Delusion of vindication could destroy the Democrats

“Vindicated”: that is the new buzzword in American politics. It is being parroted by Democrats, from West Wing spin doctors to recently re-elected dog-catchers. In its origin, it is a commonplace example of political-speak, damage-limitation vocabulary; but it has implications far beyond the current election and, in the long term, has the potential to become, for the Democrats, a lethal example of the law of unintended consequences.

In the short term, “vindicated” is simply intended to promote the Democrats’ “narrative”, in the argot of political PR, that losing control of the House of Representatives and possibly the Senate is a famous victory. There is nothing surprising about this: it is politics, and politics is about deception. Joe Biden did not get where he is today – nor did any of the 100 Senators and 435 Congressmen – by telling the truth. “Vindicated” is just part of the routine smoke-and-mirrors exercises by which practitioners of the dark art attempt to persuade the public that black is white.

The Republicans tried to convince the electorate that a “red wave” was on the way, despite the fact that opinion polls did not strongly suggest that – though they did not entirely negate the possibility – in order to create momentum for their cause. Patently, it did not work. That has left them embarrassed by the straitened character of their victory, far below the norm in midterm elections, with the US economy in trouble after two years of one of the worst administrations in American history.

The reality is that this election was a disaster for both parties and in strikingly similar ways. Reality, however, is not to be found in the mainstream media. Brits have an advantage in watching the shameless bias of the major American television stations, since we have been exposed to the BBC. One excited CNN commentator did “a James Naughtie”, when canvassing a possible opportunity for the Democrats: “if we (sic) take those votes…”

Republican candidates, in the style of classical Greece, are awarded an essential epithet – “election denier” – but, curiously, the term is never applied to Stacey Abrams, who invented the tactic, though this time she broke with tradition and conceded defeat. The celebratory atmosphere in the television studios of the mainstream media reflected relief at the relatively light drubbing the Democrats received at the hands of voters.

Not every Republican was treated hostilely. The presentation of Ron DeSantis’s return as governor of Florida with a significantly increased majority was so jubilant, so laudatory of the Governor’s political skills, one would have thought he was Nancy Pelosi’s favourite nephew. That is because the agenda of Democrats and their fellow travellers is to encourage a split in the Republican Party, along the Trump/DeSantis fault line.

The Republicans need little encouragement to embrace a fissiparous schism that could render them unelectable. Their dilemma is almost insoluble. The central issue is: is Donald Trump past his sell-by date? The talking heads in the mainstream media studios are urging Republicans to break free of Trump’s control. Why? They are no well-wishers of the GOP. The CNN exit poll showed that 39 per cent of voters have a favourable view of Trump, a verdict that astonished the studio-bound commentators.

The suspicion must be that, deep in their hearts, American liberals have a lingering fear of Trump: they have not forgotten the blow he delivered them in 2016, a trauma that still affects them. Beyond that, the elimination of Trump from US politics would, they hope, facilitate a return to business as usual, with the cosy cross-aisle consensus between Democrats and RINOs (Republicans in name only) restored and populism, meaning the impertinent aspiration of Them the People to have some say in the destinies of their country, crushed.

This is an issue that goes back to the days of the Tea Party, the first movement to reclaim power for the marginalised conservative community from its unrepresentative representatives. It is by no means a purely American problem: the British Conservative Party has not been remotely conservative for at least three decades. The weasel terms “centre-right” and “far-right” were devised by the liberal media to disguise the unprincipled behaviour of go-with-the-flow pseudo-conservatives and to demonise those holding authentic conservative views.

That Trump, two years out of office, is viewed favourably by 39 per cent of the electorate makes him impossible to remove: the backlash from his followers would annihilate the Republican Party in 2024. Yet neither is 39 per cent a reliable basis for an election victory. In 2016 Donald Trump was a force of nature, a conduit for the resentment burning among Americans at the destruction of everything they believed in by liberal forces. But politics moves very quickly: the brand begins to look old-fashioned; some of the magic has worn off.

In terms of stark politics, the solution would be Trump as candidate in 2024, with DeSantis on the vice-presidential ticket, with the promise of the reversion of the presidential slot in 2028. Obviously, though, the two egos involved could not contemplate such a compromise. The best the GOP can hope for, in the short term, is that Trump will make no destabilising announcement until after the run-off in the Georgia senatorial race on 6 December.

At his press conference after the election, Joe Biden made a sarcastic remark about watching Trump and DeSantis fight it out. Biden was in a smug mood: he felt vindicated. A narrative was being crafted whereby his genius and charisma had saved the day – if not the House. He gave evidence of his grasp on geopolitical nuances, in the context of the Ukraine war, by canvassing how he might respond if the Russians were in Fallujah – er – Kherson. He remains oblivious to the discredit his mishandling of the Afghanistan debacle brought upon America.

Joe had the sly, pleased demeanour of someone with a secret he longed to share. It was obvious what was on his mind: his relatively light caning by the electorate has emboldened him to stand again in 2024. That is momentous news, for the Republicans as much as the Democrats. Challenged by a journalist with the exit poll data showing two-thirds of voters do not want him to stand again and asked how that factored into his decision, he replied: “It doesn’t. Watch me.”

Sleepy Joe had been galvanised by his moderate defeat into full-blooded “Earthlings-cannot-hurt-Zogrob” mode. The wishes of two-thirds of the electorate would not deter an entitled Democratic president from imposing himself on the nation. Watch him.

He will be worth watching in 2024. His cognitive decline (he will be 82 by the time of his putative inauguration) could be spectacular. At his press conference he made five attempts to say the word “apocalyptic” before giving up. It is possible that Joe Biden is the only person who could put Donald Trump into the White House.

Biden threw out the usual chaff about being willing to work with Republicans – the same guff we used to get from Obama, a relentlessly partisan president. By the time Joe had made clear on how many issues he was not prepared to compromise, it was evident that the pattern of wallpaper in the Capitol was possibly up for discussion, but little else.

There was a kind of majestic impudence about the Democrats’ decision, in the most developed democracy in the world, to evade accountability for generating massive inflation by micturating $3 trillion of taxpayers’ money against the wall in “infrastructure” packages, loaded with pork-barrel handouts to woke causes, by turning the election into a referendum on a new Project Fear.

“It’s the democracy, stupid.” The Democrats sought to defund the police, looked on indulgently while BLM and Antifa mobs set Portland ablaze (but denounced a hooligan riot at the Capitol as “insurrection”), fought tooth-and-nail against every attempt to ensure voter legitimacy, in favour of allowing any casual alien to distort the electoral process – but, suddenly, they are alarmed about “danger to democracy”.

Or it’s about abortion, on which Joe Biden has an exceptional record: in 1981 he voted for a constitutional amendment that would have allowed states to overturn Roe; in 1982 he voted against the same amendment. In 1981 he voted to end federal funding of abortion for rape and incest victims; in 2003 he voted to ban partial-birth abortion and in 2007 he opposed the Supreme Court’s decision upholding the ban he had voted for. From 1976 to 2019 Biden supported the Hyde Amendment, banning taxpayer funding of elective abortions and the Mexico City policy, denying federal funding to NGOs that promote abortion. In his first days as president, he abolished both.

“Pragmatic” might be one way of describing Joe; other terms might be less benevolent. In Montana, the ballot included a proposition that babies born alive after an abortion should be given medical care to help them survive. The proposition was defeated. That is a chilling demonstration of where the Democratic Party has led America.

In electoral terms, it seems that two ageing egos are insisting on inflicting a rerun of 2020 on the American public. Both have the potential to destroy their respective parties. Perhaps, considering the present state of American politics, that would be a merciful outcome. Meanwhile, the Democrats are celebrating: they consider themselves to have been vindicated.

Write to us with your comments to be considered for publication at letters@reaction.life