The Dilemma of Arab & Muslim voters in the US elections

Arab and Muslim Americans face a moral and political dilemma regarding the fast-approaching US presidential elections set for 5 November.

For many, voting for the democratic candidate Kamala Harris will mean trampling on their consciences, due to her current role as vice president for Joe Biden, who's made the US a full-blown partner in Israel's genocidal war in Gaza.

The Democratic Party's alignment with Israel and disregard for Palestinians was on display at the party conference in Chicago last month, where no Palestinian American was allowed to speak about the suffering in Gaza - while an Israeli hostage's family member was readily given a platform.

Harris's speech at the conference was also disappointing, with the presidential hopeful reaffirming her staunch support for Israel, while adding some hollow words of sympathy for civilian victims in Gaza.

Nevertheless, many fear that not voting for her, or voting for a third candidate, like the Green Party's Jill Stein or independent Cornel West, will in effect be a vote for Republican presidential nominee Donald Trump. He will likely benefit from every vote the Democrats lose, and even if he doesn't win this time, such an increase could change the course of the subsequent elections in his favour.

Though it may seem like a clear choice to some- just a case of punishing the Biden administration for its complicity in the genocide being perpetrated in Gaza - it isn't that simple. Trump is no better, nor less brutal, than Biden or Harris, and his zealous support for Israel has no restraints, not to mention the danger he poses to Arab and Muslim Americans themselves.

Weaponising fury

Faced with this dilemma, Arab and Muslim American activists (not including African-American Muslims, most of whom historically vote for the Democratic candidate) are considering the options available. None are ideal, however, and each present possible political and ethical repercussions.

For most Arabs and Muslims, a clear red line they will not cross is voting for Trump. Though this doesn't mean a minority won't do so, as in 2016. Trump's campaign has also been keen to attract some Arab and Muslim votes, especially in swing states like Michigan, Pennsylvania, Georgia, Minnesota, Wisconsin and North Carolina - or at least, stop them from voting for Harris. To achieve this, special coordinators have been appointed to communicate with American Arabs and Muslims, like Trump's son-in-law's father, Massad Boulos, a Lebanese-born business tycoon.

Trump's campaign hopes to convince a significant number of this community by leveraging their fury at Biden's support for Israel’s crimes in Gaza. This could contribute to her loss in the presidential elections, which opinion polls indicate will be extremely close. After all, there are precedents for Democratic nominees losing due to lacklustre support in their electoral base, as Hillary Clinton did in 2016 - even though opinion polls at the time predicted her a landslide victory.

Former Vice President Al Gore also lost to Republican candidate George W. Bush in 2000 by a few hundred votes in Florida, where the Muslim vote was decisive.

Limited choices

In reality, there are four options for Arab and Muslim voters. The first is that they can swallow the bitter pill and vote for Harris and the Democrats in the presidential, senate and house elections. After all, Trump and the Republicans are even more supportive of Israel, and the ex-president has made public threats to reinstate the ban on citizens from Arab and Muslim countries entering the US, which he introduced back in 2017.

Trump also threatened to cut scholarships for American university students who demonstrate in solidarity with Palestine, and ensure those with student visas are expelled. Some of his assistants have said he wants to shut down Arab and Islamic organisations in the US.

Supporters of this voting strategy additionally argue that there are sympathisers within the Democratic Party who can be worked with and who could exert pressure on Harris if she becomes president. In contrast, there are no genuine or influential allies among the Republicans.

The problem with this, however, is that most Arab and Muslim voters are unlikely to do this on ethical grounds.

The second option is to punish the Democrats in the presidential elections by voting uncommitted, abstaining, or voting for a third presidential candidate, and only voting for the Democratic candidates in the senate and house elections. This would result in a divided government if Trump wins the presidency with the Democrats winning congress.

Some feel this would limit Trump's ability to harm American Arabs and Muslims, as Congress wouldn't be under his control. For the same reason, it could curb his ability to support Israel - once the Democrats understand they'll pay a price for neglecting this voter bloc. However, success is far from guaranteed with this strategy. For a start, many voters may be confused on the day when trying to distinguish between the different nominees - with the presidential, senate and house candidates all appearing on the same ballot.

Additionally, if Harris wins despite the absence of this bloc of voters, this may further undermine their influence within the Democratic Party on issues that concern them.

Moreover, this approach could lead to a Trump presidency for the next four years, with possibly an even higher level of blind bias towards Israel. Allies in social justice movements could therefore blame them for Trump's victory.

The other option would be to vote for a third presidential candidate, as well as refusing to vote for any democratic nominee in the congressional and state elections, to punish those who stood with Israel. This would see the Arab and Muslim community endure four years of harassment and marginalisation if Trump won as a result, but the hope is that in exchange, the Democrats would realise their error and change their policies for the midterm elections in 2026, and the presidential elections after them in 2028.

Similarly to the previous option, the pitfalls would be that Trump becomes president, and the Republicans could also win a majority in both the House and the Senate.

The final path that they could take is to vote uncommitted in the presidential election, and blame the Democrats if they lose. But, this carries the same risks as the second and third options.

In the end, there are no good options when it comes to how Arab and Muslim Americans could vote in November's elections, and in order for them to have any collective impact, the outcome will need to be very close. Indeed, with each path the risks seem to outweigh the slim chance the outcome has of possible positive aspects, which is why they will need to weigh up every option before casting their votes.

Osama Abu Arshid is a Palestinian writer and researcher based in Washington.

This is an edited translation from our Arabic edition. To read the original article click here.

Translated by Rose Chacko.

Have questions or comments? Email us at: editorial-english@alaraby.co.uk.

Opinions expressed in this article remain those of the author and do not necessarily represent those of The New Arab, its editorial board or staff.