Donald Trump is the New President of USA

Democracy is a unique system of governance.

Actually, I don’t like Mr Donald Trump so much, but started looking at him after the media and the celebrities started calling him names. I understand the common people’s preference for such candidates who are slammed by media. Masses don’t like media’s guidance. These unknown unsung (and often silent) people are eager to show that they too have a free mind of their own.

Despite the media and celebs talking against him regularly, and even when some of his own party leaders spoke openly against him, it is great that Donald Trump has won the election and would soon be sworn as the next president of United States.

In my view, though I must admit that I have very very limited knowledge of USA and its politics, but as a layperson who has been watching the news on tv and has been following the media reports and analysis, the reasons for his victory appear to be essentially very simple and we need not wreck our heads to unearth them.

First, it appears to be an exact US replay of the recent Brexit in UK, where the people from the hinterland (leaving aside the capital city of London and few big cities), had voted strongly against continuing as a member of EU. The smart factor was that they avoided openly challenging their highbrow urban elitist countrymen and silently went about gathering support for their view point, keeping away from media glare.

The same strategy was adopted by supporters of Donald Trump as they went about their task silently but assiduously and never made a hue and cry about it. If one were to believe some stray comments in media, it appears that they kept telling the pollsters (those who carry out pre poll surveys) by telling them they are going to vote for Ms Clinton, and thus misled (fooled) their opponents.

As may be seen from the blue and red portions of the maps and voting patterns, the coastal states, both in north east and in west, voted for democrats but it was the inner parts, the central zone, mountains, deserts, and southern states, that have overwhelmingly voted for republicans.

As an Indian, to me it looks like a repeat of the division between India (the rich urban elite) and Bharat (the low income rural masses).

Secondly, the persona of Trump is of a non conformist. He is not a regular politician but a brash rich man who is accused of so many things but is still standing tall, shows no intention to be apologetic, and this might have endeared the masses in contrast with the image of an average politician who appears to be too eager to please all.

Thirdly, the biggest disadvantage of Ms Clinton was that she has been around for a long long time. Elections are essentially about image. I am not suggesting that she is guilty of anything but then there have accusations of all kinds and this might have dented her image. It is said in cinema that despite having a pretty and photogenic face, it is difficult for cine stars to hide the blemishes when in close focus. In essence, her being a well known face, often seen as an asset, actually worked against her.

In fact, the people who might have kept a close watch on this election process, it would have been visible during the primaries itself, when she was seen faltering against her main rival. Democrats must ruminate over the issue as to why did they push her candidature despite the chinks in her armour being so clearly visible.

Besides, the second term of President Obama has been going through a lean phase, and provided hardly any support to the democrat candidate. In fact, I had observed that President Obama too would have lost his second term but salvaged the situation by taking out Osama Bin Laden (thanks to Pakistan). Hence, there was not much going in favour of Ms Clinton.

I have observed the campaign of Ms Clinton and there were clear signs in primaries itself that she is a weak candidate. Democrats seem to have erred in preferring her over Mr Sanders. As I have said, being a known face worked against Ms Clinton.

At home, my wife expected her to win and feels sad that US citizens (Americans) are not yet ready to elect a woman as their president.

Lastly, there are so many mundane reasons - that have been debated all over the media and one need not repeat them here all over again. Further, I also believe in the anti incumbency theory followed by Prof Allan Litchman.

By the way, as an Indian, I may add that our own PM Mr Modi was clearly not a favourite to begin with but he shocked everyone by obtaining a massive mandate.

It looks like the people have become smart all around from India to UK to USA.

Next time, one hopes, the pollsters would do their work a little more carefully.

Incidentally, this election too has gone with the historical trend of the incumbent party (this time a democrat occupied the white house) loosing to the opposition party after every eight years’ cycle. Again, US Presidents usually win their second terms easily but President Jimmy Carter (1980), and President George H W Bush (1992) were the exceptions in recent elections.

Let us now hope that President Elect Donald Trump lives up to the expectations and manages to win the second term.

One thing I may add here is that, in my view, the US democracy is strong enough and that even a rabid racist person shall have to ‘behave’. Also, a President is bound by ‘oath of office’, duly ‘ring-fenced by constitution’.

Donald Trump may be seen as racist maniac, but I have faith that the people and democratic ethos of USA will not let him turn in to a Dictator.