Although the contender for the crown contender's chances of winning the race is better than that of the person sitting in the Oval Office, there is no room for perfume and blindness from the overall voting rates • Interpretation
Wisconsin Ballot Committee
Photography:
IPI
One of the most prevalent and ingrained tendencies in evaluating the conduct of voters at the polls is to be impressed by macro data such as voting rates that seem exceptional in scope.
Indeed, when the American nation shows such a high level of political involvement and participation in the electoral process, the immediate conclusion is, ostensibly, that it will automatically serve the Democratic Party.
This is because its scope and margins are much wider than those of its Republican rival, and because its friends and supporters did indeed vote en masse for Joe Biden in the early vote.
Photo: Reuters
However, even though the contender for the crown's chances of winning the race is better than those of those sitting in the Oval Office, there is no room to fret and be blinded by the overall turnout, even if they break the mythological record of the 1960 campaign.
What is even more important - and this can only be checked when the battles subside and after the vote is over - is the segmentation of voters according to specific groups and sectors, whose strategic importance is critical.
Thus, for example, the polls indicate broad support for Biden on the part of young voters up to the age of 29. However, in the last election campaign of 2016, the turnout among this sector was particularly low, so that it did not make its mark on the decision.
Even today it is not clear to what extent the youth camp mobilized for the flag and will play a significant role in determining the result.
Violence is not new in U.S. history
The same is true of the African-American community - especially the older ones over the age of 45 - and their support for Biden is sweeping.
But even here, the high turnout in the early voting does not at all indicate the role of the African-American segment in this pie.
What's more, only four years ago, this community actually contributed to the election of Trump, due to a relatively low turnout in the neighborhood.
That rate dropped significantly from the volume of votes for Obama in 2008 and 2012, thus paving Trump's path to the White House.
The second connection, which also leads to the conclusion that it is not advisable to be overly impressed by phenomena and character traits that seem unprecedented at first glance, is the connection of mass violence, which is ostensibly at the gate.
While the severity of the rift, polarization, and extremist rhetoric of the present generation, and especially in the era of the incumbent president, should not be underestimated, they do not necessarily herald a tsunami or an apocalypse and the impending end of the American democratic era.
Photo: Reuters
On the contrary, at least until now, the contrasting rhetoric and the attempt to question the legitimacy of the process have not yet been translated, into a real and tangible damage to the mechanisms of civil society or the state establishment.
1968, on the other hand, was a year saturated with physical rather than verbal violence, as evidenced by the assassination of the Democratic nominee, Robert Kennedy, by Sirhan Bishara Sirhan in Los Angeles.
The Democratic Party convention, which convened in Chicago that summer to elect its candidate against Richard Nixon in a belligerent atmosphere of polarization, against the backdrop of the ongoing war in Vietnam, was also characterized by widespread violence on the streets of Chicago.
This, when representatives of the police and forces loyal to Mayor Richard Daley, marvel at their beatings at protesters, who demanded an immediate withdrawal from Vietnamese discrimination.
In light of this, the assertion that the Trump era has lowered the curtain on the era of pragmatism and moderation in American political culture is hasty.
The 45th president certainly contributed to the escalation of antagonisms and the intensification of rivalries, but it was the war in Vietnam and the rift it caused that constituted the main - if not the primary - factor in the decline of the era of relative consensus in American politics.
The price of disregard
However, the fact that Trump remained unreservedly close to the mask of his initial beliefs, and refrained from addressing other target audiences after his election, contributed not only to the polarization of political discourse, but is today a factor that may be at odds with him.
For his aspiration to keep all his election promises one by one to the base of his electorate, especially among the evangelical community (which was centralized in the appointments of two judges and one judge - conservative), created antibodies and precipitation among other groups, especially among the white and educated women in the suburbs.
These fear that the new composition of the house will lead to the reopening of particularly sensitive issues, such as the woman's right to her body and issues related to the nature of the relationship between religion and state.
Very soon, and perhaps even tomorrow, the picture will become clear and it will be finally clarified whether Trump's absolute loyalty to his flock will entail a heavy electoral price.
Let's wait and see.