More stories

  • in

    It is galling to see Starmer ingratiate himself with Trump – but it would be horribly negligent if he didn’t | Gaby Hinsliff

    Dawn had barely broken, and nor had Kamala Harris publicly conceded, when Keir Starmer tweeted his congratulations to the not-quite-officially President-elect Donald Trump.Britain would, he said, stand “shoulder to shoulder” with its old ally, as it always does. Though he got the early opportunity he wanted to congratulate the new president-elect even more fulsomely down the phone, those words will have been gut-wrenching for many people. How can it be business as usual, with a president whose own former chief of staff said he met the definition of a fascist? What on earth makes Starmer think he can influence Trump for the better, the usual rationale for engaging with unsavoury leaders, where Trump’s own advisers repeatedly failed? The only people he ever really heeded, the British-born former White House adviser Fiona Hill once told one of Theresa May’s aides, were the now late Queen and the pope.Starmer’s obvious answer, of course, is that it would be an act of breathtaking negligence not to even bother trying; that he can’t be squeamish when there are workers afraid of losing their jobs in a trade war, Ukrainians dying under Russian bombardment, and future generations who would pay a terrible price for the US reneging on its climate commitments. The less obvious one, however, is that if he cannot get Trump’s ear then Trump will get his hot takes on the British national interest elsewhere. Starmer may have got that phone call, but it was Nigel Farage who spent election night at the Trump victory party in Mar-a-Lago.Though this isn’t the result a Labour government wanted, it’s the one it has war-gamed hardest. The charm offensive began months before Starmer and Trump’s relatively cordial dinner in September, with the foreign secretary, David Lammy, making surprisingly deep inroads in Republican circles for a man who once called Trump a woman-hating, neo-Nazi sociopath. But as Lammy’s allies point out, JD Vance once called Trump an idiot who might be the US’s Hitler, which didn’t stop Trump picking Vance as a running mate. The president-elect is both intensely transactional – if anything, he may see British desperation to make up lost ground with him as useful – and wildly unpredictable, a combination offering both opportunity and threat.The lesson Downing Street takes from studying Trump is essentially the one many Republican voters do: that he says a lot of wild stuff but doesn’t always mean it, and if he does he often unexpectedly changes his mind. Already there are hints he might give Ukraine more time to win its war, if only because he hates being associated with losing, while senior Republicans are signalling that “friendly” nations could escape his threatened trade tariffs – a crude signal that there will be rewards for compliance.But there will surely also be a price: Starmer could easily find himself pushed to pick a side in trade negotiations between the US and Brussels, just as he is trying to mend fences with Europe. What if a British government that has staked everything on economic growth finds its business interests pulling one way, and its shared interest in the defence of Europe against Russian aggression pulling the other? At the very least, those budget forecasts – and the money set aside for extra defence spending – may well soon need revisiting.In her memoirs, Theresa May describes the acute anxiety of standing beside then president Trump at a press conference where he was supposed to send a critical signal to Russia by stressing his commitment to Nato, not knowing whether he’d actually say it until he opened his mouth. But at least she could plan for that scenario in advance: harder to deal with was Trump’s tendency to blindside Britain with things nobody saw coming. For her, that meant Trump pulling troops out of Iraq and Syria without warning or concern for British forces fighting alongside them, lobbying her to bring Farage into cabinet, and casually retweeting incendiary social media posts by the British far right. This time, he won’t just be surfing X when he’s bored but actively integrating its owner, Elon Musk – who is already regularly kicking lumps out of Starmer, most recently over cutting inheritance tax relief for farmers – into his administration.The Southport riots, during which Musk tweeted that “civil war is inevitable” and promoted conspiracy theories about white protesters being more harshly treated than ethnic minority ones, convinced many Labour MPs that hate and disinformation online must be tackled. But how brave are ministers prepared to be if that means a direct hit on someone in Trump’s inner circle?Labour MPs in seats where Reform came second in July are, meanwhile, now visibly rattled, and newly fearful of handing Farage further sticks to beat them with. Though Starmer learned his own lesson about the salience of immigration or the risks of alienating white working-class voters way back in 2019, Harris’s defeat is only likely to underline that message for him.There’s no denying that for progressives, the world now looks lonelier than it did; that the choice the US has made will have consequences smaller countries can only do so much to contain. But that doesn’t mean Britain can afford to sit the coming battles out, assuming someone else will do the dirty work. Starmer’s job now is to pull whatever levers he can reach, in alliance with whoever he can persuade to join him; ours, meanwhile, is never to give up hope.

    Gaby Hinsliff is a Guardian columnist More

  • in

    Bernie Sanders says the left has lost the working class. Has it forgotten how to speak to them?

    Donald Trump was elected US president this week. Despite vastly outspending her opponent and drafting a galaxy of celebrities to her cause – Jennifer Lopez, Oprah Winfrey, Ricky Martin, Taylor Swift – Democratic candidate Kamala Harris lost the Electoral College, the popular vote and all the swing states.

    This has bewildered and dismayed liberals – and much of the mainstream media. In the aftermath, progressive Senator Bernie Sanders excoriated the Democratic Party machine.

    It should come as no great surprise that a Democratic Party which has abandoned working-class people would find that the working class has abandoned them.

    He continued:

    Unbelievably, real, inflation-accounted-for weekly wages for the average American worker are actually lower now than they were 50 years ago.

    Harris ran a campaign straight out of the centrist political playbook. Sanders observed that the 60% of Americans who live pay cheque to pay cheque weren’t convinced by it.

    Bernie Sanders has excoriated the Democratic Party for abandoning the working-class.
    Bernie Sanders/AAP

    She sought to dampen social divisions rather than accentuate them. She spoke of harmony, kindness and future prosperity, of middle-class aspiration rather than poverty and suffering. Her speeches often repeated rhetoric like her promise to be “laser-focused on creating opportunities for the middle class”.

    This was unlikely to endear her to those for whom social mobility appears impossible.

    Words of blood and thunder resonated

    Jaime Harrison, the Democratic National Committee chair, refuted Sanders’ claims, saying:

    [Joe] Biden was the most pro-worker president of my lifetime – saved union pensions, created millions of good paying jobs and even marched in a picket line.

    But did those workers feel like the Democrats were speaking to them? And did they like what they heard?

    Class politics needs to not only promise to redistribute wealth, but do so in a language that chimes with people’s lived experience – more effectively than Trump’s right-wing populism.

    Harris’s genial, smiling optimism failed to strike a chord with voters hurting from years of inflation and declining real wages. And her use of celebrity advocates echoes writer Jeff Sparrow’s criticism of the left as “too often infatuated with the symbolic power of celebrity gestures” after Hillary Clinton’s 2016 presidential election loss.

    Kamala Harris’ ‘galaxy of celebrities’ did not help her.
    Annie Mulligan/AAP

    By contrast, Trump’s words of blood and thunder hit the spot – not only in his rural and outer suburban strongholds, but among those voters in rust-belt inner cities, who had voted decisively for Biden four years earlier. The greatest threat to America, he said, was from “the enemy from within”. He defined them as: “All the scum that we have to deal with that hate our country; that’s a bigger enemy than China and Russia.”

    Harris’s attempt to build her campaign around social movements of gender and race failed abjectly. In particular, the appeal to women on reproductive rights, and to minority voters by preaching racial harmony resonated less than Trump’s emphasis on law and order and border control. Women voted more strongly for Harris than for Trump, but not in sufficient numbers to get her into the Oval Office. Latinos flocked to Trump despite his promises to deport undocumented immigrants.

    This shows it takes more than political rhetoric to bake people into voting blocs.

    Those of us who fixate on politics and the news media tend to overread the ability of public debate to set political agendas, especially during election campaigns. In fact, few voters pay much attention to politics. They rarely watch, listen to or read mainstream media and have little political content in their social media newsfeeds. Exit polls indicate Trump led with these kinds of voters.

    Donald Trump’s ‘words of blood and thunder’ seem to have hit the spot with many working-class voters.
    Evan Vucci/AAP

    Is populism the new class?

    In much of the Western world, class has receded from the political vocabulary. As manufacturing industries declined, so did the old trade unions whose base was among blue-collar workers.

    In 1983, 20.1% of Americans were union members. In 2023, membership had halved to 10%. Few of those in service jobs join unions, largely because many are precariously employed.

    These days, politicians in the old social democratic parties, like the Democrats in the US and Labor here in Australia, are much more likely to have come up through law and business than the union movement. In the US, ex-teacher Tim Walz was the first candidate on a Democratic Party presidential ticket without law school experience since Jimmy Carter.

    Ex-teacher Tim Walz is unusual as a politician without a law or business bavkground.
    Anthony Souffle/Star Tribune/AAP

    The language of populism – the people versus the elites – is a smokescreen that obscures real structures of power and inequality. But it comes much more easily to the lips of Americans than that of class.

    Trump’s political cunning rests in his ability to identify as one of the people, even to paint the left as the enemy of disenfranchised so-called patriots. “We pledge to you that we will root out the communists, Marxists, fascists and the radical left thugs that live like vermin within the confines of our country,” he told a Veteran’s Day rally last year.

    He conjures up (an illusory) golden age of prosperity in a once-great monocultural America, where jobs were protected by tariffs and crime was low, helped by the reality of rising cost of living and falling real wages. There is plenty of room on this nostalgic landscape for Mister Moneybags, an old-fashioned tycoon, even one with the “morals of an alley cat”, as Joe Biden said in the debate that finished his 2024 candidacy.

    The elite, by contrast, are faceless: politicians, bureaucrats, the “laptop class”, as Elon Musk calls knowledge workers, and the grey cardinals of the “deep state” (a conspiratorial term for the American federal bureaucracy).

    According to Trump’s narrative, they conspire in the shadows to rob decent, hardworking folk of their livelihoods. This accords with a real geographical divide: people in cities with high incomes and valuable real estate, and those in the rust-belt with neither.

    Trump voters speak the language of populism.
    Brandon Dill/EPA

    Australian populism

    In Australia, the language of populism has deeper roots than that of class. Students of Australian history learn that national identity was based on distinguishing ourselves from the crusty traditions of the motherland: the belief that, as historian Russel Ward wrote, all Australians should be treated equally, that “Jack is as not only as good as his master … but probably a good deal better”.

    The Australian Labor Party was there when this egalitarian myth was born. But as the gap between rich and poor grows here, as elsewhere, it has become less plausible than once it was.

    It remains to be seen whether Anthony Albanese – whose life journey has taken him from social housing to waterfront mansion – is prepared to bring the sharp elbows of class politics, in both policy and language, to next year’s election campaign. The experience of Kamala Harris suggests he would be well advised to do so. More

  • in

    US election briefing: Democrats pick through defeat with blame falling on Biden and economy

    The Democratic party has begun to pick through Kamala Harris’s loss to Donald Trump in the presidential election, with the post-pandemic headwinds, a failure to distance herself from Joe Biden and overestimating abortion access instead of the economy as an election winner, all reported by congressional Democrats as reasons for the decisive loss.Biden struck an optimistic tone in an address to the nation, praising Harris for an “inspiring” campaign. Comments from the Vermont senator Bernie Sanders, claiming Democrats had “abandoned working-class people”, earned a rebuke from the Democratic party chair, Jaime Harrison.Biden’s decision to pursue re-election and then his late withdrawal drew criticism from numerous former top Democrat advisers and politicians, including Michael Bloomberg, the former New York City mayor and presidential candidate, who said “it probably wasn’t great to cover up President Joe Biden’s infirmities until they became undeniable on live TV”.Biden’s press secretary, Karine Jean-Pierre, pushed back on the accusation that it was arrogant for the 81-year-old president to run for a second term: “This is the president who has been the only person [who] has been able to beat Donald Trump.”Here’s what else happened on Thursday:US presidential election news and updates

    Trump has named Susie Wiles, the manager of his victorious campaign, as his White House chief of staff, making her the first woman to hold the influential role. She was seen as the leading contender for the job but has avoided the spotlight, even refusing Trump’s invitation to take the microphone during his victory speech on Wednesday. Learn more about Wiles here.

    Vladimir Putin has congratulated Trump on his victory and expressed admiration for Trump’s response to an assassination attempt. Putin said he was ready for dialogue with Trump, which will cause disquiet in Kyiv and other European capitals. Hours beforehand, Russia had carried out a massive drone attack on Kyiv, and killed four people in a strike on a hospital in Zaporizhzhia.

    Republicans have expanded their control of the US Senate, after Dave McCormick defeated the Democratic incumbent in Pennsylvania. Control of the House remained unclear on Thursday, with Republicans closing in on the 218 seats required for a majority.

    Healthcare providers have reported unprecedented surges in demand for reproductive and gender-affirming medications in the wake of Trump’s victory, even greater than the day after Roe v Wadefell.

    California’s Democratic governor, Gavin Newsom, announced a special session of the state’s legislature to ensure the attorney general’s office and other state agencies have the funding they need. California has been setting up guardrails to protect its residents’ rights under an adversarial federal government.

    Trump as president may give Israel a “blank cheque” for all-out war against Iran, a former CIA director and US defence secretary has predicted. Palestinians in Ramallah argue things cannot get any worse for them than it has been under Biden.

    Elon Musk has said Trump’s podcast appearances made “a big difference” in the election, as the manosphere and so-called “heterodoxy” celebrate the result. Meanwhile, searches for the 4B movement have spiked on Google and TikTok as women discuss cutting off heterosexual dating with men.

    A Texas judge has ruled against Biden’s programme offering a path to citizenship for certain immigrant spouses of US citizens, a blow that could keep the scheme blocked through the president’s final months in office. Fear has risen in undocumented communities and families face being torn apart at the prospect of Trump’s promised mass deportation programme.

    Americans see immigration as the most pressing issue for Trump to address, and a large majority believe he will order mass deportations of people living in the US illegally, a Reuters/Ipsos poll has found.

    The US Federal Reserve has cut interest rates by a quarter of a percentage point. Its chair, Jerome Powell, said the election result would have no “near-term” impact on rates and insisted he would not resign if Trump asked him to leave early, adding that firing a Fed governor was “not permitted under the law”.

    The British government will ask its ambassador to Washington, Dame Karen Pierce, to stay in post as Trump takes power, ahead of a complex shuffle of UK security and diplomatic jobs in the new year.

    Sales have surged for dystopian books, with The Handmaid’s Tale jumping more than 400 places on bestseller charts since Wednesday and On Tyranny by Timothy Snyder enjoying a similar rush.
    Read more of the Guardian’s 2024 US election coverage

    Harris urges supporters to ‘never give up’ – read the full speech

    Abortion ballot measure results by state

    How Trump won the presidency – in maps

    With Trump re-elected, this is what’s at stake More

  • in

    Where do the Democrats go from here? – podcast

    “This was a pretty sweeping victory for Trump,” Lauren Gambino, political correspondent for Guardian US, tells Michael Safi. “It was decisive, and he may very well end up with full control of Congress, which would really help him implement some of these pretty dramatic proposals he’s laid out throughout the campaign.”Speaking to Democrats processing the result, Gambino says there is a sense of devastation.“Some of them are calling for a full overhaul of their brand. Bernie Sanders has said they’re no longer the party of the working class.”Safi also reports from Kamala Harris’s concession speech at Howard University, Washington DC. He speaks to Harris supporters reflecting on what went wrong, and asking: what next?Support the Guardian today: theguardian.com/todayinfocuspod More

  • in

    Levi Strauss heir Daniel Lurie elected mayor of San Francisco

    After years of negative headlines and post-pandemic economic struggle, San Francisco has picked a wealthy Democratic outsider with no government experience to serve as the city’s new mayor.Daniel Lurie, 47, is one of the heirs to the Levi Strauss jeans company fortune, and previously spent 15 years as the executive of a San Francisco non-profit he founded. He defeated several Democratic challengers, including the current mayor, London Breed, in an election that was expected to break local campaign spending records.“I’m deeply grateful to my incredible family, campaign team and every San Franciscan who voted for accountability, service and change,” Lurie said in a statement. “No matter who you supported in this election, we stand united in the fight for San Francisco’s future and a safer and more affordable city for all.”Lurie poured more than $8m of his own money into his campaign, while his billionaire mother, Mimi Haas, backed him with another $1m. He will be the first San Francisco mayor since 1911 to win office without previously serving in government, making him the city’s “least experienced mayor in a long time”, the San Francisco Chronicle reported.But the Chronicle also ended up endorsing Lurie, praising the “balance of compassion and toughness” in his planned approach to dealing with the people in San Francisco struggling with homelessness, and saying the city needed a change in leadership, making Lurie’s inexperience potentially worth the risk.Lurie had touted his experience funding and building affordable housing at the Tipping Point Foundation as evidence that he could lead San Francisco in the right direction.San Francisco is dominated by Democrats, and so the choice was effectively between moderates and progressives, with voters focusing on pragmatic centrists. Lurie beat and will replace Breed, the city’s first Black female mayor, who has led the city since 2018.Breed, who was raised by her grandmother in public housing, conceded the race on Thursday when it became clear she could not overcome deep voter discontent and was trailing Lurie, a philanthropist and anti-poverty non-profit founder.“At the end of the day, this job is bigger than any one person and what matters is that we keep moving this city forward,” Breed said, adding that she had called Lurie to congratulate him. “I know we are both committed to improving this city we love.”The northern California city has come to represent the challenges faced by many large US cities that have struggled with an uneven economic recovery and rising cost of living since the Covid-19 pandemic. Standout issues across all candidates’ campaigns were housing and crime, even with crime down 32%.San Francisco has the highest median household income among major US cities, but homelessness remains intractable. Since a June supreme court ruling, Breed’s administration has been actively sweeping unhoused encampments.Her critics pointed out that sweeps are temporary fixes and the city has not done enough to offer shelter to its unhoused population.In an interview with Reuters, Lurie said sweeps were a tool for the city to combat homelessness and promised to stand up 1,500 emergency shelter beds in his first six months in office.Lurie is an heir to the Levi Strauss & Co fortune through his mother, Mimi, who wed Peter Haas when Lurie was a child. Peter Haas, a great-grandnephew of Levi Strauss, was a longtime CEO of the iconic clothing company who died in 2005.Both the Levi’s name and Haas family philanthropic foundations are deeply embedded in San Francisco’s history and identity.Lurie’s father, Brian Lurie, is a rabbi and longtime former executive director of the San Francisco-based Jewish Community Federation. More

  • in

    Republican Dave McCormick wins Pennsylvania Senate seat in key race

    The Republican Dave McCormick won the Senate race in the battleground state of Pennsylvania on Thursday, denying the Democratic incumbent, Bob Casey, a fourth term and expanding his party’s majority in the upper chamber.When the Associated Press called the race at 4.09pm ET on Thursday, two days after polls closed in Pennsylvania, McCormick led by 0.4 points. The narrow margin raised the possibility of a recount, although his victory is expected to stand given his lead of roughly 30,000 votes.A spokesperson for Casey insisted that thousands of ballots remained uncounted, refusing to yet concede the race to McCormick.“As the Pennsylvania Secretary of State said this afternoon, there are tens of thousands of ballots across the Commonwealth still to count, which includes provisional ballots, military and overseas ballots, and mail ballots,” Casey spokesperson Maddy McDaniel said in a statement. “This race is within half a point and cannot be called while the votes of thousands of Pennsylvanians are still being counted. We will make sure every Pennsylvanian’s voice is heard.”With McCormick’s victory, Republicans have now secured at least 53 seats in the Senate, erasing Democrats’ previous majority in the chamber. Two Senate races in Nevada and Arizona remained too close to call as of Thursday afternoon.Although he fell short, Casey outperformed Kamala Harris, who lost Pennsylvania to Donald Trump by two points. Trump also won the two other “blue wall” states of Michigan and Wisconsin, but Democrats managed to hold on to both Senate seats that were up for grabs in those states.The call in Pennsylvania brought an end to a contentious and expensive Senate race that saw the two candidates trade barbed attacks on the cost of living, abortion access and McCormick’s recent residency in Connecticut. Casey attacked McCormick, a former hedge fund CEO, as out of touch while McCormick linked Casey to the “reckless” government spending of the Biden administration.At their debate last month, Casey mocked McCormick as “bought and paid for by these billionaires and corporations”. McCormick returned fire, saying: “When you don’t have a record to run on, which Senator Casey does not, you attack your opponent.”The high stakes of the race made it into one of the most expensive Senate elections in the nation, as the dueling campaigns and their allies spent more than $300m on ads. One pro-McCormick organization, the Keystone Renewal Pac, spent at least $54m on the race, making the group the highest-spending single-candidate Pac involved in a Senate race of this election cycle.Most public polls of the race showed Casey leading by several points up until recent weeks, when McCormick narrowed that gap to just a few points. Despite that trend, Casey appeared to be in a slightly stronger position than Harris, who was running neck and neck against Trump in Pennsylvania up until election day. Leaders of both parties had identified Pennsylvania and its 19 electoral votes as the potential tipping point in the presidential race.“I think both races are going to be very close, but I think the people of our state know it’s a very, very clear choice,” Casey told the Guardian in September. “It’s never been clearer.”Before election day, Democrats held a 51-49 majority in the Senate. Republicans’ victories in Montana, Ohio and West Virginia had already guaranteed control of the Senate, but McCormick’s win will give the party even more leverage to enact Trump’s agenda when the new Congress is seated in January.Read more of the Guardian’s 2024 US election coverage

    Trump wins the presidency – how did it happen?

    Full presidential election results and map

    Abortion ballot measure results by state

    Republicans retake control of the Senate

    Senate, House and governor results More