A Tale of Two Eagles

Harris should Follow Poland's Example.

Listen

0:00

The American bald eagle has much to learn from the Polish white-tailed eagle. Both countries boast a proud democratic heritage, albeit with different results. During the 16th to the 18th centuries, Poland had the unusual practice of electing its monarchs, which ultimately led to its downfall, the three partitions of the Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth and the end of the existence of the state until the rebirth of the Republic of Poland in 1918 — a traumatic 123 years of domination by neighbouring powers that define modern Poland today.

Add into the mix the Second World War and the dual invasion of Poland by Nazi Germany and the Soviet Union, followed by 40-plus years of communism; one can forgive Poland if it needs to go to therapy as a nation with the century-old fight for existence, survival and ultimate democracy against oppression from its neighbours firmly embedded in its DNA.

The more recent events in Poland show a path forward for the United States. The democratic resurgence in Poland following the parliamentary elections on October 15th 2023, with the victory of the centre-right coalition led by Donald Tusk, is an example to follow.

Poland is a large and influential country in Central and Eastern Europe and the European Union per se. Since 2015, it has been governed by a far-right party, Law and Justice, dominated by Jaroslaw Kaczynski, twin brother of the Polish President Lech Kaczynski, who died tragically in the April 2010 plane crash in Smolensk, Russia.

PIS was re-elected in 2019 for a second four-year term. Their eight years in power were characterised by the implementation of a far-right program involving a total ban on abortion, major backsliding on a commitment to liberal democratic values, notably with significant changes in the judicial system that caused a conflict with the EU and the politicisation of all major public companies including the state media. The model that PIS intended to follow was that of Orbán in Hungary. Still, given the size of the country and its strategic place within the EU and on the Eastern border of NATO, a shift towards an illiberal democracy was felt even more keenly.

After winning two parliamentary elections as the head of the Civic Platform party in 2007 and 2011, Donald Tusk made a strategic move that would have significant implications for him personally and for Poland. Tusk resigned from his role as Prime Minister to take office as President of the European Council (he was formally nominated President of the European Council on December 1st, 2014). The Civic Platform party subsequently lost the 2015 elections under the new leadership of Ewa Kopacz. Tusk served for five years in Brussels before returning to Poland in 2021 to take over the leadership of the Polish opposition once again. 

The latest polls just before the 2023 election predicted a very close race, with PIS better positioned to form a coalition government with the help of the nationalist party “Konfderacja”. The campaign was ruthless, with the ruling PIS party and its leader, Jaroslaw Kaczynski, accusing Donald Tusk of wanting to subjugate the country to both Germany and Russia. Kaczynski presented his party’s program as the catholic, nationalist alternative to Tusk’s liberal program. Only PIS would defend Poland as a strong, independent and sovereign nation-state. The traditional family unit (with father and mother), the right to life (including the unborn) and the defence of traditional values (excluding LGBT rights) were the main focus of the government’s program after two successive terms in office.

To ensure the government’s victory, state TV and public media pulled no punches in promoting the government’s views and propaganda. TVP, the national TV channel, commands a viewership of over 3.5 million, representing 40% of the national news audience, of whom several million have no access to alternative news channels. The government went so far as to reduce the petrol price by more than 12% in the run-up to the election through the state-owned Orlen company. The day after the election, the prices suspiciously rose again.[i]

All such measures were to no avail. The opposition coalition won an outright majority with over 54% of the votes, resulting in 248 seats out of 460 in the lower house of Parliament, the Sejm.

The main opposition parties led by Tusk decided not to unite under the common banner of Tusk’s party (the Civic Platform), but each party kept its political identity. The two other parties, a new centre party, “The Third Way”, and a left-wing party, “The Left”, campaigned on their specific values with a clear understanding that all three parties were in opposition to PIS and that they would form a governmental coalition after the elections if they won enough seats.

This tactical approach, campaigning separately while promising to form an anti-PIS coalition, enabled voters of different sensitivities to declare their opposition to PIS without feeling locked in advance in a political straitjacket. Each party maintained its identity, focusing on various constituencies.

Tusk and the leaders of the other two opposition parties campaigned in opposition to PIS in defence of democracy, adopting a heart-shaped logo in the national colours as the emblem and symbol of their love not only of the country but of liberal democratic values. The “march of a million hearts” organised a few weeks before the election featured the biggest anti-government protest since the fall of communism and galvanised the opposition. The messaging was both anti-PIS and critical of the current situation but also adopted a positive, optimistic outlook for the future – aimed in this respect at the younger generations.

The use of the heart as a symbol of the coalition’s campaign that was present at every opportunity, including on Tusk’s white shirt (strategically positioned over his breast pocket) that he consistently wore throughout the campaign, crystalised the positive message that the opposition wanted to convey, namely that the Nationalists cannot highjack the Polish flag as their exclusive property. Love of country can also be the purvey of the opposition, symbolising a positive, tolerant and caring outlook for all Poles.

Modern politics is also about branding, and the heart symbol that worked so well in Poland is a universal symbol that can also be effective in the US, hence the example above.

The turnout for the election was historically high at 74.4 %, with over 85% in Warsaw. More people under 30 voted than people over 60. This is a definite blueprint for the US campaign against Trump in 2024. There are several key learning points for the pro-democracy forces in the US, generally, and the Democrat party in particular.

The main lesson is “Do not let the pro-democracy coalition fracture.” Anne Appelbaum,[ii] writing in the Atlantic, stated: “Donald Tusk, the leader of the Civic [iii]Coalition, pointedly used the language of civic patriotism rather than angry nationalism. Thousands of volunteers came together to organize election-monitoring teams. Hundreds of thousands of people marched in two major demonstrations in Warsaw, carrying Polish and European Union flags; others joined a series of big public meetings around the country. The existence of three opposition parties meant that different messages were heard by different parts of the electorate, on the center-right as well as the center-left. Some of the candidates attacked PiS. Some used the language of unity and called for an end to polarization.”

As a first step, the coalition that carried Biden to the Oval Office in 2020 has to be secured. Tusk was successful in Poland because he gained the confidence of two critical demographics: young people and women.

In 2020, Biden made gains with suburban voters compared to Hilary Clinton in 2016. His coalition was broad and consisted of a wide and racially diverse voter base united by a deep opposition to Donald Trump. The voters were looking for a unifying figure after four years of chaos under Donald Trump, and the unique conditions of the 2020 elections in the middle of the pandemic favoured Biden as voters were looking for somebody who could tackle the crisis, something that Trump was not able to do. Biden’s coalition was comprised of clear majorities of college graduates, women, urban and suburban voters, young people and Black Americans, as well as moderate voters, including Republicans opposed to Trump. In terms of racial division, 37% of Biden’s supporters were of colour and 63% white (whereas Trump’s voters were 86%).[iv]

Before Biden's withdrawal from the race, the conditions for 2024 are very different. he electorate has had time to forget the chaos under Trump. The mere fact that the election would have probably figured the same two individuals as in 2020 would have induced a lot of fatigue and dampenedhe fierce opposition to Trump that prevailed in 2020. This phenomenon of anti-Trump burnout[v] is a drag on the enthusiasm and energy of liberals. It would have been difficult for Biden to sustain the anti-Trump energy. The 2020 election was already portrayed as the most important election of all time and a battle for democracy for the soul of America. It would have been dficult to fight the 2024 election on the same terms. In addition, Trump is making inroads amongst black and Hispanic voters, traditionally a stronghold of the Democratic party.[vi]

The outrage against Trump that unified such a diverse coalition of voters in 2020 needed to be actualised for 2024. A new potentially potent factor is the issue of abortion framed in a larger context of personal freedom and liberties under threat from Trump. The major uncertainty lies in how Trump’s legal problems will play out if he goes to trial before the elections and, if so, in how many cases. But the major overiding game changer was Biden's decision to withdraw from the race and allow his Vice President to pick up the torch.

As discussed previously, one part of the 2020 coalition is under threat, namely young people. Biden’s advanced age was a major problem for younger people who failed to connect with somebody of Biden’s age, and trying to appeal to them by joining TikTok was risky. Biden couldn't reinvent himself and make himself younger by dressing in the style favoured by younger people. Men over fifty wearing ripped-up tight jeans and leather jackets are not particularly credible (and Biden wiswely did not fall into this trap). The same applies to social media. However, Biden's problem with younger people went far beyond style and appearance. His foreign policy, in particular regarding Israel and the Palestinian question, was a significant issue not only for Americans of Muslim and Arab background but for younger people in general.

Harris, on the other hand, has been a tremendous success on TikTok, gaining traction almost immediately. Her unique style of dressing (e.g. Converses and pantsuits) has gone down well with the younger generation, and she has been able to recapture the youth spectacularly. The enthusiasm amongst the younger voters in her favour demonstrates their need and desire for change. Harris has astutely capitalised on this by focusing on "a new way forward" and "we're not going back". The fight for the "soul of the country" has taken backstage, and the message and tone of the campaign have radically changed.

Harris can learn from Tusk to re-engage and secure Biden's 2020 coalition and take it one step further.

The Polish coalition was successful precisely as it recognised and emphasised that it was not a uniform coalition. The main party in Tusk’s coalition is the Civic Platform, which has a classic centre-right program. However, the two other members of his coalition are from different political horizons. The Third Way is a centrist party that promotes a new way of politics based on a more moderate conservative platform. As its name suggests, the third and final coalition partner is the Left, a centre-left party focussing on social democracy. Each party of the coalition fought the election under its colours and was, therefore, able to rally a large part of the electorate to its common cause: upholding the rule of law and safeguarding Polish democracy seen to be under threat from the PIS government.

Harris can extend Biden's coalition to include the anti-Trump Republicans more formally, which goes beyond what happened in 2020. The main difference here is, once again, what happened on January 6 2021. The Republicans who opposed Trump after that as a matter of principle may have been pushed out of Congress and exiled from the Republican party. But people such as Liz Cheney still command a lot of respect amongst conservative voters, and Biden has the opportunity to work with Cheney and Republicans of her kind in a coordinated and concerted manner.

In 2020, the primary motivator was getting rid of Trump. In 2024, the emphasis needs to be a more upbeat message, not only in favour of democracy per se, which remains a somewhat theoretical concept for a large part of the electorate, but also in favour of the constitution and the rights enshrined therein, which is a more positive message based on individual rights and freedom, not only abortion rights. Hence t, the focus on "freedom" has been recaptured by Harris and used in a larger sense.

The new 2024 coalition cannot only be an anti-Trump coalition. It has to become a pro-constitution coalition. This is a subtle but essential difference, as the threat to American democracy needs to be rooted in a historical basis that every American can identify with and understand. It also has the added advantage of covering a broad political spectrum, going from conservative Republicans such as Liz Cheney to liberal progressives such as Bernie Sanders. From a psychological perspective, it is always easier to favour something rather than be against it. Dick Cheney's recent endorsement of Kamala Harris, alongside his daughter Liz, is a prime example of this phenomenon.

The opportunity is there for the taking. After Trump’s sweeping victory on Super Tuesday at the beginning of March, Cheney released a biting statement unequivocally: “The GOP has chosen. They will nominate a man who attempted to overturn an election and seize power. We have eight months to save our republic & ensure Donald Trump is never anywhere near the Oval Office again.”[vii] She also demonstrated the seriousness of her intent by announcing the creation of a new political action committee (PAC), named after a quote from Lincoln, “The Great Task”[viii] described as “a multi-candidate PAC (…) that is focused on reverence for the rule of law, respect for our Constitution, and a recognition that all citizens have a responsibility to put their duty to the country above partisanship. The Great Task is designed to educate and mobilize Americans in a unified effort to ensure that our Republic endures.”

The fight for democracy framed as the fight for the Constitution rather than simply getting rid of Trump allows to not only focus on Trump as a flawed individual but also places the Republican party and all of Trump’s supporters at the centre of the debate as a toxic movement that needs to be defeated as such.

Focusing solely on Trump allows the far-right America First/MAGA movement to thrive under new leadership in the eventuality that Trump is defeated. An additional positive effect is deflecting the conversation from Biden as an individual.

The pro-constitution movement, represented by the Democrats and allies, is destined to secure the long-term future of the American system of liberal democracy with the Constitution as its cornerstone. The focus on the Constitution matters. With his wisdom and experience, Biden becomes the custodian of the Constitution and can pass the torch to the next generation of pro-constitution politicians. The first major step in this process was his giving up power in favour of Kamala Harris.

On the eve of the 250th anniversary of the Declaration of Independence that gave rise to the Constitution of 1787, it is a message that makes sense and that many Americans can enthusiastically embrace.

In essence, just as Donald Tusk created a powerful new social movement in Poland, Vice President HArris can firmly establish a long-lasting social movement in the US in favour of constitutional democracy. The short-term goal of defeating Trump in November is primordial, but the tail of Trumpism is long, and there must be a long-term strategy. JD Vance has been crowned the heir to Trumpism, and he will remain a threat after the election even if Trump loses.

After a tumultuous summer, the stage is set. The election will be between a disgraced, twice impeached, and quadruply-indicted former president who is liable for fraud and sexual assault “akin to rape” and a current vice president who not only was part of the administration that has a significant track record in bringing back the economy from the brink of the COVID abyss, with over 3.2 million jobs created post COVID, exceptional GDP growth[ix] and experience in foreign affairs allowing to navigate the troubled international environment, but moreover who represents a generational change and a path forward in a new direction. The Center for American Progress illustrated the strength of the American economy across seven indicators, namely inflation, energy prices, gross domestic product (GDP), the unemployment rate, the long-term unemployment rate, the 2023 International Monetary Fund (IMF) GDP forecast, and the 2023 IMF unemployment rate forecast. [x]

Donald Tusk had the advantage of running against an incumbent administration. Trump has been out of office since his outrageous coup attempt in January 2021, and he benefits from the short-term memory of the American electorate. Past presidents are viewed more fondly after leaving office, and in Trump's case, even more so as he has managed to convince many Republicans that the 2020 election was unfair and that he was robbed of a second term. The "Big Lie" is so big and has been repeated so many times that it has burrowed itself into voters' minds, causing irreparable damage.

The Polish example also demonstrates how difficult it is to rebuild liberal democracy after eight years of a government that was committed to moving towards authoritarianism. Eight years of an anti-liberal right-wing government resulted in a fractured and divided society, where the political discourse is aggressively focused on attacking the opposition's very reason for being and promoting hate, fear-mongering and intolerance. Sound familiar? Many independent judges and professional civil servants have been replaced by government lackeys and stooges with unquestionable loyalty to the governmental dogmatic policies, pushing back on social advances and curbing freedom at all levels of society.

Tusk understands the immensity of the task and does not underestimate the efforts required to repair a modern democracy that has been systematically undermined for eight years. The new prime minister refers to fighting back with "an iron broom".[xi] Tusk can rely on the support of women and young people, who were an essential part of his coalition that enabled him to win the elections. This important constituency understood too well the implications of a government obsessed with banning their most fundamental rights, such as abortion. The PIS government first introduced extreme anti-abortion legislation eliminating all exceptions so that, in the words of Jaroslaw Kaczynski, "to ensure that even very difficult pregnancies, when the child is condemned to death, is severely deformed, will end in birth, so that the child can be christened, buried, given a name."[xii]

After unsuccessfully attempting to impose such extreme measures legislatively, the government resorted to introducing the ban via the constitutional court, similar to what happened in the US with the reversal of Roe vs. Wade by the Supreme Court. The resulting protests in 2020 were the largest since the fall of communism. They were met with a violent crackdown by the government, which encouraged their ultra-far-right supporters to defend the nation with "a national guard" to protect the Catholic Church from riots.[xiii] The COVID pandemic dampened the protests, and in January 2021, the ruling became the law of the land.

The demonstrations failed to prevent the implementation of the restrictive ban, but it had a far-reaching consequence that would ultimately come back to haunt the PIS government. The protests were built on a social movement based on a new generation of women and young people becoming involved in matters that were important to them. The politicisation of this demographic led to the historically high turn-out in the parliamentary elections of October 2023 and tipped the balance in favour of the opposition.

A final lesson for the US is that the far-right will not simply disappear and ride off into the sunset despite electoral defeat. The PIS government delayed the transfer of power to Tusk for as long as possible – although, despite many rumours – there were no concrete efforts to prevent him from taking office. PIS remains a powerful force to be reckoned with primarily since the presidency is still held by the far-right and has the constitutional authority to thwart and delay any reforms initiated by the new government. The next presidential election is due in May 2025 and will be the next important step in the rebirth of democracy in Poland. The fight against the far-right is a long-term venture and must be considered as such. The tail of illiberal democracy à la Kaczynski is just as long as the tail of Trumpism.

Trump’s coup attempt and his “Big Lie” are so outrageous that they have completely erased from the voters’ minds the single most disastrous and impactful series of presidential actions, or rather lack thereof, where dereliction of duty was deliberately declared official government policy. The woeful attitude of Trump throughout the COVID pandemic was directly responsible for numerous unnecessary deaths.[xiv] He repudiated science, downplayed the threat of COVID,  and made mask-wearing a political issue by refusing to wear one as it made him look weak.[xv] A lack of a coordinated federal strategy made matters worse.

Exceptional times required exceptional measures, and it was the Democrats who, under then-Speaker Nancy Pelosi’s leadership, pushed through a significant public spending program that prevented the worst off from being written off both figuratively and literally. When President Biden took office in January 2021, his priority was to tackle the COVID crisis, and further legislation was passed as the “American Rescue Plan” stimulus program worth 1.9 trillion $. Not a single Republican supported this important stimulus program.

The price to pay was inflation, which became a major issue from 2021 to 2023 (inflation peaked at 7% in 2021 before trending downwards, with 6.5% in 2022 and 3.4% in 2023). 167 The Federal Reserve increased interest rates (from 0.25% in February  2022 to 5.5%) to battle inflation, negatively affecting mortgage rates. 168 In terms of comparison, the inflation rate in Poland was respectively 5.1%, 14.3%, and 11.6% in 2021, 2022, and 2023. However, the recent rate cut by 0.5% signals that the fight against inflation has been won and that it is time to focus on the unemployment rate. Credit must be given to the Biden/HArris administration for achieving the holy grail of economic policies, i.e. a soft landing after a major recession.

In the run-up to the Polish election, Tusk marked the policy differences between his coalition and the government, declaring that the election was “a choice between two futures”. Differences were particularly marked in the area of social policy where PIS had followed in power, a hard-line policy with a de-facto ban on abortion, and a strong anti-LGBTQ policy (the infamous “LGBTQ free zones”). Tusk, on the contrary, promised to promote women’s writes with the reintroduction of abortion up to 12 weeks, civil partnerships for same-sex couples and the legal enshrinement of in-vitro fertilisation, termination and contraception rights as fundamental rights.

As the Ohio rights initiative demonstrated, there is cross-party popular support for abortion rights at the state level (although the state Republican parties may be of an anti-abortion Trumpian view), and the Harris campaign understands this all too well. Harris herself has been a strong advocate for reproductive rights as vice president and, as a candidate, has continuously emphasised this message.

The difficulty for Harris is to counteract the feeling of the electorate who do not appreciate the economic advantages of the Biden/Harris policies and who do not credit them sufficiently for reducing healthcare and costs of major types of medicines or for achieving an increase in real wages that outstrip inflation, and of a net increase of job creation reflecting an ongoing strong labour market. People only see the increase in gas prices and mortgage rates, as well as the increase of prices in grocery stores, without considering the increase in real wages, which, by the way, are the result of the most pro-union president in recent history.[xvi] Harris is making progress in this area, shortening the gap between her and Trump on the economic credibility front and taking the risk of taking the offensive specifically in this area by presenting a detailed policy plan on September 28. She also has the support of a genuine billionaire, Mark Cuban, who is enthusiatically supporting her and acting as her surrogate.

Harris understands that her task is to be much more vocal about past accomplishments whilst changing the tone and focus of her future policies. It is all about credibility based on tangible facts that people can relate to. Focusing only on protecting democracy without tying it to concrete day-to-day consequences will not work. As a one-time adviser of Obama, David Axelrod recently said messaging about democracy is for those with “privilege” not to worry about inflation,[xvii] adding for good measure, “I’m pretty certain in Scranton they’re not sitting around their dinner table talking about democracy every night.”[xviii] “Kitchen table” issues matter.

Harris is faced with a similar public perception problem regarding the Biden/Harris immigration policy. Taking advantage of anecdotal crimes committed by illegal immigrants, Trump has coined a new phrase to attack the incumbent president: ”Biden Migration Crime”. When Harris replaced him at the top of the ticket, Trump lost no time at all, branding her as the "Border Czar". True to his original message from 2015, Trump falsely claims that “millions and millions” of criminals and terrorists are pouring over the border illegally and that the crime rates in US cities are skyrocketing due to this massive influx of migrants.

Once again, the facts are very different. When Biden took office, the COVID-related Title 42 rules allowed to turn away migrants on the grounds of preventing the spread of COVID that Trump had put in place in March 2020 were extended until May 2023, thus curbing illegal immigration at the border. Nonetheless, the numbers shot up as these provisions were no longer applied to unaccompanied minors. In 2021, 2022 and 2023, the number of illegal immigrants has been 1.7 million, 2.2 million and 2 million.[xix] 

On an anecdotal basis, horrific crimes are committed by undocumented immigrants, such as the killing of college student Laken Riley in Georgia. However, as terrible as these incidents are, national data shows that there is no evidence of migrant-driven crime in the US.[xx]

Tusk prevailed by countering the government's nationalistic rhetoric, which emphasised division and social repression, by presenting a future of hope built on the support of “a million hearts.” Harris is attempting to inspire similar heartfelt support by addressing the younger generations and giving them the inspiration and passion that so decisively favoured Tusk in Poland. The notion of "Joy" and "the politics of joy" has taken centre stage.

Ultimately, the fight against authoritarianism is not only a tale of two eagles but also a tale of two Donalds.

[i] “Polish state oil giant Orlen’s wholesale fuel prices begin to rise after pre-election drop”, Notes from Poland (NFP), October 19, 2023, https://notesfrompoland.com/2023/10/19/polish-state-oil-giant-orlens-wholesale-fuel-prices-begin-to-rise-after-pre-election-drop/

[ii] Anne Applebaum is a Pulitzer Prize winner and renown specialist on Polish and Central Eastern politics and is married to the current Polish foreign minister.

[iii] Anne Applebaum: “Poland Shows That Autocracy Is Not Inevitable”, The Atlantic, October 16, 2023, www.theatlantic.com/ideas/archive/2023/10/poland-parliamentary-election-autocracy-tusk/675656/

[iv] https://apnews.com/article/how-did-joe-biden-win-election Josh Boak and Hannah Fingerhut: “AP VoteCast: How did Biden do it? Wide coalition powered win”, Associated Press (AP), November 7, 2020, https://apnews.com/article/how-did-joe-biden-win-election-a493c68b6b947c5f90f36efef76d13c2

[v] Katie Glueck: “Anti-Trump Burnout: The Resistance Says It’s Exhausted”, The New York Times, February 19, 2024, www.nytimes.com/2024/02/19/us/politics/trump-resistance-democrats-voters.html

[vi] Jason L. Riley: “Biden’s Worst Nightmare: Blacks and Hispanics for Trump”, The Wall Street Journal, March 5, 2024, www.wsj.com/articles/bidens-worst-nightmare-blacks-and-hispanics-for-trump-economy-2024-presidential-election-fbbe674c

[vii] Ewan Palmer: “Donald Trump Faces New Republican Threat”, Newsweek, March 7, 2024, www.newsweek.com/donald-trump-liz-cheney-pac-great-task-1876834

[viii] https://greattask.com

[ix] Neil Irwin: “U.S. winning world economic war”, Axios, January 31, 2024, www.axios.com/2024/01/31/us-economy-2024-gdp-g7-nations

[x] “7 Reasons the U.S. Economy Is Among the Strongest in the G7”, The Center for American Progress”, July 25, 2023, www.americanprogress.org/article/7-reasons-the-u-s-economy-is-among-the-strongest-in-the-g7/

[xi] Maciej Kisilowski: “Poland’s ‘iron broom’ shows that democrats can bite back”, The Finacial Times, January 15, 2024, https://www.ft.com/content/6d526816-8f35-47ef-90af-8b8950840021

[xii] “Pushing for abortion ban was a “mistake”, admits Polish prime minister”, Notes from Poland (NFP), November 6, 2023, https://notesfrompoland.com/2023/11/06/pushing-for-abortion-ban-was-a-mistake-admits-polish-prime-minister/

[xiii] Monika Sieradzka: “ Poland's churches become sites of protest”, Deutsche Welle (DW), October 27, 2022, https://www.dw.com/en/polands-churches-become-sites-of-protest-amid-abortion-row/a-55415180

[xiv] Prof. Steffie Woolhandler et al.: “Public policy and health in the Trump era”, The Lancet, February 10, 2021, era”www.thelancet.com/journals/lancet/article/PIIS0140-6736(20)32545-9/abstract

[xv] John Haltiwanger and Aylin Woodward: “Damning analysis of Trump's pandemic response suggested 40% of US COVID-19 deaths could have been avoided”, Business Insider, February 11, 2021, www.businessinsider.com/analysis-trump-covid-19-response-40-percent-us-deaths-avoidable-2021-2?IR=T

[xvi] “Workers’ Paychecks Are Growing More Quickly Than Prices”, The Center for American Progress, January 3, 2024, https://www.americanprogress.org/article/workers-paychecks-are-growing-more-quickly-than-prices/.

[xvii] “Axelrod: American democracy messaging about democracy is for those with “privilege” not to worry about inflation”, Grabien, March 5, 2024, https://grabien.com/file?id=2321827

[xviii] Jason L. Riley: “Biden’s Worst Nightmare: Blacks and Hispanics for Trump”, The Wall Street Journal, March 5, 2024, www.wsj.com/articles/bidens-worst-nightmare-blacks-and-hispanics-for-trump-economy-2024-presidential-election-fbbe674c

[xix] Nick Miroff, Maria Sacchetti and Sarah Frostenson: “Trump vs. Biden on immigration: 12 charts comparing U.S. border security”, The Washington Post”, February 12, 2024, www.washingtonpost.com/immigration/2024/02/11/trump-biden-immigration-border-compared/ 

[xx] Olympia Sonnier and Garrett Haake: “Trump's claims of a migrant crime wave are not supported by national data”, NBC News, February 29, 2024, www.nbcnews.com/politics/2024-election/trumps-claims-migrant-crime-wave-are-not-supported-national-data-rcna140896