The successful political campaigns of Sadiq Khan and Donald Trump are a study in contrasts. Khan won the mayoral elections as an inclusive candidate for all Londoners. Trump divided and conquered his way to become the presumptive Republican nominee. Both proved formidable candidates. Their campaigns rewrote the rules by devising a way to win. They were able to create a comparative advantage against their respective foes. Khan and Trump were vilified as opportunists as they exhibited an extraordinary capacity to understand what an electorate wants to hear, and an almost unrestrained readiness to say it. US President Woodrow Wilson once said, “A politician, a man engaged in party contests, must be an opportunist. Let us give up saying that word as if it contained a slur. If you want to win in a party election, I take it for granted that you want to lure the majority to your side. I never heard of any man in his senses who was fishing for a minority.” As a candidate, Khan was pro-everything: gay marriage, unions, business, the poor, the rich. He even ticked off his Labour party and leader for anti-Semitic leanings and refusing to sing the national anthem. Khan’s manifesto is, “I want all Londoners to have the same opportunities that our city gave me: a home they can afford, a high-skilled job with decent pay, an affordable and modern transport system and a safe, clean and healthy environment.” Khan’s strongest message was that he is the son of an immigrant who moved to London in search of a better life. In a speech to the Union of Jewish Students he said, “My dad worked as a bus driver and my mum sewing clothes. And that work ethic that was necessary for them to pull themselves out of poverty leaves a deep impression for generations. It is something British Muslims and British Jews share. I am amazed at some of the stories I’ve heard from people like Parry Mitchell, Michael Levy and Gerald Ronson who I’ve had the pleasure to befriend. People who in a single lifetime have pulled themselves out of absolute and total poverty — literally living in slums in East London — to becoming so incredibly successful.” This powerful message gave credence to the idea that Londoners lived in a meritocracy, an idea that no matter what your colour, creed or background you can rise to the top with enough hard work and determination. On the other hand, Trump with no political experience defeated a strong Republican field of candidates. Trump fed of deep ill will of grassroots voters towards establishment elites. All the while his supporters saw a truth-talking problem-solver unlike traditional politicians who have let them down. They saw Trump as genuine and honest, one of the few politicians who does not lie to them, even if his comments are not fully true. Trump resonated with many conservative voters who are looking for someone to trust over the mainstream politicians and media. Trump realised early on that he could not win as the traditional nominee of the Republican Party. His best chance to win the Republican nomination lay in positioning himself as an outside reformer against the establishment of both parties in Washington. And what seemed a bumbling, disorderly campaign Trump was, for the most part, a focused and deliberate candidate. “It is a beautiful thing to watch, and a beautiful thing to behold,” Trump said during a victory speech. Trump also used his variation of a much-trumpeted global political slogan, “We are going to make America great again.” Reminiscent of past populist campaigns, Trump used scapegoats to advance and consolidate his candidacy. He attacked a regular cast of villains including undocumented Mexican immigrants, Muslims, Democratic front-runner Hillary Clinton, his Republican rivals and media. Despite predictions that such a searing, divisive campaign was destined for defeat, Trump beat the odds by tapping the prevailing anti-establishment mood in the US. Trump was portrayed as a dangerous demagogue who has little understanding of the problems facing the US and the world and how to solve them, and who based his campaign on appeals to the worst instincts of people, such as xenophobia, anger and resentment. Clearly this did not prevent him from winning. Trump’s candidacy has roused the Republican Party, bringing in voters — especially in regions like the Rust Belt — that might not otherwise be attracted to the party’s message. The Rust Belt is a term for the region straddling the upper North-eastern United States, the Great Lakes, and the Midwest States, referring to economic decline, population loss, and urban decay due to the shrinking of its once powerful industrial sector. It appears that even established democratic systems would continue to challenge the electorate by throwing up stark choices before them. Ultimately, it is the people who must decide whether to choose hope and unity or fear and division. To paraphrase the renowned Latin American intellectual José Martí “The first duty of people is to think for themselves.” The writer can be reached at shgcci@gmail.com