Trump’s election challenges disintegrate

On Tuesday, December 8, the US Supreme Court declined to hear the case brought by Pennsylvania Republicans challenging the presidential election results. This Supreme Court decision marks the point of no return in the unravelling of Trump’s attempt to overturn his election loss. This presents a good opportunity to draw a balance sheet of that campaign. A recent article on this site argued that there were four parts to Trump’s plan to challenge the election results. They were using the Supreme Court, an “avalanche of litigation,”intimidation by far right “poll watchers,” and a general unleashing of the far right against a Biden victory. The purpose of this article is to see how each of the four points played out in reality.

1) The Supreme Court

Trump had placed great hope in the Supreme Court to overturn the election results. Yet, the justices refused to play along. This demonstrates that the justices value the legitimacy of the Court over Donald Trump’s personal fortunes. For the Court to play its critical function in maintaining the US ruling class, the Court needs to maintain its standing with the population. If the Court is seen as too blatantly functioning as a personal toy of the President, it undermines its role as a vital pillar of the system. The ruling class, and their nine Justices, were not willing to throw away the Court’s authority in backing the Donald’s Hail Mary pass.

2) “Avalanche of Litigation”

Trump’s lawyers filed forty-six different suits to overturn the election results. By and large, these suits failed miserably. The comic opera antics of Rudy Giuliani epitomize this failure. In the last months,Giuliani has taken up the case of the computer repairman, who fearing murder from the Democratic National Committee, instituted a new store policy that all items unclaimed after ninety days would be forwarded to the FBI and Giuliani. Following on the heels of this fiasco, Giulianiwas next seen having a “wardrobe adjustment” with Borat and then holding his infamous press conference at the Four Seasons Landscaping Company. Prior to Giuliani’s recent hospitalization for Covid, we were further treated to videos of his leaking sideburn dye and the bizarre testimony of Melissa Carone at the Michigan House hearings.

Deeper issues are involved here than Giuliani’s comic failings. The courts rejected Trump’s cases because the American ruling class believes that the election system must be seen as democratic, powerful, and final. The myth of a venerable electoral process, standing above the commotion of daily politics, is a critical component of bourgeois ideology. Preserving this institution is a thousand times more important to the ruling class than worrying about the tweets from Stormy Daniels’ ex. This is why Trump’s filings fell upon deaf ears. Furthermore, Biden’s margin of victory made the type of incisive and vigorous campaign that James Baker waged in Florida in 2000 impossible. Trump’s legal staff were clutching at straws.

3) “Poll Watchers”

Trump had called on his supporters to go to polling places to “prevent vote fraud.” This was correctly seen as a call for armed right wing thugs to invade elections sites and intimidate voters. Trump’s plan, however, never got off the ground. The response to his call was minimal. In two instances, police removed lone individuals armed with handguns from polling places. Additionally, while the early and mail-in ballots were being counted, there were scattered demonstrations outside counting centers in Detroit and a few other locations. These small scale events were far too weak to have any national influence.

4) The far right

Prior to election day, there was much discussion about what the far right would do in the event that Trump lost. As events transpired, the far right’s post-election interventions, while larger than the proposed “poll watchers” project,were quite small. The weekend after the election there were scuffles at dueling demonstrations in about seven or eight cities. There were somewhat less the second weekend, and one confrontation in Washington DC on the third weekend. These are the main instances of far right violence since the election. This is very small, given the vast overall size of the United States.

However, two points need to be made. First, even if there is no mass fascist movement, the danger of lone wolf or small cell violence is still present. We are by no means out of the woods. Mobilizing against the far right continues to be an important task for socialists.

The second point is a bigger one. There is a difference between organized far right violence and the broad acceptance of right wing ideas. It’s important not to spend so much on the small organized far right groups that one misses the bigger picture. Pro-Trump and right wing ideas have a hold over large sections of the white working class and poor.Years of industrial decline have alienated large sections of the white working class from the political system. Many workers think, accurately, that the people who run the country do not care about them. Decades of labor movement defeats have created a marked demoralization. Living standards and the quality of life have suffered greatly for many workers.

In this context of working class setback and disorientation, right wing ideas have found acceptance. This presents a huge challenge to socialists and the labor movement. These workers need to be won back to working class outlook and organizations. This task is going to require far more than articles and speeches. Only large events can change the minds of thousands of people. In this situation, workplace victories, that show that united working class struggle can improve workers’ lives in the real world, are crucial. This is what can break down the current hold of right wing ideas and strengthen working class self-confidence and unity. This point holds true not only for the white working class, but also among Latinx and Black people where Trump has made some inroads.

Such struggles are far and few between in today’s world. This is what makes it all the more important that socialists throw their energies into building solidarity when strikes do take place, as is happening today in the healthcare industry.

Why did Trump’s campaign to overturn the election results fail?

The main reason why Trump’s campaign failed is simple and clear: the ruling class opposed it. Now, of course, any ruling class is divided into a hundred different interests, factions, and subgroups. But the “heavy hitters” of the US ruling class made their insistence on a peaceful transition and the orderly installation of a Biden presidency quite clear.

On November 6, a video conference of leading CEOs took place to discuss the post-election situation. Their decision was straight forward. Business did not want anything that would challenge the stability and international standing of the United States to take place. Any attempt by Trump to reverse his loss would be bad for business.

A surprisingly frank series of public statements soon followed. On November 7, the Business Roundtable, which has among its members Amazon, Walmart, and Starbucks, welcomed the election of Biden and Harris. National Association of Manufacturers CEO Jay Timmons made a strong appeal for a smooth transition. Tom Donohue, CEO of the US Chamber of Commerce issued a similar statement. Jaime Dimon, CEO of JP Morgan is one of the most prominent ruling class figures in this county. He said, “We need a peaceful transition. We had an election. We have a new president. You should support that whether you like it or not because it’s based on a system of faith and trust.”

“System of faith and trust” are Dimon’s words for what socialists call the institutions of bourgeois democracy. These institutions have served the ruling class well for many years and they are not about to sacrifice them for Trump’s personal agenda.

It’s clear that the military adopted a similar approach. Tensions between Trump and the high command have been high for some time. They reached a fever point when Trump forced Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, Mark Milley, to join his photo-op in Lafayette Square during the Black Lives Matter demonstrations in June. Milley moved quickly to distance himself from this fiasco.Top brass made clear they had no intention of supporting Trump in any domestic political project. This rupture between Trump and the military was clearly a factor in the November 9 firing of Defense Secretary Mark Esper. A Trump coup d’état had no chance of military support.

Many on the left exaggerated the danger of a coup or far right upsurge. Often the reason for this was to back up the argument that Trump was so unique and dangerous that Biden had to be supported as the only possible alternative. Our attention should be centered on the effects of the economic crisis and pandemic on the working class, not on Trump’s increasingly desperate maneuvers.

A final word of caution. The fact that Trump has failed miserably in his attempt to overturn the election doesn’t mean that he will give up trying. Some impulsive gimmick such as a “Counter-Inauguration” is certainly on the cards.

Donald Trump has learned that you can’t take over a capitalist country when you’re opposed by the ruling class and by the “special bodies of armed men”, the army. Marxists could have told him that a long time ago.