Peter van der Heiden, an Americanist at Radboud University, spent three weeks travelling through the southern states in the run-up to the election. He followed Election Day itself from Nashville, capital of Tennessee. “The substantive agendas are not very important,” he reflects on the election race. “It's all about personality. The winner is the candidate who best reflects the presidential image.”
Van der Heiden does not believe that the policy intentions determined the outcome, nor was Kamala Harris undone by her rather meagre agenda. “Her unfamiliarity was more of a problem. No one knew much about her and what she stands for. And she is to blame for that.” The campaign rallies didn’t help her, says Van der Heiden, citing the grandiose shows in which the candidates reinforce their image with catchy one-liners. “This is where Harris falls short. She doesn’t have the presidential look, and the hoped-for mass support from women did not materialise.”
“Many people are fed up”
“Many people are fed up with the presidential election,” says Van der Heiden. While foreign countries are amazed at the lack of vision, in America itself frustration is growing. “Democrats in particular are tired of the constant political spectacle that is staged every four years. What was once an inspiring democratic exercise is now a repetition of the same play, with new actors and little in the way of new content each time.”
Van der Heiden underlines the indifferent mood with the turnout figures: the Democrats had fifteen million fewer votes compared to 2020, while Trump won three million votes less. “If Harris had been able to keep hold of those fifteen million, she would have won easily.” Incidentally, there’s still a lot of fuss about the turnout figures, he says. “The Democrats don't understand where those votes have gone, although more are still being counted. According to the Republicans, those 15 million votes are just proof that there was rigging last time.”
