US’s socio-political fault lines likely enabled Trump’s trump, Kamala’s loss

Quite unexpectedly, Donald Trump has returned as United States President comfortably. This, after all the talk of a close fight, dead heat etc.

It's tempting to look at immediate reasons like the immigration issue, state of the economy and the Biden administration’s questionable track record in creating the conditions for the Ukraine-Russia war and the wide berth it gave Israel in its continuing assault on Gaza.

They may all be valid but US administrations in the past also committed transgressions of this kind, without paying a price. The George W Bush administration’s decision to invade Iraq, for instance. He came back for a second term.

Watch: Trump's political resurrection | Why America chose him again

If it had been anyone else, the voters’ call could have been understandable, but here it is none else but Trump. An individual who faces charges of trying to subvert US democracy, who questioned the fairness of its election process and was in fact indicted of felony and of other misdemeanours over the last few years.

Understanding American psyche

There must be something deep in the American psyche that forgave his faults wholesale and deemed him fit to return as president. Immigration was an issue, but not just of the illegal type. In recent years, there has been a perception that the US is fast turning into a multicultural democracy like some nations in Europe. And that does not sit comfortably with many white Americans.

In the last three decades or so, there has been a massive influx of highly talented and well-qualified migrants from all over the world, especially from South America and Asia.

Also read: The message from Donald Trump

According to Pew Research, in 2022, some 10.6 million immigrants living in the US were born in Mexico, making up 23% of all U.S. immigrants. The next largest origin groups were those from India (6%), China (5%) and the Philippines (4%).

By region of birth, immigrants from Asia accounted for 28% of all immigrants two years ago.

The Chinese and Indians, among others, are a visible presence today across the US, in states where mainly whites were seen not too long ago. This is particularly so in four states: California (10.4 million making up 23% of the national total of Chinese and Indians), Texas (5.2 million or 11%), Florida (4.8 million or 10%) and New York (4.5 million or 10%).

Watch | Trump's victory speech in full: 'God spared my life for a reason'

For the white Anglo-Saxon American, who would like to see themselves as the dominant community, the arrival of thousands of coloured non-native English-speaking immigrants from Latin America, Africa, the Middle East and Asia could well be unsettling. There has been extensive documentation that proves these fears are not unfounded.

Resentment against Asians

The latent resentment against Asians came to the fore during the Covid pandemic when they were targeted for being perceived as the originators of the Coronavirus spread. Trump, one may recall, constantly referred to the Covid as Chinese flu or the Chinese virus. California Congresswoman Judy Chu estimated 100 hate crimes were being committed against Asian Americans each day during that period.

The Covid period was not an exception. From the late 19th century onwards, Asian migrants have experienced racist violence for various reasons. It started off with attacks against the Chinese. This was followed by resistance against Indians migrating into the US.

Also read: Modi congratulates 'friend' Trump on 'historic election victory'

According to a report in National Geographic, at the turn of the century, a rise in Indian immigration sparked “dusky peril,” a fear of what a Washington newspaper then described as “Hindu hordes invading the state.”

In the early 20th century, following pressure from anti-immigrant groups like "100 per cent Americanism," the Asiatic Barred Zone Act put a halt to most Indian and Asian immigration. Not more than 100 Indians per year were allowed to enter the US in this period. Kamala Harris’s mother Shyamala Gopalan was one among 100 migrants in 1958. The restriction was lifted only in 1965.

The Japanese too were targeted during the Second World War, with 1,20,000 Japanese Americans even being interned in detention camps, and a complete halt to immigration of this community was put in place.

Also read: Trump profile: Why he wouldn't disappear from American politics

More recently, before the Covid pandemic, the 9/11 World Trade Center strikes triggered attacks on Hindus, Muslims, and Sikhs.

Did gender play a role?

So, the racist resentment has always been there, only to bubble over periodically over some issue or the other.

In this context, to think that an Afro-Asian woman like Kamala Harris could turn out to be president. No way.

Watch | Trump's win: What it means for India, US and the world

Another possible issue could be the gender of Kamala Harris. Though it can never be conclusively established that this was a factor, there is a long-held suspicion that the US is a deeply conservative society that tends to be conformist when it comes to gender relations, never mind the fantasies woven by Hollywood films on equal status for women.

Going by surveys in the aftermath of polling, there were a large number of Spanish-origin and Black Americans who voted for Trump. So this would not fall into the category of the white American rejecting an Afro-Asian. In which case, did gender play a role? Entirely possible, as long-held notions of patriarchy, if not male dominance, have held sway among all ethnic groups not just white Americans.

But then again, if gender was an issue, why was there not an upsurge of women voting for Kamala Harris. Especially given that she was so firm and clear on women’s right to abort. As an analyst explained, maybe that issue did not matter to women who were beyond the age of pregnancy. Plus of course, the hold of the Christian religion and the stigma of abortion that religiously inclined women of any age would subscribe to.

This possibly explains the large number of women who voted for Kamala but not the upsurge that was widely expected. Earlier Democratic candidates, including Joe Biden, did better, getting female votes.

Influence of Christian evangelicals

That brings us to religion. Christian evangelicals form a huge number across the US, and they unreservedly backed Trump. Some attribute Trump’s win as that “ordained by God” through a divine intervention.

Evangelicals derive their power from huge donations, including from street followers, and can influence voting heavily. They are also unconditionally pro-Israel and are one of the biggest supporters of the Zionist regime in Israel. As we have seen, the Benjamin Netanyahu government was given a blank cheque by US’s Christian right in its assault on Gaza that has seen over 41,000 killed in the last 13 months.

Though Kamala Harris identified herself more as a Christian (on her father’s side) than a Hindu (on her mother’s side), she was largely viewed as a Left-leaning liberal who was not particularly besotted with religion. There she must have lost the vote of the Conservative, religious American.

Unfortunately for Kamala Harris, she found herself buffeted by forces and circumstances that were beyond her control. At this point in US history, she is probably not the type of person who can attract the vote across the board despite her eagerness and the promise to make life better for the middle-classes, irrespective of their religion, community and politics.

For the very same reasons that Kamala Harris lost out, Trump may have trumped.