Perhaps this is premature, but I detect a new, or should I say ‘old’ morality creeping back into communications, whether it be in politics or business. It comes to mind as the concept of ‘fake news’ is increasingly being derided and social media, under pressure to bear responsibility for what is published on its platforms, is slowly, too slowly many would say, starting to clean up its act.

But it is more than that. The architects of dishonest communications are starting to disappear or mend their ways because it hasn’t worked. In politics, Trump is shuffling off the presidential stage and, however noisy he may be from the side-lines, he is no longer President and that is enough. I can’t believe I am saying this, but he was a brilliant propagandist. He knew his audience and how to incite them; he also knew how to disrupt mainstream news agendas mainly through Twitter to suit his own ends. The leading news channels regularly fell into his trap of endlessly covering his outrageous, often untrue statements, allowing him to hold centre stage on his own terms.

However, there is a limited shelf-life to this approach. People see through the tricks and tire of the divisive, explosive commentary. Fact checking gets tougher, opinion more polarised and, in the process, you lose the middle ground. More importantly, if you can’t back up your claims with competence and delivery, you are simply left with a vacuum and people see you for who you are. This is Trump. As coronavirus mismanagement grows and he tears up democratic norms in his response to his rejection by voters, an immoral communications strategy becomes self-defeating. What Trump now says, or what is said on his behalf, simply comes across as dishonest, uncaring, and faintly ridiculous, sadly with tragic consequences.

Johnson is no Trump but on communications strategy, he overlaps. Charismatically prone to untruths and exaggerations, certainly he is being held to account by this pandemic. The seriousness of his role and the level of scrutiny he is under has demanded a change of approach in communications because aggression and glib soundbites haven’t worked. Less guff and an ‘us versus them’ attitude to media relations, combined with more transparency is now the name of the game. A new cast of Downing Street advisers will ensure this change of substance and tone.

And so on to business. Much communications resource is currently focused on Environmental, Social and Governance (ESG) issues. Companies are increasingly under pressure from investors to demonstrate their credentials on a range of issues from alleviating climate change to improving the diversity and well-being of their work force. Not unnaturally they engage the services of external public relations firms to help them communicate initiatives and policies.

Two major public relations firms, one now out of business, have been accused of a lack of integrity; being reckless in their choice of clients and/or the actions undertaken on their behalf on ESG-related issues. Allegations ranging from hiding corruption in South Africa on the one hand to aggressive ‘greenwashing’ on the other have been made. But they have been found out, proving the advent of ESG applies to the moral standards of those who advise on communications strategy just as much as to underlying clients.

Strong, transparent communications, including the admission of mistakes, now ultimately brings rewards in an era of greater scrutiny. An opposite approach does not. There are no short-cuts on truth to be had without a price being paid. You do what you say and assume you will be held to account for it. Whether it is business or politics, that is good advice worth taking.

At one time, you could have despaired about the absence of a written constitution in the UK. It felt like amateur hour in governance terms. Powers set by vague precedent rather than codified in a single written document allow for all sorts of abuses. Blair’s kitchen cabinet agreeing to go to war in Iraq without proper constitutional oversight is one example. It also allows governments to potentially, almost unnoticed (since the general public are normally bored by such things), change crucial democratic relationships. Relatively recently, we have had Cameron’s casual, tactical agreement to referenda on voting and House of Lords reform to secure a coalition with the Liberal Democrats, admittedly rejected by voters. Then we have subsequently had Johnson’s attack on parliament and the judiciary.

It all seems worrying until we set the absence of a written constitution in the context of the gladiatorial nature of British politics. The PM, despite the power afforded by an overall majority, rarely has it easy in the House of Commons chamber. MPs are increasingly independent, and the public generally gives little credence to government authority. Cock ups are rarely forgotten, and, with a few exceptions, a tough independent media and judiciary mostly keep things in check.

An unwritten constitution also more easily allows for much needed reform to be undertaken where there is at least some consensus, such as the formation of a UK Supreme Court, strengthening of parliamentary Select Committees to hold ministers to account or more controversially, perhaps, fixed term parliaments.

But there is a more important reason why a written constitution is unwise. A codified document would act as a form of higher law and undermine the UK’s representative democracy. Agreement to amend and update such a formal constitution set in stone would be nigh on impossible. It could have the unintended consequences of pushing key, legitimate decisions away from elected politicians. For definitive proof of this, one need look no further than the United States of America.

Oh dear. What was once its shining beacon is now a millstone around its democratic neck and elected representatives end up being by-standers in the face of it, not all of which can be explained by congressional gridlock.

A powerful, written constitution sucks the oxygen out of legitimate democratic debate and decision-making. Healthcare, abortion, the right to bear arms in the face of automatic weapons and mental health criteria, the grotesque abuses of political funding all seem outsourced by the US constitution to a judicial process which is now, with some irony, becoming a substitute for an accountable political process.

So revered is this document, there seems no flexibility to update key parts of it governing elections which is crucial for modern day America. The constitution continues to allow presidents to be chosen by an unrepresentative electoral college rather than the popular vote; for a powerful Senate, unlike the more accountable House of Representatives, to be elected based on all states having two senators regardless of size; for Supreme Court justices to be appointed for life by just the Senate; for an increasingly politicised Supreme Court to wield enormous and growing unaccountable power over crucial areas of public life.

Recent events have brought this home. A Trump presidency, having lost the popular vote in 2016 by three million, and a Republican Senate majority, pushed a highly conservative Supreme Court nominee into place days before a presidential election whilst Obama was denied the same opportunity nine months before the end of his presidency. There is a slew of crucial Supreme Court cases on key areas of policy that will by-pass Congress in the coming months. Then, a currently untroubled constitution allows Biden, with a lead in the popular vote heading towards six million, to be prevented from preparing for his presidency by Trump who refuses to acknowledge the election result. This would be bad at any time but disastrous mid-pandemic.

A written constitution needs reviewing, updating and improving to avoid sclerosis or worse in public life. If its dominance as a single, codified document means it is almost untouchable, particularly in an era of political polarisation, ominous pressures can build with potentially calamitous effects. On balance, in a reasonably well functioning democracy, if you don’t happen to have one, keep it that way.

The first warning that there would be no Democratic blue wave came with the Edison exit poll. 34% of those who had voted cited the economy as their top priority. Management of the coronavirus pandemic limped in third at 18%.

Biden based most of his strategy on the pandemic. Campaigning in a mask at what appeared to be low energy, socially distanced rallies, he bet on Trump self-imploding amongst his raucous supporters. Well, he won so it is hardly relevant to discuss the merits of this strategy, but what is certainly not in dispute is that the polls were badly wrong. Trump and the Republicans generally did much better than expected.

The reason seems largely to have been driven by economic factors. Until the pandemic, activity was booming. Record low unemployment levels, including amongst minorities, resonated as did the attractiveness of tax cuts, even if the bulk went to corporates and the wealthy. After an endless period of stagnation, workers in the lowest quarter of incomes saw wages rise 5% in the first three years of Trump’s presidency. Accusations of Democrat ‘socialism’ in the South also played well and demographic trends are not the ‘get out of jail’ card Democrats thought. They have more work to do with Latino voters, for example, on misconceptions around their policies.

Trump is seen as a non-establishment, highly successful businessman by his supporters, often more diverse than many commentators have assumed. He plays on being the antithesis of a professional politician. In this election, the mishandling of the pandemic might well have been viewed as a surprisingly transitory issue versus Trump’s more permanent, so-called business based economic success.

Trump’s ultimate defeat will rightly be attributed to his polarising personality, which was simply too much in the end. His refusal to accept defeat is a suitable epitaph. Policy-wise, however, the message of this election is more nuanced; Democrats will need to be careful about their longer-term priorities and govern from the centre ground. And what is wrong with that?

America is clearly widely split politically but this blog doesn’t share the gloom of many liberal commentators who believe disruptive Republicans, even Trump himself, could be back with a vengeance, to ruin Biden’s term of office. A Biden victory is a Biden victory. Despite Trump adding three million more votes to his 2016 tally, Biden is at least 3-4% ahead in a record popular vote.

The removal of Trump as the nation’s voice will make a huge difference to the tone of politics and respect for its democratic institutions. Trump and his supporters may well be noisy from the side-lines but many Republicans, even right-wing ones, will be glad to see the back of him. And, whilst much of American politics will be gridlocked as usual, there is surely scope for bipartisanship on economic measures to alleviate the impact of coronavirus, infrastructure investment and even some elements of initiatives on climate change. The US may well catch up with Europe on the further integration of ESG factors into broader investment decisions.

Overseas, Biden could re-build relationships with traditional allies, re-join WHO and the Paris Agreement on climate change, participate again in the Iran nuclear deal and at least lower the tone on trade disputes. In Europe, probably to the UK’s detriment on influence generally and a UK/US trade deal in particular, Biden will likely embrace Germany and France first. He likes the EU and will be much less sympathetic to Johnson’s aggressive Brexit stance. No bad thing for the UK in the longer-term.

The Democrats performed relatively poorly in the face of Trump, and America overall is currently deeply and dangerously divided. Biden may well be seen as a transitory figure, but he is not Trump and that may be enough. His collegiate style is right for the times and that alone makes his election victory a much-needed source of optimism.

A strange aspect of US presidential elections is the almost total absence of any detailed policy discussion. Perhaps it is indicative of the checks and balances between Congress and the President, which means the latter has little direct control over domestic policy. Combined with a complete lack of public interest in foreign policy, where presidents have more sway, and there seems a vacuum at the heart of presidential political debate.

Which is a shame as there is so much to discuss. Re-skilling people, whose livelihoods depended on traditional manufacturing and infrastructure investment, are just two key topics which are crucial to reversing America’s decline but get little air time. Then there is the crippling size of the deficit, the future shape of healthcare (still no plan from Trump), or constitutional reform with the appointment of the Supreme Court and funding of politics up for long overdue legitimate debate.

Perhaps it is the inability to often deliver meaningful change which causes voter turn out to be mostly depressingly low in presidential elections. The process just doesn’t seem relevant enough for a lot of ordinary Americans.

So, in this vacuum, such elections usually tend to focus a good deal on character, as the president’s role of being the nation’s conscience and voice comes to the fore. Normally it doesn’t feel enough. It does this time.

And this is why Americans are voting in record numbers.

I watched the brilliant documentary, ‘The Trump Show’, currently airing on the BBC. In three parts, the first two to be frank led me to have a grudging respect for Trump’s chutzpah and indefatigability. In many respects you can see why his showmanship and bling attracts. But charisma on its own rarely makes good politics and can be downright dangerous. This has blatantly been the case over the past four years.

It comes screamingly home in the third part of the BBC documentary. It lifts the lid on current White House travails and provides conclusive proof of the awfulness of this President, his weird family and dodgy associates. Trump has reinvented himself as an anti-abortion, evangelical pushing extreme conservatives to the Supreme Court when many across the political spectrum, including those who have worked with him, believe he is simply a narcissistic liar with no moral or political compass. Covid is being dismissed because it gets in the way of his re-election; tax cuts go predominantly to the rich to fuel debt-driven economic growth surely unsustainable in the longer term; dictators are embraced because they are ‘strong’. There appears to be no empathy for the treatment of black people when divisions on race threaten the fabric of the country and there seems little empathy for the very people who voted for him. Trump likes the adoration of many of the core, non-college educated white voters but has not done much for them. He undermines the legitimacy of America’s democratic institutions and a free media. He denies science generally and evidence of climate change in particular. Externally, he ignores most democratically elected allies in favour of dictatorships and pulls America off the world stage, leaving it to the Chinese.

‘Make America Great Again’ has suffered shrinkage.

To be fair, Trump is on to something when he highlights the hypocrisy of the political class and extreme identity politics which has ignored the concerns of many core voters. Trumpism won’t disappear easily with the defeat of Trump until some of these issues are addressed and Democrats should take note. There is also a huge role for a free-market, smaller state, smaller deficit Republican Party to flourish. Political discourse needs to improve across the spectrum.

But first, to make any headway, this election needs to address the issue of character.

In challenging Trump, Joe Biden may be a somewhat elderly, old-school politician; but he is almost certainly a decent, moderate man who palpably cares about the things his opponent doesn’t. In this respect, he marks a sharp contrast and is perhaps a little more than ‘anybody but Trump’. His first job is simply to be a ‘healer-in-chief’ whilst the next generation of Democrats create policies that resonate. In achieving this, one hopes that his allies, and Kamala Harris in particular, can steer the Democrats back to the centre-ground where all future elections will be won.

Meanwhile, as Biden said recently: ‘character, compassion and decency are on the ballot’. You can’t put it more succinctly than that. It should be enough to defeat Trump and deliver Biden victory. One sincerely hopes so.

For those too young to remember the European Exchange Rate Mechanism (ERM), it was a managed European currency exchange rate the UK decided to participate in alongside the introduction of the Euro. The UK was humiliatingly forced out on ‘Black Wednesday’ as it is known, 16 September 1992, as it couldn’t maintain the value of Sterling above the lower limit for participation, despite panicky huge increases in interest rates. It cost John Major’s government billions and its reputation for economic credibility. It never regained its feet and, as we know, a resurgent Labour Party under a new leader won a landslide victory five years later.

Is this Boris Johnson’s ERM moment? Quite possibly. The charge sheet against his government grows ever longer. There is no point going through past mistakes made in managing the Covid-19 pandemic. An uncomfortable public enquiry strung out over the coming years will no doubt cover these in gruesome detail, but current avoidable missteps on further regional lockdowns multiply. How has he lost the support of devolved governments and local mayors so comprehensively? To fail to build a coalition against the coronavirus because of ministers’ confrontational, non-inclusive style (note Cummings’ malign pervasive influence) is unforgiveable. Endless confusing, sometimes wholly illogical, local restrictions are causing enormous resentment. Focused mainly on the North, they are destroying the Conservative Party’s ‘red wall’ majority for a future election as hardships seems to pile up more on this relatively disadvantaged region than the prosperous South. Andy Burnham, Greater Manchester’s Labour mayor, may have over-played his hand a little but his words of treating the people of Greater Manchester as ‘canaries in a coal mine for an experimental regional lockdown strategy’ resonate and the government, in failing to agree an economic support package by a mere £5 million, looks mean spirited at best. A further tier two Covid relief package cannot come soon enough.

The last Prime Minister to be accused specifically of such regional vandalism was Margaret Thatcher in introducing the hugely unpopular local government poll tax first in Scotland, and we know what subsequently happened to the Tories there…

Then there is also the slowly growing resurgence of the Labour Party under its new leader, Keir Starmer. He outperforms the under-briefed Johnson most times at PMQs and his line of attack on asking for a sharp, comprehensive, ‘circuit-breaking’, full national lockdown rather than limited regional ones for which there is no effective exit, is a powerful line of attack.

A Sky News poll this week cites 67% support for a national circuit-breaking lockdown strategy with 61% of voters not trusting Johnson to make the right decisions on the virus. Starmer is now ahead of Johnson in the polls as a credible PM and Labour are level pegging overall in the national polls, the Tories having surrendered their 10% plus lead.

Then, if all this wasn’t enough, there is the scenario of a no-deal Brexit. Bearing in mind the only thing which separates the EU and UK is fisheries policy and state aid, a deal is still expected as it is in both parties’ interest to achieve one, but again the government’s stance is confrontational and unpleasant as it moots breaking international law. The economic consequences of an aggressive Brexit on top of the coronavirus impact are incalculable.

The public very early on are starting to have had enough of the style and substance of this government. The tone of Johnson’s administration is ugly and its growing incompetence manifest. It is now also undermining the very Northern alliance that helped put it into power. Some events linger long in the memories of voters. When looking back at the next General Election, still four years’ away, many commentators might well judge that this was Johnson’s ERM moment. And deservedly so.

Whatever your political stance, there is no satisfaction to be gained from seeing the current UK (well, English really…) government struggle with Covid-19. It is scary. Johnson and his team have lost the narrative. Over-blown boasts about a world class track and trace system followed by moonshots and constant references to beating the virus have been replaced by fear. Fear that they have lost control of the virus and with it, any semblance of competence. Those views about Johnson not completing a full term as Prime Minister don’t look so outlandish now.

How did this come about? We know this deeply un-Conservative, libertarian government, who decries established institutions and experts, drifted into the pandemic complacently, not treating it seriously enough and loathe to restrict people’s freedoms. The consequences of a failing track and trace and comprehensive nation-wide testing system are sadly self-evident. But the accompanying arrogance of not building bridges with devolved governments and regional mayors in keeping the virus at bay is what is doing for it now.

A reluctance to trust Nicola Sturgeon, for example, is perhaps understandable at any other time but not when confronting a deadly pandemic. This is not a time for party politics but this deeply partisan Johnson/Cummings led government has acted throughout with minimal consultation. Chaotic restrictions were imposed across England and were often inconsistent with what was happening in the devolved regions. Ministers couldn’t even remember what the regional restrictions in England were; one minister incredibly saying during a BBC radio interview that she represented a southern constituency and couldn’t be expected to know all the details of restrictions in the North-East!

Economically, the government has performed better and the recent moves to protect two-thirds of the income of those who lose their jobs through new lockdowns, however tough for those on minimum wages, is at least in line with best practice in continental Europe. But specifically in relation to the science, the government is failing and the economic fall-out alone is too large to repair, possibly for a generation.

The virus is running rampant. Trapped between scientific experts and libertarian backbenchers the government has lurched from Eat Out to Help Out, encouraging people to go to work and opening up the universities to belated sharp national and even sharper regional lockdowns, with SAGE now letting us know it warned a more comprehensive national lockdown was needed 3 weeks ago. Track and trace and comprehensive testing is still woefully inadequate. The government is afraid and Johnson looks haggard. This is not the premiership he hoped for and his style doesn’t work in this environment.

As the Tory Red Wall crumbles in the face of northern city mayors crying foul, the government is belatedly consulting them to spread the blame of further lockdown measures. Both mayors and the devolved regions know necessity means a belated government out-reach to all corners of the country needs meeting half-way as another national lockdown beckons.

But memories are long. One hopes the merits of local democracy and devolved government are a beneficiary of this dreadful chapter, but the origins of the disastrous mismanagement of this virus and the subsequent lack of consultation in managing it will not be forgotten. They lie squarely with Johnson and his government as it has lurched from arrogance to fear.

Either brave or foolish, this blog’s prediction is that Biden will win the 2020 Presidential election. Tuesday’s presidential ‘debate’ confirmed this.

Why the certainty?

The debate. On Tuesday, Trump needed to reach out beyond his core supporters. He failed. Over the top interruptions and failure to absolutely condemn white supremacists, essentially name checking Proud Boys, must surely be the final straw for floating voters. Biden just had to stay upright and not get lost. He succeeded. Trump also allowed Biden to put some distance between himself and the Democratic Party’s left wing by going for Bernie Sanders, and asides from Biden to Trump saying ‘Would you shut up, man?’ played well on television and social media. It came across as a comment from a decent, exasperated man fed up with Trump’s bullying antics. Surely, watching this, a majority of Americans must be worn down with the divisiveness Trump brings to the table.

As an aside, why are debate moderators so poor? We have the same issue in the UK, and there really needs to be a raising of the game to make these gladiatorial clashes worthwhile.

Coronavirus. Appallingly handled. The fall-out is growing and there will be no vaccine to save Trump or the economy this side of November.

The Supreme Court. Nominating Amy Coney Barrett in haste ahead of the Presidential election is a disgrace bearing in mind the Republicans delayed Barak Obama’s nomination nine months before the 2016 election. Any floating voter would see the hypocrisy and the divisiveness this creates. It pleases core Trump supporters but, again, as polls show, it alienates floating voters and energises Democrats to get out to vote as equal rights, the Affordable Care Act and indeed the very results of the Presidential election are threatened.

The polls. These were proving remarkably stable in favour of Biden after some tightening and in actual fact are now starting to move more favourably to him after the debate. He is now largely ahead of where Clinton was in 2016. Most polls are also now weighted for the educational qualifications of voters which was one reason they were inaccurate in exaggerating Clinton’s support in 2016. It is worth noting, however, that Clinton still won the popular vote by 3 million and only lost three key swing states by a collective 80,000 votes. For this reason alone, Biden, just for not being Clinton, should win this election. But RealClearPolitics in polls today has Biden ahead of Trump by 8-9%. Even the normally Trump leaning Rasmussen Reports has Biden leading by 8%. Then there is a poll this week in the key state of Pennsylvania which has Biden ahead by 9%. The betting odds are now 59% v 41% in Biden’s favour, strongly up in recent weeks, and the highest since July.

Of course, there is still a month left and two more presidential debates to go. But it is Biden’s to lose and, barring a catastrophe, I don’t think he will.

There have been no blogs for a while. It has often seemed futile to rail at the dire political leadership in the UK and the US but here you go… Johnson advocates breaking international law over an agreement with the EU he signed less than 12 months ago to win an election, whilst Trump threatens to ignore November’s Presidential election result due to ‘fraudulent’ postal ballot voting. Both leaders are guilty of chaotically managing the pandemic, yet incredibly, Johnson remains ahead in polls and Trump is just a few points behind Biden.

Why is this the case? There are various reasons. Both Trump and Johnson have played a clever game in exploiting disillusionment with past political regimes. Globalisation has been unkind to many; the professional classes as represented by the likes of Cameron, Obama, Clinton et al have been seen as remote, hypocritical and/or patronising. It was time for a change. Traditional alliances, treaties, political correctness and even experts are out. They don’t matter to many mainstream, frustrated voters. However unfair, they feel nothing seems to change. The immediacy of crude nationalism in the form of Making America Great Again and Brexit (ex-Corbyn) is in.

This is a narrative that will maintain its resonance with many voters for years. Liberal commentators can rage at each other using the echo chamber of social media, but Johnson is safe. In the US, although Trump may lose in November, he has reshaped American politics. The Republican and Conservative parties will not be the same for a generation.

But just in case this analysis is wrong, there is an additional weapon these leaders employ. They encourage voters to disengage from politics so chaos, lack of principle and incompetence go unnoticed. They trash the media and try to by-pass it. Trump’s concept of ‘fake news’ is well known, as is his desire to frustrate postal voting, but Johnson is seeking to introduce White House style broadcast press briefings too so he can ignore the conduit of regular, questioning journalism. As in the US, UK history is being re-written with bombast, whether it be the EU Agreement or manipulating facts around the management of Covid-19. Key policy announcements are made outside the House of Common; acquiescent Cabinet Members read out their scripts; expert analysis, certainly any offered by the judiciary, is carelessly denigrated and criticism is labelled simply as enemy liberal whinging.

Johnson and Cummings are set on a revolution, even if the former has arrived at this conclusion by accident. If politics is polarised, filled with outrage and ultimately based on the most charitable premise of ‘tune them out, they would say that wouldn’t they?’, then opposition can be ignored. The public in the UK have been worn out by the Brexit wrangles, all magnified by online anger. Johnson is almost certainly around for a good few years and they just want a breather from knowing or even caring who is right or wrong. Governing without attracting the attention of, or bothering, the voter is the aim. Encouraging disengagement at every opportunity is the method.

Trump’s narrative for the US presidential election has been set. It is Keeping America Great versus violent social disorder driven by a far-left political agenda. It is so depressing and untrue; but highly effective. Incredibly he might just win, and Biden must raise his game. Lightness versus Darkness is unsurprisingly not enough. For Biden, Harris and the Democrats as a whole, this must be the fight of their lives.

As Edward Luce wrote in an excellent article in this week’s FT, there is no Republican Party anymore, just the Trump Party. Most former Republican grandees including the Bushes, Cheneys, Mitt Romney et al stayed away. This week was the humbling of the G.O.P. as speaker after speaker lauded Trump with no sense of healing a divided nation, the architect of which is often Trump himself. The low point in terms of speakers, excepting the almost Dynasty-esq parade of frankly weird Trump family members, had to be a couple now facing criminal charges as they pointed guns at peaceful black demonstrators to ‘protect their home’.

There were no policies in this Republican convention, just Trump’s Will. And his closing speech, set outrageously against the backdrop of the White House in front of an audience neither socially distancing nor wearing face masks, was a litany of misrepresentations. The impact of the coronavirus and its mismanagement was swept away; no mention was made about the legitimate concerns of the treatment of black people by some members of the police; lies were liberally thrown around.

But the threat to the suburbs from ‘chaos and anarchy’, a repeated theme in Trump’s speech, resonates and the drift to the Left of many Democrats is an uncomfortable reminder of politics in the UK when Corbyn’s Labour Party was swept aside by the albeit more moderate but populist Johnson.

An excellent US website to follow is RealClearPolitics.com. It makes sober reading. In top battle ground states at this time, Biden is 3.7% ahead. Clinton was 4.8% ahead in these swing states at the same stage in 2016. The betting odds only have Biden with a 52% chance of victory. In Pennsylvania, Biden has a 7% lead. But Jon Sopel, BBC’s North America Editor, reported this morning that it just doesn’t feel like that. What everyone is agreed on is that the polls are narrowing when anyone but Trump should be a shoe-in.

Biden and Harris need to get out there. They cannot allow themselves to be defined by Trump, boxed in by law and order issues. However frustrated demonstrators are, there is no excuse for looting, every incident of which pushes votes to Trump and the Democrats need to be clear on this. They also need clear, simple messages on the economy and tackling the coronavirus. They must avoid as much as possible talking excessively about identity politics. The vote also has to be got out quickly as some postal voting can start in just three weeks.

Literally anything could happen in the coming two months with three presidential debates ahead and two fairly elderly candidates having to navigate a campaign that would exhaust many younger, fitter politicians. The Democrats must take nothing for granted, not least because America and its allies cannot afford another four years of Trump who, as many moderate Republicans would agree, is the real architect of a dystopian future.

The US presidential stakes don’t get any higher than seeing off Trump and his hugely damaging presidency. Another 4 years of him will fatally wound the US as a global power, challenge the whole concept of democratic accountability and split this amazing nation in two.

Yet the polls that put Biden so comfortably ahead are just starting to narrow. We have been here before. In the face of Trump, Biden (Clinton) couldn’t possibly lose, Biden (Clinton) is consistently ahead in the polls, Biden (Clinton) is experienced and will focus on policies that will improve the lot of the less well off. Surely Biden (Clinton), despite some baggage, is a shoe-in…and yet…and yet…

Many say the VP choice doesn’t make an impact but this time it is different, and Senator Kamala Harris is the right pick. Biden will be 78 if he assumes office, Harris is 55. As a woman of colour, with tough prosecution credentials as California’s former attorney-general, she is hard to lay a glove on. She will energise the black vote in a racially divided nation and yet cannot be portrayed as simply soft on law and order issues. She is centrist and ruthless and that is what will really matter.

This will be the dirtiest campaign yet, the slug fest diluted only by the lockdown, and Biden needs an ambitious running mate who is unafraid and unperturbed by what lies ahead. She will use her role as VP candidate, and hopefully as VP, as a training ground for the top job and good for her. Trump has said Harris would have been his preferred choice as an opponent and describes her as ‘extraordinarily nasty’. Perfect.

Meanwhile the Trump presidency rolls on and voter suppression remains top of his agenda. The US Postal Service is now run by a major Trump donor who is reorganising it as we speak, and cost cutting with the consequence of slowing deliveries down in the face of the largest postal vote election in US history. Trump is attacking the Postal Service daily, saying it can’t cope and that voter fraud will consequently undermine the legitimacy of the election.

As for the pandemic, the death toll heads to 170,000 with over 5 million infections. A further stimulus package remains marooned in Congress. Trump floundered in an interview on HBO, referring to statistical graphs he clearly had no idea about. He is talking about banning Covid-infected Americans based overseas from returning home as part of his anti-immigration rhetoric, and compared Covid to the Spanish Flu of 1918 which apparently ‘ended World War II’ two decades later…Trump makes it up as he goes along and meanwhile people are dying.

So, the US Presidential Election is crucial domestically as well as for allies of the US abroad. Trump needs a heavy defeat so he can’t undermine the result and, if nothing else, to allow some space for the Republicans to regroup on more moderate ground (no mean feat when one considers some of the cleverer nationalist ideologues behind Trump).

Incredibly polls are starting to narrow despite Trump’s performance. Biden, at 77, is not a strong candidate and there is a long way to go. He needs an intelligent, ambitious Rottweiler at his side to keep those polls on side. She might not be the most likeable person but, in Kamala Harris as his running mate, Biden has made a shrewd choice.