The mass shooting in Orlando, Florida on June 12 broke several tragic records. It was the deadliest attack by a single gunman in US history, and the deadliest terrorist attack on US soil since the September 11 attacks. The gunshots not only killed 49 people and injured dozens more, but also fanned new flames of antagonism within US society over gun control, immigration policy, anti-terrorism and a battery of other social problems, which have also intensified the already heated US election.

US society has been plagued by the excessive private gun ownership and the gun-caused violence for decades since the Second Amendment legalized the individual right to keep and bear arms. Now, gun control has become a focal point of the debate between Republicans and Democrats in the election season. Their stands are irreconcilable. Hampered by heavy intervention by groups like the National Rifle Association, the debate on gun control might be endless. Even if the Democratic party wins the election and continues to advance gun control, the malady can hardly be eradicated in the foreseeable future.

If Hillary Clinton is elected, Democrats will keep up the reform on immigration, trying to address minorities' long-standing problems in terms of education, medical care, employment and social welfare. But a feeling that they are not getting their "fair" share is also a powerful drive among the white underclass, which have turned to Donald Trump in response. Thus, it won't be easy for a Democratic government to cut the cake into pieces and impartially distribute them to each group.

If Trump takes office, although his radical proposals to build a wall along US-Mexico borders, deny Muslims' access to US and get rid of 11.5 million undocumented immigrants are unlikely to be realized, they will continue stirring up the conflicts between different racial and ethnic groups.

The growing fear of "lone wolf" attacks and mass shootings has something to do with the infiltration of extremism and terrorism into the US, which is a repercussion of Obama's ineffective approach to the Middle East. As his second term comes to an end, the Obama government has started to readjust its Middle East policy and even has deployed a small number of ground troops. No matter who wins the election, Washington should keep up the readjustment and moderately enhance power projection into this region in order to effectively contain the spread of radical groups and ideologies.

In the short term, the Orlando mass shooting will greatly aggravate Americans' anxiety toward the long struggle against terror, disturb their belief in the country's capability of defending national security, and flare up xenophobia and Islamophobia. The security anxiety is ripping US society, breeding distrust toward the US government because of its inaction over gun control. Trump's tough stand on immigration, Islam and national security might acquire increasing support from voters, although the polls do not yet reflect this.

The mass shooting in Orlando will probably prompt the voters to make a choice. For example, Democratic voters will show stronger support to Clinton as gun control becomes a more urgent demand, and the Republican voters will give more backing to Trump because many of them are more inclined to oppose new immigrants. In this circumstance, swing voters will choose their preferred candidate sooner than before.

At present, 53 percent of swing voters are in favor of tight gun control, so the mass shooting will probably prompt these people to vote for the Democrats. Besides, a large portion of swing voters have shown an increasing aversion to Trump for his instigation of racial hate and xenophobia.

In this election between the most senior representative of the establishment and the rising figure of the anti-establishment, Clinton's biggest advantage - experience - might be her biggest disadvantage. But if Clinton can make use of her experience and propose down-to-earth policies to alleviate people's concerns, she will contain Trump.

What the US society and people need is policymakers who can put the mechanisms of problem-solving back on track. Trump or Clinton, as presidential candidates, they shouldn't use the tragedy to denounce each other or instigate people's anger. They should respond to people's demands and focus on how to solve problems.

The author is a researcher at the Institute of American Studies, Chinese Academy of Social Sciences. opinion@globaltimes.com.cn Follow us on Twitter @GTopinion