The two-party trap: Looking at the US presidential election from Malaysia

The results of the US presidential election are trickling in, and Donald Trump is leading in the race.

The US, the world’s second largest democracy, has over 160 million registered voters, 82 million of whom voted early ahead of 5 November.

Like some other nations, the US allows for early and absentee voting. So voters can avoid long queues at polling stations and other hassles on election day, which is always on the first Tuesday of November.

US voters may find it challenging to get time off to vote as polling day is not a public holiday. Hence, the options to vote early or mail in absentee ballots.

This flexibility is a convenience I wish we have in Malaysia, especially for voters who live far from the state where they are registered to vote. Imagine Sabah and Sarawak voters living on the peninsula not having to sell their kidneys just to afford the flight ticket to go home to vote.

Bersih, the coalition for free and fair elections, is presently advocating for some form of remote voting for out-of-state voters.

As the count continues, many in the US and elsewhere are waiting with bated breath for the final results.

But then, the candidates’ final popular vote counts do not decide the winner. Instead, the US has an “electoral college” system that allocates every state a specific number of electoral votes based on population size. Simply put, the candidate who receives at least 270 electoral votes wins the election – even if he or she loses the popular vote. In 2016, Hillary Clinton received almost 2.9 million more popular votes than Donald but still lost the election.

The outcome of the US presidential election usually hinges on a handful of so-called “swing states” such as Pennsylvania, Wisconsin and Michigan. These states provide a sizeable chunk of electoral votes that a candidate needs to cross the 270-vote threshold.

This raises a crucial question: is this electoral system really democratic? Some argue the system is outdated and too complex. They feel it should be updated to reflect the will of all the states – not weighted in favour of a select few. How can a handful of states serve as the decider for the entire nation?

Like Malaysia, the US uses the first-past-the-post system, favouring the Democratic and Republican parties. It is a system that is not kind to smaller parties and forces voters to choose strategically, often between the lesser of two evils.

In Malaysia, for many years, voters were made to choose between Barisan Nasional and the opposition while a small, hardworking, highly motivated party like the socialist party PSM got the shaft.

Under this system, voters are told they have to choose between the two major coalitions to make their votes count. Otherwise, they would only be wasting their votes – or worse, electing a horrible person to power by default.

The stakes are particularly high this year. In the US, many voters are sickened by the genocide in Gaza and the heavy bombardment of Lebanon, both perpetrated by the murderous Zionist regime in Israel. Voters in places like Dearborn, Michigan, where there is a large Arab American population, see little difference between the two candidates and their parties in their positions on the Israeli atrocities against the Palestinians.

The situation is even worse for Kamala Harris and the Democratic Party as the genocide is taking place under their watch. The US government provides tens of billions of dollars of military aid to Israel, which is used to slaughter the Palestinians.

These Arab American voters may get to determine the outcome in a swing state such as Michigan by not voting and thus handing over the state to Trump.

In response, the Democratic Party has been guilt-tripping voters into supporting it by saying they would be to blame if Trumps wins because they decided not to vote or because they voted for third-party candidates such as Jill Stein of the Green Party.

This raises an interesting question. Shouldn’t people, especially those who care about the Palestinians, be able to vote according to their conscience instead of being coerced into voting strategically, especially when there is little qualitative difference between Harris and Trump over stopping the genocide?

This moral dilemma explains the appeal of a third-party candidate like Stein, who is Jewish but staunchly against the genocide. Supporting Stein would be an act of conscience for those horrified by events in Gaza and Lebanon – not something to be ridiculed or demonised. Would they really have chosen Harris if they had not voted for Stein?

I bet my bottom dollar that these voters would rather stay at home than vote for Harris and the Democratic Party. Yes, their decision might put Trump in the White House. But the blame should solely rest on the Democratic Party for their complicity with the genocidal regime in Israel – not on those who voted with their conscience.

It is hard to see the horrifying situation in Palestine changing for the better no matter who wins. The US government is fully in thrall to the powerful Zionist lobby.

The Zionist lobby has been consistently rated as a powerful political group in the US with enough resources to influence elections by supporting its preferred candidates and punishing those deemed as “enemies of the state of Israel”.

Given this reality, for those whose voting preferences are shaped by what is happening in Gaza and Lebanon, the US presidential election is hardly crucial, even pointless.

But there is hope. Many of them have found other ways to pile pressure on the US government.

Many are supporting the Boycott, Divestment and Sanctions (BDS) movement.

Others could bring more cases before the International Court of Justice.

They have also joined the groundswell of calls for the recognition of Palestinian statehood at the UN General Assembly.

People around the world could also pressure regional organisations such as Asean and the Organisation of Islamic Cooperation (OIC) to take a stronger, unequivocal position against the genocide in Gaza.

No matter how the US presidential election turns out, let’s keep hope for our common humanity alive. May justice and peace prevail for the oppressed and the downtrodden!

Azmil Tayeb
Co-editor, Aliran newsletter
6 November 2024

The views expressed in Aliran's media statements and the NGO statements we have endorsed reflect Aliran's official stand. Views and opinions expressed in other pieces published here do not necessarily reflect Aliran's official position.

AGENDA RAKYAT - Lima perkara utama

1. Tegakkan maruah serta kualiti kehidupan rakyat
2. Galakkan pembangunan saksama, lestari serta tangani krisis alam sekitar
3. Raikan kerencaman dan keterangkuman
4. Selamatkan demokrasi dan angkatkan keluhuran undang-undang
5. Lawan rasuah dan kronisme

Support our work by making a donation. Tap to download the QR code below and scan this QR code from Gallery by using TnG e-wallet or most banking apps: