflation problem? In 2012, the economy had not yet fully recovered from the great recession of 2008-2009. In his re-election bid, Barack Obama blamed the poor performance on George W. Bush. Perhaps Harris would be wise to tell a similar story about inflation. On the other hand, recessions are not as politically lethal as inflation.

How can Harris differentiate herself from Biden when it comes to the border? Should he explain that Biden’s approach was a mistake that he would correct after taking office? This is a politically risky proposition. Why would voters upset about the border choose a rehabilitated dove over an aggressive hawk? He might have had a rule of law argument, such as that Congress should reform asylum law and that until it does, the president lacks the authority to address the issue. But Biden overruled that lawsuit in June when he issued executive orders that significantly reduced border crossings.

According to this coping mechanism, voters were demoralized (just look at the right way/wrong way polls) and did what voters always do: punish the incumbent by voting for the change candidate. There’s nothing else to see here.

But those of us who see Trump’s second presidency as a pivotal moment in history—an inevitable departure from what made us a great nation—think there’s more to see here. To follow Trump’s behavior closely is to sense that this election is unlike any other. This lying idiot was seen pantomiming oral sex on the microphone a few days ago (which was perhaps preferable to his usual spew of lies). It’s not as if his politics somehow offset his vulgarity, cruelty, and self-indulgence. His campaign promises consist of ridiculous proposals such as magically balancing the budget and eliminating income taxes through tariffs, rounding up and deporting 11 million or more people, and resolving foreign conflicts through the so-called power of intimidation (though he has consistently denied this). rejecting war).

Voters chose to elevate a cartoon character to the highest office in the land. From there he will close the federal lawsuits against him; Forgive the “hostages” or “political prisoners” or whatever they call them these days of January 6; appoint a series of sycophants, dreamers and despicable individuals to lead other agencies; and then they set about firing most of the capable, responsible civil servants in the government and replacing them with Steve Bannon, Stephen Miller, Boris Epshteyn and other loyalist goblins.

Trump often derides the United States as a Third World country. From now on, he will begin to unite us as one body.

Of course, most of the people who voted for Trump weren’t voting for what they were going to get. And yet it’s their fault for not doing their duty to stay away from him.

Perhaps voters have never prioritized democracy, the rule of law or fair play. So what changed? This is a failure of the elites of the first order. Opinion shapers clearly failed to fulfill their function. In a healthy government, it is up to organizations such as political parties, churches, newspaper editorial boards, radio hosts, company executives and news analysts to shape public opinion, not to follow it. If there were no excuses and explanations; Even without the “Whataboutism” in places like The Wall Street Journal and National Review; If it weren’t for the cowardly capitulation of Wall Street wizards and Silicon Valley prima donnas, if it weren’t for the cowardice of 95% of elected Republicans, ordinary voters would not feel comfortable voting for a flamethrower-wielding clown.

If he succeeds in imposing tariffs that trigger inflation and a trade war; If his deportation, firing, abuse of the justice system, corruption of law enforcement, and degradation of the healthcare system are causing America’s quality of life to decline, then what? Will voters do what they always do and vote for a change candidate next time? Maybe. Or will the elites preparing for Trump’s second election use excuses and cover up every failure as the work of the “deep state” or “saboteurs”? We’re about to find out.

— Mona Charen is a syndicated columnist for Creators.