Andrew Vine: Very few signs of hope for America's next president

Only once before in my lifetime has the United States seemed so unsure of itself, so ill at ease, as it does today when its people elect their next president, and in doing so create the world’s most powerful man or woman.

That was in 1974 when Richard Nixon resigned in disgrace to avoid the ignominy of removal from office in the wake of the Watergate scandal.

The revelation that their president was a crook shook the US to its core, making it question the functioning of a democracy that could have allowed such a man to ascend to power without being found out.

And today, as tens of millions agonise which way to vote, there will be many once more questioning a democratic process that in a country of almost 325 million citizens, with massive political and intellectual establishments, can produce only a choice between Donald Trump or Hillary Clinton.

A demagogue rabble-rouser versus a sleaze-mired careerist. A man repudiated even by his own party or a woman under investigation for criminal acts until recently. What a choice. Who would be an American voter today?

And for us here in Britain, and across the rest of the democratic west, what a prospect. The country so vital to global security, stability and trade in the hands of a man patently unfit for office or a woman unable to shake off allegations of corruption that have dogged her for years.

In some respects, 2016 is more worrying than 1974. For all America’s agonies as Nixon’s presidency imploded, his fall marked the end of a corrupt administration, a chance to clean the stables and start afresh.

But today’s poll marks the beginning of a period of uncertainty – and probably violence – in America that is all the more disturbing against the backdrop of an increasingly tense international scene.

Instead of a fresh start, the incoming president comes to office with a cloud of disturbing questions about the past swirling about them. Has she enriched herself by criminal means? Is he a virulent racist and tax avoider? Did she menace her husband’s mistresses to help him cling to power? Is he a serial sexual abuser of women who regards them with contempt?

Whichever wins, neither will ever be able to lay claim to the moral authority that is one of the key strengths of the US presidency.

Both are too divisive for that, too hated by half of the electorate, which if the opinion polls are to be believed, is split almost evenly between them.

Such a president hobbled by questions over their past or character, and a consequently divided America, must be manna for the most dangerous people in the world. Like the belligerent Vladimir Putin, of Russia, with his eye on rebuilding a Russian empire. Or the Islamist fanatics bent on spreading terror around the world.

They must be rubbing their hands gleefully. A weak US president allied to a stumbling and uncertain Europe. Where will the united front be against aggression?

We can only hope America will conclude, even as its voters wrinkle their noses in distaste, that Hillary Clinton is the least-worst choice because the raging, seemingly-unstable Trump is just too great a risk.

Even if that proves to be the case, the hatreds whipped up by this most bitter of contests in any western democracy in living memory are likely to spawn a poisonous legacy.

Trump’s insistence that if he loses the reason will be vote-rigging, and his refusal to commit to accepting the electorate’s verdict, may well end in bloodshed in a country where there are too many guns.

Supporters convinced that their man has been cheated of the presidency will vent their anger.

And even if the unthinkable happens and Trump wins, America will need to be braced for violence. Against immigrants he wants shut out behind a wall, or Muslims, who have been demonised by him. The shameful and inflammatory rhetoric he has been preaching for well over a year will be viewed by some as a licence to take direct action if he wins office.

It is those who have felt left behind by globalisation and pressurised by immigration who have propelled Trump to the threshold of the White House, just as their counterparts in Britain voted for Brexit for the same reasons.

The difference between Britain and the US is that we are largely free of bitterness. In America, worryingly, it appears to have become embedded in voters’ psyches.

The election of a new US president should be a time of hope, not just for the people of America, but for the civilised world. We look for a dependable friend and robust defender of freedom, a force for stability and prosperity in world markets.

Yet we look in vain for those qualities as this rancid and acrimonious election reaches its conclusion. Whoever wins, there is little hope or optimism to be found in their victory.