DONALD J Trump won a historical presidential battle on an upsurge of protest votes. In his fight against VP Kamala Harris, one of the key underlying factors that translated into protest votes was the economy. 

Many Democrats would have voted against their own past political affiliation because they did not see their party thrusting the nation onto a better economic path. 

Malaysia, too, has had its share of “undi protes” in the past elections. Some of them were political in nature. But when the time comes, you can bet your ringgit that the economy will be a major barometer, the make-or-break factor, for Prime Minister Datuk Seri Anwar Ibrahim. 

But let us first stick with Trump who has just been “rehired” by the American voters in an election like none before. 

A Trump victory is expected to upend a good number of norms, including the US foreign policy. Wars being one of them. 

The US and wars seem synonymous. The US has been involved in so many wars around the world, overtly or covertly. 

Remember the US itching to invade Iraq. The George W Bush administration began the campaign in 2001. They told the world that Iraq, under Saddam Hussein, is a danger to humanity. It had weapons that we didn’t want them to unleash upon the world. In one dramatic scene in February 2003, US Secretary of State Colin Powell made a dire presentation to the United Nations Security Council. He held a model vial of anthrax, with the world as his witness. 

Eventually, Bush Junior got what he wanted. The US Congress approved a joint resolution to “disarm Iraq of weapons of mass destruction (WMD), to end Saddam Hussein’s support for terrorism, and to free the Iraqi people”. This led to the Iraq invasion, but one that did not encounter WMD. 

Iraq was destroyed, but the US could not produce those deadly weapons it alleged Saddam was hiding. 

The US, be it the Democrats like Barack Obama or Republicans like Bush Senior, comes across the same when it comes to waging wars of all kinds around the world. 

Here, many believe that Trump may be different. 

“They said: ‘He will start a war.’ I’m not going to start a war, I’m going to stop the wars,” Trump said as he claimed the 2024 presidential victory in a speech to a cheering crowd in West Palm Beach, Florida. He promised a “golden age of America”. 

Why would a voter care? Well, wars enrich the big corporations and the retinue of people involved in the war economy. But not necessarily the man in the street. He may end up paying more in taxes. She may end up losing jobs impacted by that very war in the US or around the world. 

Trump cleared a path to the White House by “doubling down on the very things that Democrats said made him unfit to return to the Oval Office”, reported the Wall Street Journal on Nov 7, as it became clear that Harris had lost. 

“American voters seeking a change in fortune bet on Trump’s promises to boost the US economy, lower prices and taxes, settle foreign conflicts and put a stop to illegal immigration,” it added. 

It circles back to the economy. Some view that Trump is good for the economy, on this and many other fronts. 

Trump has been a handful in the past. And he has shown some of those same streaks in the run-up to this election. The campaign saw Trump appealing to the “worst instincts and lowest common denominator”, said a former Republican communicator director. Trump pushed bogus stories on Haitians eating pet cats and dogs in Springfield, Ohio. In one interview, when confronted directly on that topic, he didn’t deny, just saying that that’s what he heard. Boy, such a leader has actually won and is set to be the next US president, once more.

China is watching closely. But it has been having tough moments with presidents from both the Democrat and Republican. Incidentally, Anwar was in China, his third China trip in two years, when the US presidential results came trickling out. 

Anwar and his team would surely want to pick up some lessons from the Trumpian moment. 

At some point, political analysts had said that the race was winnable for Harris. They felt that she failed to communicate what she wanted to do, at least to the level the public expected her to. Kamala also failed to cross the threshold of credibility, they argued. 

The clearest signal for Anwar and his team to pick up is the importance of the economy. The economy matters, and it matters to a huge degree. Get the economy chugging, put money into the pockets of voters and you will be assured of getting their votes. A huge slice of the electorate for sure. 

After the economy comes the promises. You have made so many promises, before and after taking over the government. Do deliver on some of them. This may be another yardstick that people will hold you up against. 

For Malaysia, the game will be played out in the next general election (GE) comes around. The GE17 to elect the next federal government must be held by Feb 17, 2028. Anwar still has time to do something about the economy and the promises. 

• Habhajan Singh is the corporate editor of The Malaysian Reserve. 

• This article first appeared in The Malaysian Reserve weekly print edition