The race to the White House: Sanders & Rubio or Clinton & Trump?

Written by Nasser Kandil,

From now and on America enters the long race to the White House within conditions and internal and external variables that impose merits and weights on the rival parties in determining what each one of them wants after the elections, not just the answer to the question how to conduct its candidate to the White House, in return the results of the elections and the identities of the candidates who are qualified to continue the race will impose results since America is the arena of the presidential competition and since the US President is still the closest one to be the head of the global system if there is a system, and the head of the world if the system was absent.

A typical mind is dominating on the Arab follow up in dealing with the US presidential race that is based on considering the wining of the Republican Party a gateway to the extremism in the foreign policy, and the wining of the Democratic Party an expression of the hegemony of a moderate foreign policy that accommodates for the global and regional partnerships in drawing and forming the policies on one hand. On the other hand it turns to the Arab region according to the policy that takes into consideration controls that are not taken into account by the Republican policies towards linking the wars with the Republicans, and the peace efforts with the Democrats.

A typical mind is dominating on the Arab follower in another interpretation; its basis is to follow the names which he knows or which transmitted to him by the Arab media as titles of the presidential race, on the basis of the positions of those who are concerned in the race in foreign policy. Therefore this Arab follow –up which is determined by these two typical approaches becomes easy to be fallen in the pitfalls and surprises. In most cases, it drives away of the immediate understanding of the reality of the American scene which each country of the world is concerned in, specially the Arab countries more than others as long as it is an arena for conflict about the triangle of the oil, Israel, and terrorism. It is the triangle through which the sides of the American national security are formed by the consensus of the two parties and their competitive candidates.

America wages its coming elections while it is witnessing internal and external changes that impose merits that are not too much similar to the merits of the previous elections, American is no longer the rising power economically, nor the dazzling through the prosperity of its citizens or the size of the guarantees which they have socially, it is no longer that coherent nation at the level of its national structure or the advanced country through the dealing of its institutions with freedoms, and human rights issues. On the other hand, America is no longer the dominant superpower globally after the earthquakes of the wars of Iraq and Afghanistan and the decline of the military power of Israel, and after the storms of the Arab Spring and after America has lost its dominating status in the Middle East through big partnerships with each of Russia and Iran, and in the light of economical partnerships which cannot be broken with the rising power as China.

During the race within each one of the two parties a pragmatic populist project that is accused exclusively of presenting a candidate that is apparently suggested that he offers the better opportunities for winning according to the normal conventional criteria is opposed by a project that tries to provide a candidate that has the vision of the party and forms the closest leading version to its intellectual approach, furthermore he is able  to present answers for the challenges which are drawn by the internal and the external conditions of America, so he must have a degree of the innovative desire, so within the Democratic Party Hillary Clinton is competing Bernie Sanders and within the Republican Party Donald Trump is competing with many rivals at their forefront Jeff Bush, Ted Cruz and Marco Rubio without the attention of the Arabs. It is obvious from comparing the competitors that the stardom of Bernie Sanders and Marco Rubio worth pursuing away from the illusion of restricting the competition between Clinton and Trump.

Sanders represents the conscience of the Democratic Party and its faithful leading example of the principles of transparency and integrity, he is the fierce advocate of liberties and the civil rights, he adopts an economical vision that makes him presenting himself as a democratic socialist candidate because he was asked to adopt a governmental sponsoring policy for the marginalized groups, and presenting high guarantees that enable the participation of the country in many social and economical life aspects, while Rubio represents a remarkable project because he challenges his leader Jeff Bush in running the nomination, his belonging to the younger generation, and because of  his Cuban descent.

The characteristics and the advantages of Sanders and Rubio were according to many people elements that are against them, towards the expectations of their failure in gaining countable votes, many of the polls’ companies and the follow-up sites suggest that they have to be totally out of the race. While the results of the internal elections of the two parties in the State of Iowa have shown the opposite, Sanders have gained 21 seats out of 43 ones that represent Iowa at the conference of the Democratic Party, compared with his rival Hillary Clinton who gained 22 seats, while Rubio had the third place after the winning of Ted Cruz in representing the Republican Party in Iowa in 28% of the votes versus 24% for the millionaire candidate Donald Trump, while Marco Rubio has gained 23% of the votes within the Republican Party.

This is a call to be aware of the electoral path of each one of Sanders and Rubio within an American society that disintegrates, and that the concerns of the internal political worries and the economical and social policies are dominating, while the concerns in the foreign policy are declining in parallel with the decline of the status of America in making the politics in the world, and the decrease of its ability in providing economical revenue for its citizens as a result of that aggravation in the global influence and status, so maybe we will be in front of surprises, but it is enough not to be surprised by the names.

Translated by Lina Shehadeh,