Will Americans vote for a black woman to be president?

It has to be asked. Kamala Harris is going to be the Democratic nominee after Joe Biden's pull-out and she has a lot going for her. She's 59, nearly 20 years younger than Donald Trump, she has the experience of being the vice president for more than three years, she has the vast majority of Democrats endorsing her and she looks great. The fact that she is a woman of colour should make no difference but there may be a significant percentage of American voters who are not yet ready to choose a black woman for president. Well, they voted for Barack Obama, the first black male president, so why not a black woman? To put it simply, it's because the new Democratic nominee-designate is black AND a woman. I don't know whether to describe this challenge for some American voters as evidence of racial prejudice or just plain "not in my lifetime thank you". It will be a problem for Kamala Harris, but with such resounding support for her in the Democratic party, it's a challenge she should be able to overcome. But she will have to perform much much better than any man would have to when faced with Trump as an adversary. It's totally unfair but realistic. There is enough misogeny around to make it difficult for her as she campaigns around the country. I would like to nsay how brilliant it would be if she chose a woman to be herrunning-mate but I guess that really would be too much for many male voters, and probably female ones too in parts of the country. But I have to say I don't see a potential president among the would-be male vice president short lists doing the rounds.

The drop-out by Joe Biden is what Trump didn't want

Donald Trump was in victory mode while the faltering, wayward, incomprehensible Joe Biden was mumbling away at the microphone as his rival for the White House. Now that has all changed. Now Trump is the Old Man. Whether it's Kamala Harris or some other Democrat, his rival is going to be younger, fresher, more healthy-looking and not facing any federal charges. I have no doubt Trump and his team will try to destroy Vice President Kamala Harris as a no-hoper but she has been Biden's deputy for more than three years, so she must have picked up a lot of what the job entails. Obviously she is going to have to perform a helluva lot better than Biden at the microphone, particularly during any TV debate with Trump. But Trump has recently shown tendencies to mumble and jumble his words and has been speaking (ranting on) during his speeches for so long that even the adoring crowds started to look at their watches. So, for once, Trump is on the back foot. He has been calling for Biden to go but now he's going, Trump nust be biting his tongue. He is still odds-on to win the election but if Harris does well over the next few weeks, it could be a very different story. Potentially there could be an open debate about who takes over from Biden when the Democrats hold their convention in Chicago next month but it seems unlikely and it would be a big mistake. Rally round Kamala has to be the call from the convention. Then that big smile might just be wiped off Trump's face.

Now Trump joins in: why was that gunman on the roof?

A week has gone by and still no one has given an answer to the biggest question of all right now: why was Donald Trump's would-be assassin able to climb on to the roof of a building within range of the former president and fire off four rounds? Trump was initially full of praise for the Secret Service who bounced on to the stage and covered his body within seconds of the first bullet skimming through the top part of Trump's right ear. But now he has begun asking the same question as every one else. Why was the gunman on that roof? And why, when people wandering around outside the convention spotted the man lying on the roof with a rifle, wasn't the alarm raised instantly? Like a phone call to the Secret Service? There's a lot of speculation about the roof being in a blind spot fronted by trees that obscured the Secret Service's view. But the fact is, as soon as those shots rang out, a Secret Service sniper on a roof adjoining where Trump had been standing shot dead the gunman. So he must have had a clear line of sight. As for that rubbish about the gunman's roof being too dodgy, health and safety-wise, for a Trump sniper to lie on, if an assassin could do it, why not one of Trump's protectors? One can only conclude with that sort of explanation that no president or former president in the United States is safe.

Would Trump go to Taiwan's defence?

The prospect of a second Donald Trump administration has put the fear of God into America’s allies around the world. The biggest question being raised is: would the United States heave up the drawbridge and let others do the dirty work to keep the planet safe from global war? Comments made by Trump seem to suggest he still has no love for Nato, that Taiwan should fend for itself if attacked by mainland China and that Ukraine should give up the territory it has lost to the Russian invaders in return for a ceasefire and forgo any ambition to join the western alliance. On the face of it, even if elements of this Trumpian foreign policy vision were to be implemented, it would represent one of the starkest changes in America’s relations with allies and partners in modern times. The reality is probably not quite so bleak. Trump may have a history of unpredictability and unexpected surprises. One has only to remember his extraordinary, albeit abortive, charm offensive with North Korea’s Kim Jong Un. However, the one topic where he demonstrated implacable consistency was his demand that allies “play fair” and spend significantly more money on defence. Although, during his term in office as the 45th president between 2017and 2021, he was thinking principally about Nato, he is now expanding his mantra to embrace Taiwan, South Korea, Japan and anywhere else where American taxpayer dollars are being spent to deter aggression by regional adversaries. Taiwan is a case in point. In an interview with Bloomberg, Trump said it was time Taiwan spent more on defending itself from the rising threat posed by China’s People’s Liberation Army (PLA), and that Taipei should reimburse the US for the huge cost of maintaining a deterrent presence in the region. When he pointed out that Taiwan was 6,500 miles away from the US and only 68 miles from China, some observers interpreted this as a sign that under a Trump administration, the US would not necessarily jump to the island’s defence if the PLA launched an invasion. Under President Biden, the long-held policy of strategic ambiguity on what the US might do if China tried to occupy Taiwan has become more strategic and less ambiguous. Biden has stated on several occasions when asked that he would go to Taiwan’s aid under such circumstances, presumably with aircraft carriers., anti-ship missiles and the US Marine Corps in mind. Trump has promised so such intervention. But judging by his past hawkish approach to China on trade and the PLA’s expansionist endeavours in the South China Sea, it would seem unlikely that a Trump administration would allow Beijing to get away with seizing, or trying to seize, Taiwan. It would also upset the Republican party whose hierarchy has always been staunch supporters of Taiwan and critical of Beijing’s hegemonic ambitions in the region. Senator Marco Rubio who was on the short list to be Trump’s running-mate and has considerable experience as a senior member of the Senate foreign relations committee, advised reporters on the sidelines of the Republican National Convention in Milwaukee that Trump would continue to back Taiwan, as he did during his time in office. So, it’s down to money, not whether Trump would send for the Marines. If he were to authorise military action to defend Taiwan against the PLA, he would presumably expect Taiwan to pay for or contribute towards the cost. Trump has sent out the same message to South Korea and Japan, where the US currently has a combined total of around 82,000 troops stationed. Trump wants more money for the burden of protecting these allies from aggression by China and North Korea. This argument of greater burden-sharing comes at an even greater price for Europe, where, since Russia’s invasion of Ukraine in February 2022, the US has increased its troop presence to more than 100,000, and is planning to deploy land-based Tomahawk and hypersonic missiles to Germany to defend Nato allies and deter further Russian aggression. Much was made of Trump’s threat to pull the US out of Nato when he became president in January 2021. But the alarm was short-lived. He banged on about the Nato members who had failed to spend the required two per cent on defence and said it was unfair that America, a military superpower notwithstanding, should have to spend so much more than anyone else in the alliance. In fact, a lot more than the rest of the alliance put together. There are still eight Nato countries who have failed to reach the two per cent target, including Canada, Italy and Spain. They must expect a hard time from a second Trump administration. What’s more, a reelected Trump might well use the first Nato summit under his leadership to push for 3.5 per cent of GDP across the board. This is what the US spends and a significant proportion of it is devoted to defending Europe. If Trump’s pledge to end the war in Ukraine within 24 hours of taking office failed to materialise , no doubt he would demand Europe pay out a much larger slice of the burden to stop Russia from seizing more of its neighbour’s sovereign territory.

Did God save Donald Trump?

The man who wants and expects to become the 47th president of the United States has declared that God is on his side which is why he survived the assassination attemnpt. That sort of comment will really go down well with Republican voters and might even make some Democratic voters think twice about whether, after all, to swap their allegiance to the man who miraculously dodged a bullet. God and religion and faith are all key ingredients in the American way of life, far more so than in Britain where religion is having a hard time. The churches are emptying. In the US, God plays a part in politics but rarely in Britain. Tony Blair when he was Labour prime minister, famously glanced upwards to the heavens when he was asked a question about his leadership success. But usually politicians steer clear of religion in this country. In the US it's a very different story. So Trump's gratitude to God for saving his life will run true for many Americans. After all, every president in US history has always said at the end of a speech or address, God Bless America. Now the cry will be God Bless Trump!

The men in grey suits have come for Joe Biden

It's a traditional expression for when the leader in Britain gets a visit from a group of so-called cabinet colleagues demanding his or her resignation. Margaret Thatcher had her visit from the men in grey suits and before long she found she had little choice but to step down. Now it's happening to Joe Biden. Despite his determination to stay put and fight on for another four years in the White House, all the top hierarchy of the Democratic party have either phoned or paid a visit and made the case for the president to step aside for a younger and less faltering candidate to take on Donald Trump. It's a desperate time for poor Joe. Nancy Pelosi, hardly a man in a grey suit, but still with the same message, suggested to Biden that he might think about considering handing over. The two top dogs of the Democratic party, Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer and House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries, were more blunt. They made it clear they didn't think Biden could beat Trump, especially not now after his miraculous survival from the assassination attempt. Time is running out for the Democrats who want Biden out. It's really tough on Biden. He appears to genuinely think he's still fine to take on and defeat Trump. But almost no one else believes it any longer.

Everyone in the Republican party is now a Trumper

Even Trump's strongest critics in the Republican party are now singing his praises. It's the most extraordinary and triumphant moment for the Trump campaign. One bullet that misses and he is the biggest hero the party has ever had. Even the worshipped Ronald Reagan is being pushed into the background. To be honest I've haven't heard what Mitt Romney thinks but Trump's strongest critic is probably keeping very quiet. This is not to downplay the assassination attempt. It was a miracle Trump turned away just at the moment the trigger was pulled by the sniper. It was just like that scene in The Day of the Jackal film when General de Gaulle bowed his head at the precise moment when the Jackal fired his rifle and missed. The repercussions, however, have been so dramatic that there cannot be a commentator on the planet who now believes Joe Biden will win the election in November.It may not unite the United States of America but it sure has united the Republican party. All the also-rans in the election campaign have pledged their loyalty to Trump. Had there not been the assassination attempt, I suspect the decision by Trump to choose Senator JD Vance as his running-mate might have caused a lot more angst within the Republican party. As it is, the pairing of Trump and Vance is being seen as a guaranteed winning combination for November. And so it will prove to be.