Republican presidential nominee and former US President Donald Trump attends his campaign rally at Van Andel Arena in Grand Rapids, Michigan, US, November 5, 2024. [Brian Snyder/Reuters]
2024 is the first time in the history of modern democracy and universal suffrage that all incumbent parties in developed countries lost vote share. An astute observer of the two campaigns would have observed that the Harris campaign was hunkered down in Pennsylvania, while the Trump campaign expanded outreach across the country attempting to win the popular vote. It should come as no surprise that Vice President Kamala Harris and the Democrats lost this week in the second post-Covid election. And yet, the triumphalist manner with which former president Trump returned to office leaves pundits wondering what happened.
In the days before and after the election, most of the mainstream media and other insiders spun stories for example that Harris ran a “perfect campaign,” that she was the most well-prepared candidate in history, or that the Trump campaign was struggling with Hispanic voters despite ultimately winning a larger proportion of the Hispanic vote than any GOP presidential nominee. After the vote it is hard not to conclude that the liberal establishment class is systemically delusional, reflecting the need for a broader and more troubling conversation.
The Democrats claim that it is obvious that they should be in power. They claim to be the party of stability, the party of sanity, the party of competence, and yet any honest reflection on how the Democrats governed over the last years would reject those statements. And despite many warning signs, the Democrats are dismissive to the concerns of average Americans on a whole host of issues.
The claim to stability is undermined by a brief look around the world, which is in enflamed, stoked by an extreme and revisionary pro-America outlook from our elite liberal establishment. The party of sanity was shattered by a cult-like mentality towards any number of issues from Covid, to policing, to education, to immigration, and to even experimental and unproven treatments for young children. And while many Democrat operatives touted Bidenomics as the greatest economic success in the history of the country, the reality is much murkier. While nominal statistics showed a booming economy, relative to 2019 real median household income was down 0.7% and 3 million more people were in poverty. Inflation mattered to the median voter, and the Democratic Party never properly addressed those concerns. Instead of seeking an abundance economy, the Democrats seemed to prefer propping up special interests, process parasites, and rent seeking. The most analogous party to how the Democrats actually govern is that of the German Greens.
What they represent is something different, and classic terms of “communist” or “leftist” fail to explain their worldview. Prior to recent times, the most incisive opponents of corporate globalization were often on the left. But times have changed and these critiques are now often found on the right, with folks there often discussing the impact of globalization on local communities, nation-states, social cohesion etc. Trump channeled this opposition, because much of the liberal elite which dominates the Democratic Party, benefits from these forces of globalization.
And as much as he is a media personality, these issues defined his candidacy. If he ran a conventional Republican campaign, he would not have won in 2016, gotten close in 2020, or won again in 2024. In 2016 Trump moved left by saying he would protect Social Security and Medicare, and scale back US interventionism. His positions on trade and immigration were historically those of the labor movement. He also moved farther left on abortion than any GOP candidate, again showing his prowess for electioneering. Including the shift in minority voting, it does reflect a reorientation of the two parties. And this election he also for the first time had an effective surrogate in J.D. Vance as vice president.
But as strong as he is at courting voters, Trump’s first term was remarkably ineffective, with only a single tax cut as his legacy. He is now a very old man, with many personalities surrounding him who have their own agendas. It is not clear how this “team of rivals” will govern, or if they will be effective at legislating.
Alexander E. Xenopoulos is a restaurant operator and lawyer based in New York.