The prospect of a brighter future for many Americans was lost on November 5th as the result of the US election came in. Donald Trump conquered states such as Pennsylvania and Wisconsin to secure a majority, but behind the colour of the states lies a more complex story as to why the Democratic Party lost the 2024 US election.
At the forefront of concerns among the electorate in this election was the economy. Neglecting this issue was the fatal flaw of the Kamala Harris campaign. 81% of voters viewed the economy as very important in their decision and understandably so; inflation under Biden had been rampant and impacted many working families across the country.
Instead of disassociating from the economic legacy formed by her predecessor as the Democratic nominee, Harris doubled down on her policies, offering no major alternative. Arguably, her legacy as a Vice-President was highly damaging to her campaign. This gave Trump a way in, visiting working-class mining communities in the battleground state of Pennsylvania promising a return to prosperity.
Of course, it is unlikely Trump will fulfil these promises as he didn’t from 2016-2020. Tax reliefs for the rich will be the focus of his economic policy, with Elon Musk already gaining $26.5 billion in capital and Jeff Bezos $7 billion mere days after the election. However, false promises from the populist candidate overpowered the feeble attachments the Democrats attempted to make with voters who are heavily impacted by the economy.
Harris’s major economic policy regarded housing. It promised to unlock over 1.2 million homes for first-time buyers. Although important, this issue only allowed gains in voters in inner city areas (which already skew Blue) where rent controls are poor. Red state citizens were not swayed, as home ownership is much more accessible for them.
Both candidates were arguably equally inept at offering a positive direction for the US economy. The performative McDonald’s visits with Trump at the drive through window and Harris recalling her days as a student working part time at the fast-food institution symbolise something larger. American politicians are clutching at any chance to show that they can still resonate with the experiences of everyday people. Nevertheless, Trump did this much more successfully.
Foreign Policy played a similar role in damaging the Democrats’ campaign, resulting in them snatching defeat from the jaws of victory. Biden and Harris’s response to the Israel’s illegal invasion and occupation of Gaza only displayed complicity in the eyes of the electorate. This subject of foreign policy had been the centre of political discourse since October 7th 2023 and has held a similar gravity in swaying voters as the 2003 invasion of Iraq.
Muslim voters in the US who are deeply affected by the conflict understandably withdrew their support for Harris, opting for alternative candidates such as the Green Party’s Jill Stein. In states such as Michigan, where there are over 241,000 Muslims, the Democrats had an uphill battle maintaining an already slim majority.
However, it was not just Muslim voters who were appalled by Harris’s decision to not come out more firmly against Netanyahu’s actions. Much of Jill Stein’s 774,000 votes were made up of disillusioned activists on the left of politics who saw no hope of a ceasefire being actualised through a vote for Harris. Therefore, the Democrats’ inability to not stand against Israel was instrumental in causing their implosion at the election.
The third factor contributing to Harris’s surprising loss was the over-prioritising of social issues in the Democrats’ campaign. Harris and Tim Walz (the VP nomination) repeatedly avowed their commitment to enshrining a woman’s right to choose in their campaign. They believed this would be praised by many Americans, as statistics show that 63% of the population supported abortion rights.
But this over-emphasis was misguided and left behind many voters who saw this issue as less important – that is, male voters. The Hispanic male vote was a very important in this election. From 2022 to 2024, the support for the Republican party among this demographic increased from 38% to over 43% which at first seems insignificant.
Yet this change was very impactful on election results in states such as Arizona and Florida, and I believe this was caused by the Democrats’ square focus on the right to an abortion. After all, many Hispanic males are Roman Catholics who are strongly against abortion.
Spotlighting this as a major policy commitment assisted Trump’s win, even though he has the statistically unpopular opinion on the argument. As it turns out, abortion rights were not as important of a policy point as the Democrats expected.
Overall, the 2024 US election was a damming display of poor campaigning on the left of politics. The Democratic party were highly ignorant to changes in electoral opinion, instead believing that the absurdity of Trump’s statements and actions would lead him to defeat. Resultingly, they fell considerably short, and now 334 million Americans face 4 years of volatility and, perhaps even, tyranny.
