By MohammadReza Farahzadi

Can Democrats compete with Republican billionaires?

February 23, 2020 - 11:3
Iran, Trump’s Achilles heel in the 2020 election

TEHRAN - Trump is at the helm of the $35 billion American cabinet, which has been backing by Wall Street and the lobbying of U.S. corporations in the oil, pharmaceutical and weapons sectors. Trump is the first impeached U.S. president to run in the next election.

Unlike the 2016 election, which Trump and his cabinet members had no record of government jobs, they are now casting the 2020 election campaign with greater wealth and executive experience. In other words, the upcoming election will be a competition between Republicans and Democrats. 

In the 2020 election, the American people should choose a person among Republican billionaires and Democratic millionaires. Any decision that the people make will determine the future of themselves and their children for another four-year term. 

Democrats, who cannot financially compete with Republican billionaires, have relied solely on popular donations in their election campaign, which has so far been estimated $5.18 per donor.

Democrats have not performed well in the debates so far, so candidates are trying to defame Trump in their domestic policies and goal setting. They do not consider Trump as a right person for presidency position duo to his narcissism, lies, instability and moral corruption and continue their propaganda against him.

By criticizing Trump’s foreign policy, the Democrats' chances of winning the election will be increased because they can gain the support of foreign countries that have been heavily suffered from Trump's plans. Emphasis on unstructured diplomacy, part-time strategies, and decision making based on Trump’s tweets, which even have confused European allies of the U.S., have been mocked by Democratic candidates to pave the way for foreign political support for the Democratic Party.

To draw the attention of countries around the world, Democratic candidates describe Trump policies, which are based on “political militarism” and “military terrorism”, as his obvious blunders. They insist that Trump has failed to redefine his friends and foes, becoming reliant on dictatorial regimes and distancing from its old allies. 

Democrats have used the JCPOA in their election campaign as a bargaining chip against Trump. To further pressure Trump, they state that the U.S. withdrawal from the nuclear deal has led to a series of events that threaten U.S. national interests and security.
In this regard, Democratic candidates are seeking to please China, Russia, and Europe in an attempt for maintaining the JCPOA. Despite Trump, who left the nuclear deal and has consistently insisted on the benefits of this withdrawal, Democrats have agreed with a conditioned return to the deal.

Of course, their conditions include extending the Iran deal's sunset provisions in the fields of nuclear and weapon restrictions or negotiating Iran’s missile and regional behavior, which is also being followed by Trump and Europe.

Along with the Democratic election campaign, Trump has been setting his foreign policy to reduce tensions with China and Russia, which are the most influential states in carrying out cyber-attacks or influencing the 2020 election.

Despite his efforts to find a way to negotiate with Iran, Trump has yet not succeeded, and the Democrats' focus on developments in Iran could become his Achilles heel in the 2020 election. Any unexpected event regarding Iran could face Trump with trouble. Therefore, Iran and the developments in Tehran-Washington relations are at the center of the Democrats' attention.

In recent debates, the candidates were in obvious odd with Trump regarding the assassination of Commander Qassem Soleimani. By stating this issue, which is related to military terrorism, democrats are trying to show public and international opinion that, unlike Trump, they are predictable and hate war.

In recent debates, most recently held in New Hampshire (February 7, 2020), two candidates stated that if they were in such a situation they would never ordered such a strike unless they evaluate all of the intelligence aspects and effects and learn about the results, while with President Trump’s decision, there is no evidence that the assassination of General Qassem Soleimani made the U.S. safer.

Candidates put forward their reasons for the lack of necessity to order the strike, saying that there is no evidence yet of imminent threat that was going to come from General Soleimani.   

One of the candidates stated, “You cannot go around saying you’re a bad guy, we’re going to assassinate you, and then you’re going to have, if that happens, you’re opening the door to international anarchy that every government in the world will then be subjected to attacks and assassination”.

In the Democratic candidates’ debates, Trump is deliberately blamed for severe and dangerous tensions between the United States and Iran to in the case of any disaster between two states like a serious military conflict he is claimed responsible. To create such a situation, all candidates denounce the use of a military option against Iran, and state the use other tools, including economic, diplomatic and international pressure, along with the U.S. allies, as their alternative strategy toward Iran.

The Democrats, in full alignment with global security strategies, see the most important reason for the continued pressure on Iran as the nuclear issues and the possibility of Iran's access to nuclear weapons, which is strongly agreed by the remaining states in the JCPOA, including Russia and China.


Leave a Comment

5 + 13 =