Du Jianguo's US election has come to an end, and Democratic presidential candidate Biden defeated the current President Trump with a clear advantage. Why can Biden defeat Trump? Why didn't he become "another Hillary"? One of the important and unvaluable reasons is that Biden has

Du Jianguo

The US election has come to an end, and Democratic presidential candidate Biden defeated the current president Trump with a clear advantage.

Why can Biden defeat Trump? Why didn't he become "another Hillary "? One of the reasons why

is important and not valued is that Biden has received support from progressive forces within the Democratic Party represented by Bernie Sanders .

This year's US election, Trump and the Republican Party have little variables. Overall, their basic structure is firm and positive, and they have fully tapped and realized the potential of their camp, just like when they fought against Hillary Clinton in the last election.

variables are mainly on the Democratic Party and Biden's side. The outcome of the election depends largely on whether and to what extent Biden learned the lessons of Hillary's loss to Trump in the last presidential election. If Biden shows only "another Hillary", he will find it difficult to defeat Trump; if Biden can absorb Sanders' progressives' views and keep united with them, he will defeat Trump.

This is the key to the problem.

Local time on June 28, 2019, Miami, Florida, the second debate on the party primary in the 2020 presidential election began. The picture shows former US Vice President Biden and senior US Senator Sanders. The Paper Image

1. The main reason why Hillary Clinton lost the election four years ago - without unity Sanders

4 years ago Trump finally defeated Hillary. From Hillary's perspective, that is, she did not learn from the Democratic competitor Bernie Sanders, did not propose a "new choice", and ignored the traditional working-class voters of the Democratic Party.

Trump is the opposite. Although he has a lot of bad deeds and lacks experience in governing the country, he acts as if he can bring about "new choices", and at the same time he has snatched away a large number of working-class voters who were originally Democratic supporters who were ignored and abandoned by Hillary.

If a country is in a deep economic and social crisis, whether the ruling class or the ruling class, whether it is the proletarian or the proletariat, then society will long for change and urgently need a new way out or a new choice to let society find or at least feel the possibility and hope of getting out of the crisis. At this time, if a person or party shouts a new choice or a new way out - regardless of whether the so-called way out or choice is feasible, and his competitors are too steady and plain, then this person or party may unexpectedly emerge and stand out.

Trump and Sanders are both such characters - of course they have different positions, while Hillary is not.

Since the 2008 financial crisis, the United States has fallen into a dual economic and social crisis and has never been able to get out of it. People's dissatisfaction with reality is becoming increasingly strong. In the 2008 election, Obama first defeated Hillary in the Democratic Party election and then won the presidential election. Eight years later, the United States government and the government were still full of resentment. At this time, the program and publicity strategy that is close to the public, listens to dissatisfaction, and calls for change is still the first choice for a candidate who wants to win.

Trump did this, and his electoral strategy was exactly the same as the famous fascist bewitchers in history.

First of all, like Hitler of that year, Trump used voters' anger to target people of color, immigrants, China and other scapegoats, and stoked racism and xenophobia.

Secondly, Trump made promises to everyone to expand support. He promised Yan Yuan and to Dao Zhi; he promised Antonio and to Sherlock; he promised Yang Bailao and to Huang Shiren.

Trump, a "domineering president" who has always been arrogant and likes to shout "You were fired" to others on live TV, suddenly played the role of working class spokesperson for the election. And Hillary just lacked attention to the working class, which helped him.

In order to attract voters, Trump also pretended to criticize Wall Street's rich and powerful people in the early stages of the election, which seemed different from other Republican candidates, but the more he returned to the old routine of Republican economic propositions: (for the rich) tax cuts and financial regulation, that is, neoliberalism. This has also become a powerful weapon for Hillary to attack him, but it is not enough to compensate for the losses caused by Hillary's abandonment of working-class voters.

It is these working-class voters in the "rust zone" - traditional industrial zones - that gave Trump a slight advantage in several key swing states and won the election.

All this that Hillary overlooked is what his party rival Bernie Sanders values. First of all, Sanders and Trump have one thing in common, which is that they are full of passion and propose a new program that is exciting and attracts more voters, rather than continuing the conservative and dull old routine of the Democratic "establishment". Secondly, Sanders, a "democratic socialist", has a program that insists on facing the traditional Democratic voter base working class and other working people, the "majority of the American people", and demands that the social status quo of "1% to 99%" be changed, thus winning widespread support, which can just offset Trump's incitement in this regard. Furthermore, statistics show that Sanders impresses young voters better than anyone – whether it is Trump or Hillary.

In a word, Sanders can mobilize more voters to vote.

Unfortunately, the mainstream establishment of the Democratic Party does not like Sanders, a "progressive" and relies on a lot of disgraceful operations to eventually squeeze out Sanders, who is more popular than Hillary in the party election. When the Democratic National Convention announced that Hillary would run for the Democratic Party in July 2019, many Sanders' supporters expressed protests on the spot.

Hillary is not popular in the party primary election and is inferior to Sanders. If she wants to win the decisive battle with the Republican Party in the future, she needs to absorb the power of Sanders' progressives. However, she has not actively sought support and cooperation from Sanders and his supporters, whether in program and propaganda, or in organization.

In this way, by the end of the vote, the proud Hillary Clinton had no choice but to fail.

From four months before the election, Sanders' supporter and the best documentary director of the United States, Michael Moore, wrote an article in July 2016 to clearly predict that "this poor, ignorant, dangerous part-time clown and full-time anti-socialist will become the next president of the United States. President Trump!" The first reason is that Hillary ignored the traditional supporters of the Democratic Party, working-class voters, and did not actively unite the Sanders progressives. Trump took advantage of the situation and made great promises to the US Workers' Congress to turn voters from traditional industrial areas that were originally Democratic, especially in four states: , Michigan, , Ohio, Pennsylvania and Wisconsin.

Four months later, as Moore predicted, Hillary lost to Trump.

After Hillary lost the election, the British website of " Daily Mail " reported on November 15, 2016 that the Clintons had a fierce quarrel because of great differences on their campaign strategies. On the eve of the voting day, Hillary's poll approval rating suddenly dropped rapidly. Hillary blamed her on the FBI's restart of the "mail gate" investigation. Clinton pointed out that it was because Hillary and his campaign team blamed him because "they turned a blind eye to the weak economic situation and the negative impact of the weak economic situation on millions of working-class voters." "Clinton said that continuous attacks on Donald Trump can make Hillary's men and the media happy, but this cannot resonate with voters, especially those in the rust zone (the traditional industrial recession). ... Clinton always shows himself in the image of being able to sense voters' pain during the campaign, but Hillary is different. She is more like a campaigner who is angry with his opponents than a future president who extends his hand and wants to improve the lives of the white working-class."

The day after Trump won, Obama analyzed the reasons for Hillary's defeat in an interview with Rolling Stone:

"The white workers who once voted for me a considerable number of votes... In this election, a large part of them voted for Trump. ...This is because the Democratic Party has not gone to the grassroots level to carry out its work. ...We should think about how to carry out work at the grassroots level and how to go deep into the fields to win voters. We should make policy publicity deeply rooted in people's hearts and let the people understand our specific ideas for improving people's livelihood, rather than relying on technocrats to formulate policies and share them with the editorial committee of " New York Times ". ”

Biden, who was still vice president at the time, had a similar viewpoint to Moore, Clinton, and Obama: “I think our mistake is that we do not talk about the dilemma of the middle class and their worries. The couple worked hard to support their families, earned $100,000 a year, and raised two children. They were full of panic about life, and they did not mention such words. And they were our voters. "I don't think he (Trump) understands the working class or the middle class, but he at least has the courage to acknowledge their pain. "

Local time on October 16, 2020, US President Donald Trump held a rally to "Make America Great Again" at Ocala International Airport in Florida. People's Vision Data picture

2. Today's Trump is difficult to incite working-class voters like he did four years ago.

At the end of Trump's four-year rule, he was getting more and more embarrassed: the trade war launched against China was not only strongly boycotted by China, but also did not bring any benefits to the US economy; racism incited by Floyd's protest movement; the COVID-19 pandemic has become a global laughing stock. In addition, , One of the major factors that are unfavorable to Trump's re-election election is that it is difficult for him to attract or incite working-class voters like he did four years ago.

Just as the election ended four years ago, the author pointed out: "Trump's commitment to American rich people - tax cuts and relaxation of supervision of Wall Street - will be fulfilled, but his commitment to the working people of the United States, such as giving American people job opportunities, increasing their income, and revitalizing American industry, will be difficult to fulfill. It's very simple, needless to say, because the previous promise and the latter promise are completely opposite and difficult to coexist. Tax cuts (and the inevitable relaxation of capital regulation) in reality have always been just tax cuts to the rich (such as Buffett pointed out that his tax burden is much lower than his secretary, which is the consequence of the US 30-year tax cut policy), which will only encourage the prevalence of the wealthy's privileges and speculation. It is the "neoconservative revolution" that started by Reagan, which represents economic content that cut taxes on the rich and relaxed supervision of speculative behavior on Wall Street, which on the one hand has caused American wealthy people and Wall Street to do whatever they want, and on the other hand, it has caused the decline of American industry, the gap between the rich and the poor, the loss of job opportunities in the American people, and the decline of living standards. Can Trump's promise to the financial bourgeoisie to keep them from getting something for nothing, and also promise to the working class that they want to get something for nothing. Can this be done in parallel? ”

It can be said that the author’s prediction has withstood the test of facts.

The promise of tax cuts during the Trump election was quickly fulfilled, but it did not produce the results of promoting investment and driving economic growth as it advocated.

In December 2017, Trump began to implement the large-scale corporate tax cut bill. A year later, a survey released by the National Business Economics Association on December 29, 2018 showed that the corporate tax cut bill was for most American companies. hiring and investment plans have little impact. The U.S. Federal Reserve economists pointed out in a report released in early September 2018 that in the first quarter of 2018, most of the funds obtained by companies due to tax cuts were widely used to buy back stocks, and "the signs of investment growth are not obvious."

In August 2019, an article by economists at the International Monetary Fund also showed that the increase in investment activities in the U.S. is basically irrelevant to large-scale tax cuts for companies, and is mainly caused by market demand.

In January 2020, US media reported that in just two years, the six major U.S. banks have saved more than $32 billion in tax cuts. However, there has not been any tax cuts that Trump boasted about will promote investment. On the contrary, these banks are restricting new loans and laying off employees. At the same time, the revenue from tax cuts is used to increase returns to corporate shareholders, with shareholder returns increasing by US$21.5 billion, an increase of 14%. Tax savings drive record profits for these banks, with the six banks totaling $120 billion in 2019, surpassing the 2018 record, and before the tax cut, they never made more than $100 billion.

shows that large-scale tax cuts have little positive effect on promoting economic improvement, except for intensifying the rich and the poor.

On the other hand, Trump's promise to create job opportunities for workers and increase workers' income has not been implemented.

When he was running for the election, Trump either just made some general talk about bringing job opportunities back to the United States and improving the situation of workers, or he was racist and emotional inciting such as "Chinese and immigrants robbing American workers' jobs." After taking office, Trump made a big noise about this. Except for some shows, he was not good at making good news and rarely took practical actions. Among a series of shows, what the Chinese are familiar with is the incident of Foxconn going to build a factory in the United States. On June 28, 2018, Trump made a special trip to Wisconsin to attend the groundbreaking ceremony of the Foxconn factory, which is said to cost $10 billion. In his speech, he called the factory building plan "the eighth miracle of the world" and boasted about his "great achievements" in recovering "Made in the United States", introducing foreign investment, and adjusting trade policies. More than two years have passed, and this factory is still basically only staying on PPT. On October 22, 2020, the Wisconsin government announced that it had refused its tax subsidy application because Foxconn did not build a large-scale 10.5-generation large LCD display (LCD) factory in Wisconsin as agreed.

From Trump, the rich, shareholders and bankers get real money for profits and returns, while the working class gets short checks.

The Guardian published a commentary article on December 22, 2019 saying that "Trump has betrayed the working-class voters." The article pointed out that during the 2016 election, Trump cleverly disguised the Republican Party, a traditional party that represents the interests of large enterprises, as a party that cares about the working class. After taking office, Trump "provided a large number of tax cuts for large businesses and the rich, but there were almost no policies that benefited ordinary workers."

article points out that Trump may also want to cover up his “redistribution” of transferring wealth from the working class to the hands of large corporate elites as four years ago by promoting “economic nationalism” with xenophobia and racism. However, “this time will be difficult because Trump’s policies have hurt American workers, especially states that were crucial to his victory in the 2016 election.”

On October 16, 2020, the New York Times published an editorial titled "End Our National Crisis: Reasons Against Donald Trump", pointing out: "He (Trump) at the time held a campaign as a defender of ordinary workers, but he ruled on behalf of the rich. He promised to raise the federal minimum wage and make new investments in infrastructure; he implemented a round of tax cuts that mainly benefited the rich. He abolished regulatory regulations indiscriminately."

The New York Times also published an article on the same day, "Why did they support Trump", which introduced the mental journey of working-class voters who have high expectations for Trump over the past four years. These workers were traditional supporters of the Democratic Party, but the Democratic Party ignored them and they "feel that they were betrayed and abandoned politically." At this time, Trump took advantage of the situation and brought these traditional Democratic voters aside in one fell swoop. Although Trump promised them some "false hopes", it was better than nothing. Now these workers are gradually realizing that Trump is just a "using blue-collar workers to enter the White House but ending up handing over power to the 1%", and instead supporting the Democratic Party.

Now, there shouldn't be so many people who continue to be excited by their empty checks.

This is the biggest problem Trump faces in the election.

Of course, the strengths of Trump and the Republican Party should not be underestimated, that is, their supporters are becoming more determined and fanatical than four years ago. Trump once praised his core supporters in this way: "Even if I shoot a person on Fifth Avenue, I won't lose a vote."

A few days ago, Trump's supporters forcibly surrounded the Biden convoy who went to Texas to pick a Biden convoy, which is a prominent example. This move shows the strength and determination of Trump supporters. Neutral masses without a stance or uncertain position are often more susceptible to fanatical, strong and determined people.

3. Biden had to ask Sanders for help

Let’s take a look at the performance of the Democratic Party and Biden.

In theory, starting from the interests of the whole Democratic Party, the lessons of the last election, and the goal of defeating Trump, the Democratic Party should actively support Sanders, who has the hope of the people, to run for election this year. However, the establishment still cannot tolerate Sanders, a progressive faction. They would rather take the risk of losing to Trump again than let Sanders run for election.

Democratic elections, starting from the first stop in Iowa in January 2020, the establishment has used cheating to curb Sanders. Even so, Sanders still took the lead, overwhelming all party competitors, including Biden. Finally, all candidates withdrew from the election and focused their efforts to support Biden and Sanders in a competition. This disgraceful strategy forced Sanders to announce his withdrawal from the election on April 8, allowing Biden to win.

Biden's main disadvantage is that he and Hillary Clinton belong to the mainstream establishment camp of the Democratic Party, and there is no obvious difference from Hillary Clinton. It seems that it is just "another Hillary Clinton". It is difficult to bring the voters a feeling of "sudden lightening" and it is difficult to satisfy the passion urgently needed by the Democratic Party.

Fortunately, Biden has done something better than Hillary Clinton, that is, after defeating Sanders as the Democratic presidential candidate, he actively cooperated with Sanders, or asked Sanders and his supporters for assistance.

"Sanders is a destructive and counterproductive character. He failed to help the Democratic Party win, but became a destructive member of the Democratic Party." In his memoir "What Happened" after his defeat, Hillary continued to take his anger on Sanders, believing that Sanders should take responsibility for her defeat, not herself.

The fact is that Hillary's arrogance and indifference towards Sanders and her supporters led to her failure.

Hillary failed to work closely with Sanders and the Democratic left after she struggled to defeat Sanders in the 2016 Democratic primary, which became an important factor in her ultimate defeat. In 2016, about one-quarter of Sanders' primary supporters did not vote for Hillary in the general election, according to YouGov's election study of 50,000 U.S. voters. They either voted for Republican Trump, or chose a third-party candidate outside the two parties, or they didn't vote at all.

Facts As Michael Moore predicted, Hillary's disrespect for Sanders' progressive voters led to her defeat in the elections in key swing states.

Biden learned from Hillary's failure and paid great attention to unity with the progressives. After Sanders withdrew from the election on April 8, 2020, Biden immediately publicly called for greater unity to Sanders and the entire left-wing progressives: "I hope you can join us. We welcome you very much. We need you very much."

Sanders said in an interview with The New Yorker that compared with Hillary, he has a "stronger" and "closer" relationship with Biden. "I think the difference now is that I have a better relationship with Joe Biden and than I have with Hillary Clinton," Sanders said.Biden is more willing to sit down and talk to me and other progressives than in the past. ”

polls show that the vast majority of Sanders’ main supporters plan to vote for Biden. A poll by The New York Times and Siena Academy on six battlefield states found that 87% of voters who supported Sanders in early 2020 now supported Biden, and only 4% said they supported Trump.

Sanders said that although he failed to run for the Democrats again, he won an ideological victory with the progressives:

“Now most Americans know that we must raise the minimum wage to at least $15 an hour, we must ensure that health care is the right of the whole people, we must let our energy system get rid of our dependence on fossil fuels, and higher education must be for everyone, regardless of income. And just not long ago, people also believed that these ideas were radical and marginal. Today, they have become mainstream ideas, many of which have been implemented in many cities and states across the country. "

For election victory, Biden has absorbed progressive ideas in large quantities. "Since the primary election, Biden has further turned to the left and adopted most of his opponent Sanders' policy program. "

Regarding this, Trump commented during the Democratic National Convention in August 2020:

"Biden is a puppet of radical leftists. They (Democrats) want to do a lot of bad things, and they follow their boss’ instructions. I think his (Biden) new boss is Bernie Sanders. … In his speech by Bernie Sanders (at the Democratic National Convention) expressed many views that were considered radical several years ago, but are now mainstream. ”

Of course, this absorption is partly rather than all, and there is uncertainty as to how much narrowness of the Democratic establishment can overcome. Michael Moore, a famous American documentary director who accurately predicted Hillary would lose to Trump and a supporter of Sanders, warned in August 2020 that Democrats seem to be making the same election mistakes as in 2016.

American media 2020 On September 14, 2019, Sanders sounded a wake-up call for Biden's presidential campaign. As a former rival, Sanders said that if he did not focus more clearly on economic issues, Biden would likely lose the election.

Sanders said that Biden needs to do more than attack President Trump, "We must also give people a reason to vote for Joe Biden, which can be because Biden has a very firm stance on economic issues. I think we should discuss this more. "

Several Democrats, including the Biden campaign team, agreed. "We know we still have work to do, and the campaign will continue to do the work," said Simeone Sanders, senior Biden campaign adviser, in a TV episode. "

Former U.S. House Member John Delaney said on Twitter: "Sanders is right at this point, we must run on specific plans that are crucial to working families, such as employment, compensation, health care, education, etc. "

"The key is the economy." The slogan that Clinton hung on the wall of the campaign office that year is still applicable to today.

Biden learned from Hillary's lessons and united Sanders' efforts to unite Sanders have produced obvious positive effects.

On April 29, 2019, at the first public campaign rally held after just decided to participate in the presidential election, Biden emphasized that he was from the working class, and pointed out that the country was not established by Wall Street bankers or fund managers, but by the working class. The United States must have a president who serves the people. On the United States Labor Day on September 7, 2020, Biden promised the leaders of the Federation of Labor-Industry-Industry-Industry-Industry-Industry-Industry-Industry-Industry-Industry-Industry-Industry-Industry-Industry-Industry-Industry-Industry-Industry-Industry-Industry-Industry-Industry-Industry-Industry-Industry-Industry-Industry-Industry-Industry-Industry-Industry-Industry-Industry-Industry-Industry-Industry-Industry-Industry-Industry-Industry-Industry-Industry-Industry-Industry-Industry-Industry-Industry-Industry-Industry-Industry-Industry-Industry-Industry-Industry-Industry-Industry-Industry-Industry-Industry-Industry-Industry-Industry-Industry-Industry-Industry-Indus "

On the eve of the election, it was reported that Biden's efforts to avoid losing the working-class voters in the Rust Belt seem to have achieved results: "In the US election four years ago, Republican candidate Trump broke through the so-called "blue wall" - the "Russ Belt"-style micro-industrial state that was originally dominated by the Democratic Party, and defeated Democratic candidate Hillary in the electoral vote.Four years later, the election situation in the Rust Belt continues to be the focus, but many polls show that Democratic candidate Biden is clearly leading in many Midwest free states, and even white voters with low education gradually abandon Trump. If Biden successfully rebuilds the blue wall, he is expected to win the election firmly. ”

4. The high turnout before the election indicates that Biden will defeat Trump

To a large extent, it is precisely because of the cooperation and support of Sanders progressives in the Democratic Party that Biden defeated Trump in the election.

Before the election, there were two signs that Biden would be able to defeat Trump.

The first is the poll. This year's poll has always shown that Biden has led Trump significantly until the eve of the vote. Trump is less likely to turn the tables in a flash like the last session.

The second one, perhaps more reference value than the poll, is that the turnout this year has greatly increased, and the high turnout is undoubtedly beneficial to the Democratic Party. Latest data It shows that as of the official voting on November 3, 100 million American voters had completed early voting, of which more than 65 million were mail-in ballots. The 2016 election was relatively hot, with the total number of voters only 136 million, and the number of early voting was 46.1 million.

According to experts' predictions, the number of voters in this year's election will definitely be more than 150 million. The United States has a population of 320 million and qualified voters are about 230 million. Even if the number of votes is 150 million, the turnout rate will reach 65%, setting a record since 1908.

High turnout rate is more beneficial to the Democratic Party's election. There are still obvious differences between the Republican and Democratic parties in the United States. Simply put, the Republican Party represents more the interests of upper-class proprietors or enterprises, while the Democratic Party It represents the interests of the working people of the lower class. This difference has been particularly obvious since the Roosevelt era. The difference between the two parties has led to more voters supporting the Democratic Party in general than the Republican Party. So on this unfavorable basis, how should the Republican Party defeat the Democratic Party in the election?

's first move is to not adopt the direct universal suffrage system, but to adopt the indirect electoral college system. When the founding elders secretly formulated the US Constitution in 1787, they deliberately made this careful design, creating obstacles for the lower class to win the election through a numerical advantage. This electoral system design leads to political parties that have won a majority of the country's total votes and may not necessarily win the Electoral College election. In 2000, the Democratic Party Gore lost to the Republican Bush Jr., and in 2016, the Democratic Party This is the reason why Hillary Clinton lost to Republican Trump. If direct universal suffrage is carried out like France and Germany, there will be no suspense in the Democratic Party overcoming the Republican Party.

The second move is to make more people not vote, or to make more votes invalid. Due to the lack of resources in all aspects, the lower class people are more likely to miss the opportunity to participate in the voting. Through some clever designs of the voting location, time and voting procedures, it will increase the difficulty and inconvenience of people participating in the voting, thereby reducing the number of voters. Among those who do not vote, Democratic supporters have always accounted for the majority, so low turnout is beneficial to the Republican Party and the Democratic Party. In this election, Trump and the Post Secretary who is loyal to him attempted to obstruct mail-in ballots because of this is to reduce the turnout to attack the Democratic Party.

allows more voters to vote as much as possible, which has always been strongly advocated by the progressives. Unlike the previous election, Democrats have been making extra efforts to call on voters to exercise their voting rights this year. Now it seems that this effort has produced some results.

has a very high turnout, with up to 100 million voters voting in advance, among which the rate of Democratic supporters is even higher. From this point alone, the pre-election situation is already clearer: Biden is more likely to defeat Trump.

However, this phenomenon seems to be generally not taken seriously in China. After the official voting began on November 3, many people in China hurriedly clamored for Trump to lead and would win the election. The author clearly objected that high turnout indicates that Trump's chances of winning are very small unless a miracle happens. The ballot statistics process of several states with the final result proved that it was precisely because of these mail-in ballots that were counted later that Biden came from behind and surpassed Trump and won the election.On the eve of the election, Bernie Sanders emphasized this specifically, and he predicted that Biden would win the swing states such as Pennsylvania, Michigan and Wisconsin later with mail-in ballots.

Local time on November 7, 2020, Wilmington, Delaware, USA, people watched Biden's speech. People's Vision Picture

5. Is another United States possible?

The decline of the US economy today stems from the neoliberal "revolution" promoted by the Republican Reagan administration forty years ago. Back then, neoliberalism was in full swing and swept the world. The Democrats have also slowly abandoned their traditional economic propositions and moved closer to the Republican Party. However, afterwards, the drawbacks of neoliberal dogma became increasingly obvious. The financial crisis broke out in 2008, declaring the complete bankruptcy of neoliberal myth. Unfortunately, the Democratic Obama administration, which holds the banner of "change", has not tried to transcend or reverse the direction of neoliberalism. In addition to continuing to maintain the economic core of neoliberalism, Trump has vigorously absorbed racism and xenophobia in China, threatening global stability.

Today, Biden defeated Trump with the support of progressives. I hope that Biden will not only temporarily use the progressives, but will be able to truly absorb the propositions of progressives after taking office, attach importance to the mass base of progressives, end neoliberalism, and promote the United States to achieve real economic improvement and progress.

hopes that the United States can restore prosperity under the leadership of the new president, the trend of the gap between the rich and the poor is reversed, the racial contradictions are eliminated, and no longer engage in unilateralism. Relations with China will return to normal and promote world peace.

If Trump is re-elected, then as in the past four years, the US economy will continue to decline, the gap between the rich and the poor will further intensify, racial conflicts will deepen, the hatred of China will become stronger, and the world will be even more uneasy.

From this perspective, Biden's move to unite the progressives in Sanders is of great historical significance.

written on 2020/11/4

Editor: Wu Qin

Proofreading: Zhang Liangliang