Unlike 4 years ago (seriously, it's already been 4 years?) I do not foresee myself writing all that much about the upcoming election in the US.
This is because, despite all that's going on in the world, I get the impression that each one matters less and less. Or maybe it never did matter much in the first place?
All of you know me as a Trump supporter. And, as I've often said, I really couldn't care less about the man's character or private life – all I care about is what he can deliver. But the same rules extend to everybody in the world.
When I go to a bakery all I want to know is whether the bread is good, not whether the baker has a mistress on the side and likes doing blow on the weekends. I only care about the private lives of my own and my closest relatives. Interactions between strangers are inherently transactional (you have something what I want, I have something what you want). That's it, let's not romanticise this.
In this spirit, there are several reasons why I would like Trump to win – and there are others, which make me quite indifferent to the result of the vote in November.
So, let's start with why he should win:
1. He deserves to
He had the 2020 election taken from him by a concerted effort of mass media peddling BS about him (as admitted by the Time magazine) and, many people forget that, about the vaccines (which the left both demonised and/or claimed they would not arrive for years).
Here's what Kamala had to say at the time:
Despite endless smear campaigns of misleading accusations, he still very nearly won it.
If Pfizer didn't withhold the positive results of vaccine trials to a week after the election, it would surely push Trump over the finish line ahead of Joe Biden, as it invalidated left-wing fearmongering of the previous months.
2. Entertainment factor
No other guy can deliver it and there may not be another one in America for decades, if ever. Can we really afford to let this chance pass? ;-)
Now, this isn't purely for joy or out of spite. He simply is capable of making all career politicians in the world cringe – and this is what all of these incompetent fools deserve, especially delivered by a man who, unlike most of them, has actually achieved something with his own work.
I would be sad if we were deprived of four more years of Trump bullying all of these cowardly ignorants in the most fun ways, pushing them to do what they have long promised to do (I'm looking at you, NATO).
He's also the only person who can shake up the situation in Ukraine and the Middle East (whether for good or bad is another story, especially regarding the former). If he loses, we're in for more years of pointless battles, without major breakthroughs.
For all the support that Democrats have eventually – and reluctantly – given Ukraine, none of it has been decisive, and even in 2024 they continue to restrict the use of long-range missiles against targets on Russian territory.
Meanwhile, Trump's killing of Soleimani was one of the most impressive deployments of American military power in recent history, striking the enemy where it hurt him the most, instead of ceaseless bombings of peasants we'd gotten so used to in the previous decade.
And we all remember how the left flipped out when he did it:
Nobody else is capable of such daring moves and I doubt we can hope for another one to appear in the predictable future (or at all, given the state of modern politics).
3. Making American economy great again
At least for a few years – let's not delude ourselves it could last any longer with the inherent instability of American politics.
Domestically the most important thing he could do is actually intangible: boosting sentiments among consumers and businesses just like he did in 2016.
All it took to achieve that was for Trump to win.
The truth about business is that it is going to do well as long as it knows it can enjoy stability. Specific conditions are less important. Sure, lower taxes and less red tape help, but as long as companies know they can safely be optimistic about the next 4 years, they are more likely to take risks, invest and hire.
As for real impact on policy, beyond extending or even deepening his tax cuts, the most significant influence Trump could have is reinvigorating the American energy sector. Cheaper oil and gas will help the economy and that's good news for the rest of us too, especially after two years of rampant inflation.
It would also blunt the impact of senseless green policies, which consume obscene amounts of money without producing measurable benefits.
EVs are already losing their appeal, as virtue-signalling regulators have pushed the the world into a dead end of dependence on ever more costly power generation. Initial rapid growth has failed to extend beyond excited early adopters, as complaints about inconvenience and cost of electric vehicles started mounting around the world.
This is not to say we have to abandon EVs or do not need to develop better, cleaner sources of electricity.
But it is not going to happen by driving the largest free market economies in the world into the minefield of renewables, which are only driving costs up, without providing any productivity benefits. The Germans are learning it the hard way as we speak.
It already puts the entire developed world at an increasing disadvantage vs. China and Russia, but also India.
And, by the way, I'm under no illusion that Trump can single-handedly defeat the blind, irrational environmentalism at all costs, but every opportunity at delaying it is good for us.
4. Erecting more barriers against the woke madness
Finally, another 4 years of Trump would hurt the woke agenda of the political left in America, whose insanity trickles down to the rest of the world.
Instead of being paraded in DC, it would have to retreat and barricade itself in left-wing states. It can't be wiped out but its spread can be delayed at least.
Of course any executive decisions will be rolled back the next time a Democrat is in office, but the lasting impact of appointing 200-300 new judges during the 4 year term should not be easily dismissed.
And while no Supreme Court justice is at a really advanced age, it's not unlikely that the two eldest conservatives, Clarence Thomas and Samuel Alito, who, by the end of Trump's second term would be 80 and 78 respectively, could decide to voluntarily retire to permit president to nominate fresh replacements.
The lesson from Ruth Bader Ginsburg's reluctance to step down is hard to ignore.
Why I won't mind if he loses
If I were an American concerned only about my job, living costs and my kids being brainwashed at school, I would vote for Trump in a heartbeat. That's a no-brainer.
However, US presidents have considerable influence on the world and for this reason I can no longer fully endorse him.
And the source of my concern has a name: JD Vance.
The problem with Vance is that he's a complete ignorant on international affairs, whose ideas about foreign policy mean de facto withdrawal from all fronts, to the detriment of interests of both the USA and its allies.
His proposal for ending the war in Ukraine is effectively an unconditional capitulation to Putin.
In practice it would amount to little else than a temporary ceasefire, providing Russia with enough time to regroup and attempt another invasion at a later date, against a country which would be granted no tangible security guarantees by anybody, and permanently frozen out of NATO.
Champagne corks must be popping at the Kremlin just at the thought of the possibility.
Unlike Trump, Vance is a young career politician, thrust into the spotlight by his writing, little else.
His stint as a "venture capitalist" as he is sometimes portrayed, is nothing to write home about, considering he was just a face with limited responsibilities and a handful of inconsequential investments to the tune of thousands of dollars here and there.
He hasn't built anything, he hasn't managed anything and he doesn't know how to wield power like Trump does after decades in cutthroat business.
He wrote a book and then proceeded to define a more organised political ideology around the MAGA movement, that the former president never intended but surely must like the sound of.
And it's a problem, because unlike Pence, who was just an extra on Trump's show, Vance appears to have the president's ear.
USA does, indeed, have the power to end the war in Ukraine quickly, but it is not by kowtowing to a broke dictator and giving him everything he wants.
It would also be terrible news for Taiwan, that Trump has already expressed concerns about during his previous term, observing – however accurately – that fighting China at such a distance would be extremely difficult for the US.
Signalling withdrawal from active engagement in international conflicts would diminish American standing and boost regional dictators, giving them a lifeline at a time they are struggling to stand firm on their two feet, instead of pushing them off the cliff the edge of which they're so close to.
It would be bad for America, even if not immediately, but absolutely catastrophic for the rest of the world.
Trump may have a winning mentality but following Vance's advice would make him a loser for the ages. And as he's getting older – approaching 80 in two years – his intellectual capacity to make sound decisions is likely to degrade.
If he succeeds on the domestic front – as he is likely to given his record on the economy but also the post-pandemic revival and lack of immediate threats – it would pave the way for Vance to run for presidency in 2028.
And while 4 years of unpredictable Trump might seem a high but short-term risk, up to 12 years of American isolationism in the White House could reshape the world order in ways that would be hard to reverse in the future.
Of course, it isn't like their domestic opponents are much better, with their incompetence, ignorance and indecisiveness.
But, at the very least, Democrats would not intentionally blow up existing relationships and international cooperation in pushing back against destructive efforts of Russia, China and their unsavoury vassals.
A possible Harris presidency will mean more of the same we have seen in the past 4 years. But even though we can't hope for any decisive action, we don't have to worry about American capitulation on international commitments that are so critical to the rest of us.
Which is why this November I will neither be celebrating nor mourning for any of the contenders. We have to buckle up and see where fate tosses us – though wherever it is, it doesn't look great.
