Listen to the article
After an eventful Super Tuesday, during which fifteen states cast their votes for the Democratic and Republican primaries, Donald Trump and Joe Biden emerged as the undisputed leaders of the political arena. This widely anticipated scenario, foreseen by many observers, left Nikki Haley – Trump’s only serious contender – with no other option but to withdraw from the presidential race. Her lackluster performance, securing only one state out of the fifteen contested on Super Tuesday and a mere two overall since the beginning of the primaries, led to her decision. Consequently, the Biden-Trump showdown seems to be solidifying, signaling an upcoming “rematch” between these two candidates who previously faced off in 2020.
The formal launch of the presidential campaign for the general elections is now taking shape, despite its already evident momentum. With no serious contenders in his path, Joe Biden has solidified his position for the November showdown. Meanwhile, Donald Trump, confident in his ability to oust Nikki Haley, is repeating the strategy he previously used with candidates Ron De Santis and Vivek Ramaswami. However, a significant distinction arises: after withdrawing from their own presidential bids, both De Santis and Ramaswami pledged their support to Trump’s campaign.
However, Haley, who focused her campaign on anti-Trump sentiment within the Republican Party, did not follow a similar path. While her influence within the party’s broader base may be limited, she succeeded in cultivating an anti-Trump feeling that could sway the election. Unlike De Santis and Ramaswami’s supporters, Nikki Haley’s voter base is not firmly committed to Trump and could even, according to some observers, entertain the Biden option, presenting an unsettling challenge for the Republicans.
In a statement, Joe Biden expressed his firm intention to seek common ground with Nikky Haley’s supporters on crucial political issues. Additionally, some surveys conducted in early voting states suggest that a “significant percentage” of Haley’s followers are open to the idea of voting for the incumbent president, according to veteran Democratic strategist Simon Rosenberg, as conveyed to BBC News. For instance, among Haley’s voters in North Carolina, only 21% stated their intention to vote for the Republican candidate.
Every time the prospect of Joe Biden’s political downfall arises, he reappears, exuding confidence and filled with unwavering optimism. Whether it is justified or not is debatable. Nonetheless, during his recent State of the Union address before Congress on March 7, the Democrat president delivered remarks that left Republican lawmakers uneasy, having previously mocked his physical and mental acumen for months. Throughout his speech, which underscored his ongoing perseverance at the age of 81 despite occasional verbal stumbles, Biden tried to draw a sharp contrast with Donald Trump, albeit without explicitly naming him, but referring to him as “my predecessor.”
Joe Biden’s team perceives this speech as being the true kickoff to his presidential campaign. His aggressive strategy aims to emphasize the alleged existential threat that Donald Trump represents to American democracy. While emphasizing the chasm between them, the president seeks to dissipate concerns about his health.
Meanwhile, Donald Trump kicked off his presidential campaign on the day of his 2020 defeat, launching relentless and often personal attacks against Joe Biden almost uninterruptedly. He went as far as bestowing upon him distinctive monikers like “Sleepy Joe” or “Crooked Joe.” These direct attacks target Biden’s age, perceived leniency on immigration, and economic policies, among other issues.
This electoral strategy, largely driven by social media platforms, has definitely yielded results, turning a candidate initially seen as lacking credibility and bound for failure at the time of his candidacy announcement a year and a half ago, into a frontrunner in the majority of polls.
However, one of the key aspects, extending beyond the United States to encompass Europe and the Middle East, pertains to foreign policy. What is the different position-taking?
During Biden’s address to Congress, the part regarding foreign policy lacked significant revelations, as two major global crises prevailed: the conflict in Ukraine and the situation in the Gaza Strip. These two situations raise growing concerns about American involvement, albeit of different natures. In the former instance, military aid to Ukraine has been stalled for months due to the obstruction of MAGA (pro-Trump lawmakers) in the House of Representatives.
The second major crisis, growing unease among progressive circles, stems from the Biden administration’s reluctance to distance itself from the Israeli government. After five months of conflict, resulting in over 30,000 casualties, predominantly among civilians, and leaving the Gaza Strip in ruins, this position is stirring considerable unrest.
On his part, Donald Trump claims to be the only political actor able of restore world peace, citing Ukraine and the Gaza conflict as examples. He contends that the latter would not have taken place during his White House tenure. Trump claims to maintain amicable relations with Russia and suggests mediating between them and Ukraine to resolve the conflict “in less than 24 hours.”
In truth, Trump’s true intentions as a leader remain elusive. His foreign policy leans towards isolationism, with a pronounced emphasis on rivalry with China, relegating Europe to a secondary position. This orientation was already evident during his first term, marked by hints at withdrawing from NATO. While a potential second term wouldn’t grant him unilateral authority to exit the alliance, he could opt to disregard its commitments. Indeed, his allies were notably alarmed, and rightfully so, by his assertion that he wouldn’t offer any support in the event of a Russian attack. The major concern lies in the possibility of Donald Trump yielding the Donbass to Russia in exchange for a ceasefire, against the will of Ukraine and President Zelensky.
Regarding the Israel-Hamas conflict, Trump, whose administration staunchly supported Israel, declared unequivocal backing for the Israeli state and endorsed its sustained offensive in Gaza, despite the high number of casualties among Palestinian civilians. The Republican candidate and former president repeatedly asserted that, under his presidency, such a conflict would not have occurred. “If I was president, this would never have happened,” he declared in reference to the October 7 Hamas attack.
But the greatest challenge lies ahead for both Biden and Trump: it is about convincing their supporters and winning over numerous undecided voters. And this time around, the number is quite significant!
