By Peace Olanrewaju
In a historic victory, Republican nominee and former President Donald Trump secured 50.9% of the popular votes and garnered 295 electoral college votes, surpassing Vice President and Democratic candidate Kamala Harris, who got 47.6% of the popular votes and amassed 226 electoral college votes, to become the 47th president of the United States (U.S.), according to AP News.
The newly elected president is the first Republican candidate to secure the popular vote in the U.S. presidential elections in two decades since George W. Bush in 2004, and the second candidate in history to win non-consecutive terms, joining the ranks of Grover Cleveland from the 1890s. He has managed to rally so much support despite his reluctance to concede power in 2020, the January 6 protests at the U.S. Capitol, criminal conviction, numerous legal charges, and two impeachment attempts.
In the months leading to the election, both candidates tried to woo undecided voters across America. Trump made significant strides across nearly every demographic group: 45 per cent of Latinos supported him—a historic high for a Republican presidential candidate; 13 per cent of African Americans voted for him, up from eight per cent in 2020; 39 per cent of Asians backed him; 46 per cent of women voted for him; and 46 per cent of young voters chose him, according to The Free Press. Kamala, however, saw gains primarily among white college-educated women and voters older than 65.
While the factors contributing to Trump’s victory and Harris’ defeat may be evident to some, there is ongoing discussion among political analysts about the key drivers behind the electoral outcome. Some analysts have blamed the VP’s loss on sexism, misogyny, and racism. In an interview on MSNBC, civil rights activist Reverend Al Sharpton said, “among Hispanic men and Black men, there is a lot of misogyny, and I think that we’ve got to deal with the reality that he appealed to the false macho thing that some black men and some Latino men went for.”
But is it factual to sum up the reasons for this electoral outcome in sexism and racism? There are some reasons why Trump’s campaign resonated with more voters.
First, Kamala Harris was not very clear about her economic policies. The economy was foremost on the minds of many voters, who hoped she would provide solutions that could actually “turn the page” on her administration with President Joe Biden. Over the first 45 months of Biden’s presidency, inflation surged by 20.1%, whereas it was just 7.1% during Trump’s first term. This reflects an annual inflation rate of 5.4% under Biden, compared to 1.9% under Trump.
While she promised what she called an “opportunity economy,” involving the assistance of first-time homebuyers, giving of tax credit to parents of newborns, and bans on price gouging, she seemed reluctant to detach herself from Biden’s economic performance and track record. For instance, in a sit-down interview with ABC’s The View, co-host Sunny Hostin asked Harris to share how her administration would differ from Biden’s. She replied, “There is not a thing that comes to mind.”
Her decision to project loyalty to Biden over intimating her base with her policies cost her a lot of support from voters who hoped for something different. The Republican campaign latched on to this obvious flaw, fostering the view that she had nothing new to bring to the table. When asked similar questions in other interviews, she replied with vague answers, stating that Americans had aspirations and dreams or that she grew up in a middle class family. Voters soon grew weary of these repeated statements as they itched to hear substantial and convincing plans regarding the economy.
Without an outstanding track record to flaunt as proof of competence, Harris soon resorted to taking a swipe at Trump. Voters had very little time to get to know her, and her campaign was more focused on being anti-Trump than promoting her policies. That backfired. Trump’s campaign, however, highlighted its economic policies as an alternative to the economic conditions that persisted during the Biden-Harris administration. He stated that he would reduce taxes, place heavy tariffs on imports, cut red tape, and curb migration. Harris’ plans were easily met with questions of why she had not executed them in her current tenure.
Secondly, the current administration’s performance on immigration hindered Kamala’s chances of winning. For a long time, Republicans have referred to Harris as President Joe Biden’s “border czar,” who failed to fix the border crisis. Though Vox states that she was not in charge of the border as it was the responsibility of Alejandro Mayorkas, the secretary of homeland security, and Xavier Becerra, the secretary of health and human services, many voters have found the southern border crisis and migrant surges during the current administration problematic.
Trump campaigned on this weakness and exploited it to his advantage. He made illegal immigration one of the top issues his administration would address. As TIME stated, “Donald Trump and the GOP have sought to appeal to some Americans’ worst fears, scapegoating immigrants for every problem facing the nation.” This messaging resonated with many voters who wanted a decisive stance on the issue from the presidential candidates and a reduction in illegal border crossings.
Thirdly, the candidacy of Trump resonated with male voters of all races, who have increasingly felt alienated. Trump’s support among Latino men rose from 36% in 2020 to 44% in 2024. He also won 20% of male black voters against Harris. In Pennsylvania, 24% of black men supported Trump, double the amount who supported him in 2020. Men aged 18-29 shifted to the Republican aisle by 30 points. While some have credited this to the fact that many Latino men are greatly affected by the inflation because they work low-paying and hard-labour jobs, some hinged their choice on the fact that men see the Republican party as a team that respects male ambition and contribution to civilisation.
Though the joke made by comedian Tony Hinchcliffe at Trump’s rally, where he described Puerto Rico as a “floating island of garbage,” did little to dissuade voters from supporting Trump, former President Obama’s callout to black men to vote for Kamala evoked a lot of backlash from black men, who felt shamed and disrespected for being singled out and told whom to support.
Also, Trump’s campaign strategy included engaging with a broader range of media platforms, which may have resonated with some male voters. For instance, he did a three-hour in-studio interview with Joe Rogan, host of one of the top ten podcasts in the world, that garnered over 40 million views on YouTube and was well-received by swing voters. Kamala’s team accepted the interview only on the condition that it would be an hour-long and be done in New York. The interview never happened.
Fourthly, Trump’s foreign policy positions appeared to find support among some voters who prioritised reduced international involvement and a more assertive global stance. During his race to the White House, Trump spoke a lot about how Iran was contained, incapacitated, and starved of cash when he was president. He also claimed that he would end the Russia-Ukraine war and restore calm to the Middle East within 24 hours of his reelection. There are also many who disapprove of the radical left’s coddling of pro-Palestinian protests on college campuses.
Lastly, there were some events that tipped the scales in Trump’s favour. For instance, the incumbent president Joe Biden’s reference to Trump supporters as “garbage” pissed off his (Trump’s) base. The presidential candidate milked it by wearing a garbage worker vest to his rally and taking questions from a garbage truck. Also, some voters perceived Harris’ response to anti-abortion protesters at her rally as offensive, and this might have cost her some Christian votes.
In the aftermath of the polls, Harris conceded the election in a speech at her alma mater, Howard University. The world now waits to see how Trump’s second term in office will pan out. Will inflation nosedive like he promised? Will the ongoing wars end? How will America treat its allies under his administration? What effect will his policies have on illegal and legal immigration?
Nevertheless, one thing is certain: this election calls for a great deal of introspection from future candidates. American voters have evolved, and choosing to ignore the economic concerns and other key issues affecting the electorate is quite dangerous. As the nation moves forward, the lessons learnt from this election will undoubtedly influence future political strategies and campaigns.
