Which Presidential Candidate Squares Up With American Voters---Trump or Harris?

The 2024 race for president is a near statistical tie between the former president, Donald Trump, and current Vice President Kamala Harris. We hear with nauseating regularity about how important this singular election is a "race for democracy" as if other elections aren't. Of course, the message is intended to imply that Trump will destroy our democracy but Harris wouldn't, which is laughable.

Our democracy has been curtailed and trampled on for decades, and it's not one party or the other. Our grandparents would be appalled by the power and control government has over our lives.  Power in this country is not in the hands of ordinary citizens as originally intended by our Founders. It is in the hands of the obscenely rich and mega corporations. Remember, the government no longer serves the American People. It serves Wall Street. 

Globally, world leaders see Trump as egotistic, a "drama king" and  prone to aggrandizement, but at the same time, an astute businessman and tough negotiator. They also see him as something of a loose cannon, and therefore unpredictable. This is actually a very good thing when dealing with politicians.

Kamala Harris, on the other hand, is seen as weak.  Politically naive and unintelligent. They know she has the lowest approval rating of any vice president in U.S. history. That means she's not popular and doesn't have a strong sustainable base. When you're dealing with cut throat politics and the likes of Vladimir Putin, Kim Jong Un, Ali Khomeini, Xi Jinping,  that's like chum to sharks.

However, to her credit, she can fall back on people know for their political astuteness and ruthlessness like Nancy Pelosi, Bill and Hilary Clinton, and Barack Obama. But in politics, even the President of the United States has only so many chips they can cash in.  Unlike the president, when the sh*t hits the fan, you can bet they won't be standing in front with Kamala.

So, where does the candidates for president stand on certain key issues and how does that correlate to the average American?  Who comes the closest to expressing the viewpoint of ordinary Americans? Let's start with illegal immigration. Trump favors stronger border protection, more border agents, rebuilding a border wall, tighter restrictions on asylum approvals, and an increase in deportations (there are around 12 million illegals living in the U.S). He also favors ending "anchor baby" citizenship and defunding so-called "sanctuary cities".

Kamala Harris wants to invest more money into the economies of Mexico, El Salvador, Honduras, and Guatemala in order to promote more job growth, reduce poverty and improve their quality of life to the tune of over $1 billion dollars. She is also proposing incentives to U.S. businesses to further invest in Central America with a goal of adding over 90,000 new jobs. The combined  government and business investment is expected to be around $5.2 billion dollars. Wouldn't that money be better spent on our own infrastructure? 

 In 2023, Honduras received $182 million in U.S. aid.  El Salvador got just over $163 million dollars and Guatemala took in $212,670,434 million of U.S. taxpayer's money. Almost $181 million went to Mexico. (as an aside, Afghanistan received $881 million in 2023. The Taliban says "thank you").

Ms. Harris also proposes increasing pathways for migrants to become U.S. citizens, not "separating families (which was blamed on Trump, but actually began under President Obama). She also promises to reduce "abuses" and delays by those seeking asylum. 

Currently, the U.S. has a population of about 65.2 million Hispanics. 19% aren't citizens. About 36.2 million are registered to vote, making them 14.7% of the voting population (the majority of them live in key electoral states like California, Texas, Florida, and New York). Every year, another 1.4 million become a U.S. citizen. Hispanics are the largest minority in America. In about ten years they'll be on par with white Americans of European origin.

Although Trump did well among Hispanics in 2014 and 2020, 89% of Hispanics lean to or are registered Democrat. About 33% are registered or lean Republican. Of those, Cubans are the only Hispanic segment with a strong positive view of the GOP.

In expanding the demographic, when asked about illegal immigration, the majority of Americans---55%--- have been pushing for a reduction since 2001. 51% want to deport all illegal immigrants. 53% would like to see a wall built on our southern border. 76% want more border patrol agents. However, 70% favoring giving illegal residents an opportunity to remain, but only if they become U.S. citizens.

When it comes to Hispanic voters, 75% say the border situation represents a serious crisis. However, 74% think Washington is handling the situation all wrong. 57% and 58% respectively believe the U.S. should create more opportunities to become citizens while making it easier for asylum seekers to enter the U.S. and obtain employment while waiting on a decision about their immigration status.

Concerning the war in Ukraine, Trump has promised to end the war "within 24 hours" through negotiations with Putin and Zelenskyy based on his "personal relationship" with each leader. However, Trump has been a little fuzzy about the details of any such agreement, although cutting military aid to Ukraine is one part of any deal (by happenstance, President Biden approved an additional $61 billion in military aid for Ukraine in April 2024). 

Trump also believes NATO members need to pick up more of the tab when it comes to their defense. The U.S. contributes 16% of the NATO budget (not 2/3 as claimed by Trump). However, only 35% of NATO members are paid up. They've put the defense of their countries on credit.

Harris believes the Ukraine is just one link in a chain of Russian aggression with Poland likely being next on the menu. She believes in strengthening relations with Ukraine and NATO. Ms. Harris says that the money will continue to flow to both Ukraine and NATO. She also promises putting together a 50 nation coalition to help defend Ukraine against Putin.

Expanding the conflict with a major nuclear power like Russia can't be the smartest move to make. Her proposal amounts to a de facto direct threat to Putin. Ms. Harris's statements also seem to contain the implied approval to allow Ukrainian use of long range missiles deep into Russia if elected (Putin has promised  an immediate and "appropriate" response which can't be good). 

Her statements imply too that the U.S. will maintain its current role in NATO and will continue to press for full membership of Ukraine into the archaic military alliance (which was the basis of the war. Putin had repeatedly promised that he wouldn't allow Russia to be enclosed on its western front by NATO or allow missiles at near pointblank range of Moscow and other key cities).

According to a Pew survey, about 1/3 of Americans believe the U.S. is providing too much support to Ukraine while 25% believe the Ukraine is receiving about the right amount in U.S. military aid. Finally, 24% of those polled said Ukraine should be getting more aid. The remaining 18% doesn't have a clue.

Broken down by party, about 50% of Republicans and conservatives think Ukraine is getting to much aid. 16% of Democrats agree. While 24% of Conservatives think support of Zelenskyy is critical to U.S. national security, 49% of Democrats and liberals believe support of Ukraine is key to our national security.   Older Americans (those who experienced the Cold War) are more worried about the war's escalation than younger adults (mainly Millennials and Gen Z).

When it comes to Gaza, the former president says he's an ardent supporter of Israel and its right to defend itself. Nevertheless, Trump has at times been critical of how the IDF has conducted the war and the claims of genocide (about 35 thousand civilians have died thus far).  However, Trump has again been a little fuzzy on details aside from urging Israeli leaders to conclude this war quickly.

Trump  has said he supports a two state agreement between Israel and the Palestinian Authority (which may involve guaranteed direct U.S. support in the event of an attack). He has previously said that he would cut off all aid to the Palestinians for their support of and by Hamas, Hezbollah, and Iran.

 He would suspend student visas and deport any foreign student who openly supports or promotes Hamas or other terrorist groups (opponents criticize him of censoring "free speech"). Trump also opposes rebuilding Gaza because devastation leveled was the result of the October 7th sneak attack and subsequent torture, burning and mass murder of innocent Israeli civilians by Hamas. (I guess it's like saying, "you caused the mess, you got what you deserved, now you clean it up").  

As for Kamala, she comes down more so on the side of the Palestinians, although she has said she supports Israel's right to defend itself and opposes the Democratic plan to suspend military aid to Israel (there have been numerous protests, including direct and indirect action by the Left, against Israel for what they call "the Palestine genocide"). The U.S. has sent Israel some $34 billion dollars in aid since October 7th. Ms. Harris has said that she is "working with" Biden on a cease-fire agreement (it's unlikely she has been directly involved in any such plan and is just trying to build some foreign policy creds).

Ms. Harris has also spoken about the "devastating" numbers of dead as a result of the war launched by Hamas (just under 50,000 civilians has died thus far). She said she supports the right of Palestinians to "dignity, security, freedom and self determination", which was a indirect swipe at Israel and happens to be the same things Hamas opposes for its citizens in Gaza. Beyond that, Ms. Harris is pretty light on details as to how she would help bring about a ceasefire, prevent further attacks on Israel or cut off its military aid and to what extent, if any, the United States would help rebuild Gaza.

According to a July 10th Gallup poll, 48% of Americans oppose Israel's military actions in Gaza while 42% approve. In March, the figure was 55% against Israel and 36% for.  Israel's biggest supporters are Republicans, with 76% expressing their support. Only 23% of Democrats back Israel and the nation's largest political bloc, Independents, have a 34% approval rating of Israel. Interesting, just over 1/3 of American Jews regard Israel's actions in Gaza to be genocide while 60% support the creation of a independent Palestinian state.

Politically, 49% of Democrats believe the IDF's actions constitute genocide. 21% disagrees with 30% being undecided. Among Republicans, 57% doesn't believe Israel is engaged in genocide. 18% said it was and about 25% weren't sure. The poll, taken by Economist/You.Gov, excluded responses by Independents. Looking at age, 49% of those between 18 and 29 years old said they thought Israel was engaged in Palestinian genocide in Gaza. A minority of 24% disagreed and 27% couldn't decide (hell, they can't decide on gender either).

When it comes to abortion, Kamala Harris supports Roe v. Wade and a women's right to chose. Trump, of course, opposed it and was instrumental in its overturn. Of course, that didn't stop abortions. They still continue. Since overturning Roe v. Wade, there has been a 21% increase in maternal pregnancy related deaths due to botched abortions. 45% of illegal abortions were categorized as "medically unsafe". The majority of the public---55%---still support Roe v Wade and believe it should be reinstated. 70% believe abortion should be allowed in most all instances. 80% said it should be legal in extreme circumstances.

So, how do you square up with Trump or Harris on illegal immigration? How about the Ukrainian-Russian war or the situation in Gaza? What about abortion? None of these issues are cut and dry. They each involve complicated issues and a maze of other issues. However, regardless of where Harris or Trump stand, it's Congress and who controls the majority of seats that are the decision makers.

Thank you for reading Another Opinion! We hope you enjoyed this article and will pass it along. Please don't forget to subscribe. It's free! Lastly, please "like" us on whatever platform you use to read anotheropinionblog.com. It helps beat the algorithms and keeps our articles in circulation. Please find below the links we consulted in researching this article. 

 

Sharply More Americans Want to Curb Immigration to the U.S.

Key facts about Hispanic eligible voters in 2024

Latinos Views on the Migrant Situation at the US-MexicanBorder

U.S. Department of State: U.S. Foreign Assistance by Country

Harris announces 1 billion US investment in Central America

Kamala Harris's immigration polices explained

Views of Ukraine and U.S. involvement with theRussian-Ukraine War

Harris strikes balance in pointed DNC remarks on war

Disapproval of Israeli Action in Gaza Eases Slightly in U.S.

More than one-third of Americans believe Israel iscommitting genocide, poll shows

How Donald Trump and Kamala Harris differ on theUkraine-Russian war

Unsafe abortion: unnecessary maternal mortality

Support for abortion access has risen since Supreme Courtoverturned Roe v. Wade, poll finds

 

Pulling the Trigger: Abortion Post Roe v. Wade

On Friday, June 24, 2022, the U.S. Supreme Court handed down a decision which may ultimately prove to be as decisive as the first volley fired at Concord and Lexington in April 1775 or the First Battle of Bull Run in July 1861. The court, by a five to four decision along ideological lines, voted to overturn Roe v. Wade, which has stood since 1973, giving women the right to end a unwanted pregnancy.  

A majority of Americans, 54% to 28%, regarded the court's decision a mistake equivalent to Citizens United and further demonstrated the folly of lifetime appointments and the disconnect it creates with the American People, technology and society.  In another poll, 70% of the respondents said that a woman's decision to get an abortion should be private matter between a woman and her doctor.

The nearly 50 year old decision was based on the 14th amendment (and to a lesser extension, the 9th amendment which serves as a "catch all" amendment) and was based on the issue of privacy.  These same laws were used to guarantee the rights and citizenship of former slaves because of its "citizenship clause". It  is also cited to justify citizenship for so-called "anchor babies". That is, children of illegal immigrants born on U.S. soil.   

The 14th amendment was used in the 1954 case of Brown v. Board of Education which dealt with racial discrimination under its Equal Protection Clause, and in 2015, it was used to strike down state laws opposing mixed race and same sex marriages under the Due Process and Equal Protection clauses.

Prior to Roe v. Wade, each state regulated their own abortion laws. Some states were fairly liberal, essentially allowing abortions on demand, while others restricted it to cases of rape, incest, the life of the mother was endangered or if something catastrophic was wrong with the child which would affect its quality of life, while some prohibited it altogether.

In states where there were restrictions, it also meant that those with the financial wherewithal could afford to obtain a relatively safe abortion while the working class and poor were often forced to seek out "back alley" procedures which were typically unsafe and unsanitary (in some cases, women crossed or were smuggled into Mexico for the illegal procedure) and provided nothing for pain.. 

It wasn't unusual  for a woman to be physically injured during the procedure, leaving them with internal injuries, infections like sepsis, sterile, or dead.

Some women purchased certain drugs, which caused violent cramps, bleeding, and vomiting, from questionable sources to end their unwanted pregnancies. These drugs could be just as deadly.  Roe v. Wade was intended to end these procedures and provide safe alternatives.

The decision ending Roe v. Wade, will again put the decision back into the hands of the states in what's known as "trigger laws".  In 26 states (including Kentucky, Tennessee, Texas, and Missouri ), these laws will take effect immediately, while in others there is a waiting period ranging from five to 30 days. In a few states, the laws must be reviewed and amended if necessary before taking effect (it's worth nothing that in some states, their abortion laws date back to the early 1930's).

The ending of Roe v. Wade marks another serious break in the United States, which is already deeply divided. Approximately 2/3 of Americans supported Roe v. Wade. 58% of those polled said they hoped their state would enact more progressive abortion laws, while 51% wanted their state to become a "safe haven" for women seeking an abortion.

Thus, the Supreme Court has now joined Congress and the Presidency in disregarding the opinions of the majority of the American People. Is it any wonder that the Supreme Court has a 25% approval rating?  As an aside, the approval rating of Congress is a dismal 20% (it was a record low of 18% in May 2022) while Biden's is currently just 38% (VP Kamala Harris has a rating of 35%).  

As a result of the Roe decision, the approval rating for the Supreme Court dropped from 40% to 25% among Independents (America's largest political bloc), from 30% to 13% among Democrats, and yet it actually rose among Republicans from 37% to 39%.

It's worth nothing that the court's decision, which many consider to be a women's issue, came down primarily along ideological lines with the five conservative justices (four men and one woman) voting to undo Roe v. Wade while the four liberal justices, which  included two women, Sonia Sotomayor and Elena Kagan, dissenting ( it's worth noting that Justice Clarence Thomas is considered the most conservative while Sonia Sotomayor is the most liberal).  

In addition, it should be pointed out that Justice Stephen Breyer was appointed by President Clinton, and Justices Sonia Sotomayor and Elena Kagan were appointed by President Obama.  Justice Samuel Alito, who wrote the court's majority opinion, and Justice Clarence Thomas were appointed by President George H. W. Bush. Chief Justice John Roberts was appointed by President George W. Bush. President Trump appointed three— Justices Neil Gorsuch, Brett Kavanaugh and Amy Coney Barrett.

Many conservatives, notably among the Far Right, considered this to be a moral, and therefore, a religious issue more so than a ideological one. Their argument was that abortion, regardless of the circumstances to be morally wrong, and thus in conflict with their religious beliefs.

There may be a grain of truth in this. The court consists of six Catholics, one Protestant, and two Jews. The lone Protestant, Trump appointee Neil Gorsuch, was raised Catholic but converted to "Catholic-lite" Episcopalianism. Justice Sotomayor, who is of Puerto Rican descent and the most liberal justice, has said that she considers herself more of a "cultural Catholic" than practicing Catholic. 

Nevertheless, the Vatican has stated that any politician or judge who supported abortion, which is banned by Canon Law, could be refused communion or possibly even excommunication. Apparently five of the Catholic justices weren't taking any chances.

The Left, on the other hand, saw Roe v. Wade more of a economic and social issue which provided women with the control over their body and by being a federal law, made abortion legal, affordable, and providing a degree of safety as well as privacy.

Of course, some states, with considerable pressure from conservative Right to Life groups, attempted to hamstring the federal law by requiring a waiting period, mandatory pre-procedure counseling, and viewing images of the fetus before being allowed to proceed with the procedure.  

So, what does this all mean? Since 1973, there has been an estimated 63 million abortions performed in the United States. The National Right to Life Committee has claimed that for every 1000 live births, there are 193 abortions. Yet contrary to popular opinion, most of these were not "on demand" forms of birth control as some have alleged.

The renown Guttmacher Institute conducted an intensive study of why women had abortions found that 74% said having a child at that time would interfere with their work, education, or ability to take of a dependent. 73% cited economic reasons while 48% didn't want to try to raise a child on their own. 4 in 10 said they were done with their childbearing and didn't want any more children while 1/3 admitted that they weren't emotionally ready to have child yet.

With Roe v. Wade becoming law in 1973, the number of adoptions available significantly decreased, especially among middle and upper class white women. Adoptions rose from 91,000 in 1957 to 175,000 by 1970. But by 1975, two years after Roe v. Wade, they had dropped to 130,000 and continued to drop.

In the 1970's, 9% of single women surrendered their children to adoption. By the 1980's, that figure had dropped to 2% of single females giving their children up for adoption, which further dropped to 1% by the 1990's and on.  It's also worth noting that most of the women interviewed stated that it was less emotionally stressful to have an abortion than it was giving up their child for adoption.

Our America of 2022 is not the same America of the 1970's. There will likely be more states willing to allow abortions, at least at some level, than there was the years prior to Roe v. Wade. There are more conception options available, such as the "morning after pill", not to mention dozens of birth control devices and reversible procedures available. If you are going to be sexual active, then you need to take responsibility for your actions and use some form of protection. There's now no longer any excuse not to.

However, it's not really about birth control or even abortions is it? It comes down to who has the final say over one's own body---the individual? The state? Or is it some group attempting to impose its religious and moral values onto others? That, in my opinion, is what the argument has really been about all along.

With the undoing of Roe v. Wade, should there now be an attempt to expand this reversal of privacy and individual choice to include birth control (as some religious groups have promised to do since they believe all forms of birth control are "immoral"), or attempt to apply it to interracial or same sex partnerships and marriages (which some oppose for the same reason), I think you will see the final tear in this nation's fabric.

It's ironic that at the same time, we are seeing efforts by the Left to prohibit or further restrict gun ownership, which also comes down to a matter of privacy, personal choice, and self-protection under the Second and Fourteenth Amendments. Somehow I can't see conservatives standing by and allowing it to happen, and yet isn't turnabout seen as "fair play"?    

I struggle with abortion for several reasons, least of all depriving a healthy infant the wonders of life (none of those reasons involve religion by the way).  However, I believe there are exceptions, such as rape, incest, the endangerment of the mother's life, or something catastrophic which would seriously impair the child's quality of life. I can't condone late term abortions either unless, again, the mother's life is endangered or the child's quality of life is impacted.

But, to be clear,  I don't believe I or anyone else has the right to tell anyone, especially a stranger whose circumstances I know nothing about or someone of the opposite gender, what they can or can't do with their body, regardless of whether I agree or not (otherwise, it follows that women should be able to require men to get vasectomies for instance). I will, of course, be more than happy to give my opinion should they ask!

 Lastly, I don't believe any individual, group, or religious institution has the right to impose their religious beliefs or ideas of morality onto anyone else, particularly when they are neither married or have children. That's no different than what the Taliban has done in Afghanistan. 

If you want to know more, please take a look at the links below. If you enjoyed the article, please consider passing it along to others and don't forget to subscribe. It's free! Lastly please be sure to "like" us on whatever platform you use to read A/O. It helps with the algorithms and keeps our articles in circulation. Thank you!  

 

 What does overturning Roe v. Wade mean? Supreme Court decision's implications

Confidence in U.S. Supreme Court Sinks to Historic Low

The Religion of the Supreme Court Justices

The political leanings  of the Supreme Court justices

Trigger Law

Guttmacher Institute: Reasons U.S. women have abortions

Why So Many Women Chose Abortions Over Adoptions

New poll finds Americans oppose striking down Roe v. Wade bya 2 to 1 margin

The New England Journal of Medicine: Perilous Politics: Morbidityand Mortality in the Pre-Roe Era