The 47th Presidential Election: A Resounding Victory for Trump
It has been a week since voters made their choice for the 47th President of the United States. As the dust settles and the initial euphoria and disappointment fade, it’s time to look back at what transpired during this race, why it played out the way it did, and where both parties might be headed from here. This election was not just about personalities and political platforms—it was a referendum on the state of America, its future, and the priorities of its citizens.
Donald Trump’s victory was decisive. He not only captured the electoral college by a margin of 312 to 226 but also secured the national popular vote, a feat that many thought seemed near impossible after his previous loss in 2020. Republicans also retained the House and gained control of the Senate, signaling a massive shift to the right across the country. Trump’s win can’t be seen in isolation; it is the result of broader societal shifts that are reflected in the electoral map below, where Republican-leaning trends emerged in every state, signaling a broader realignment.
Kamala Harris, who was anointed the Democratic nominee after President Biden’s abrupt departure following his disastrous debate, faced a campaign riddled with problems. From the outset, her path was fraught with challenges. Inheriting a disastrous political climate—one where 73% of Americans felt the country was on the wrong track—Harris’s campaign failed to carve out a clear identity or message that resonated with voters.
As a candidate, she underperformed across nearly all demographics compared to Biden’s 2020 numbers. Exit polls revealed that Harris garnered 8% less support from Black voters and 7% less from Latino voters, which were core parts of Biden’s coalition. Even more surprising to me, young voters aged 18–29, who overwhelmingly supported Biden in 2020, swung to Trump by a margin of 10%.
Exit polls also highlighted two significant concerns that were top of mind for voters: 30% prioritized a candidate’s ability to lead, while 27% were most concerned about the need for change. In both of these categories, Trump held commanding leads with 65% and 73% support, respectively.
What Killed Kamala
The Status Quo Candidate
One of the primary reasons Harris lost lies in her failure to position herself as the change candidate. While Americans were desperate for new leadership and fresh ideas, Harris struggled to distance herself from the administration she had served in.
In a campaign season marked by a strong desire for change, Harris had one job: to present herself as the antithesis of the Biden-Harris administration. But she failed spectacularly. In one of her most memorable—and damning—interviews on The View, she was asked if she would govern differently than Biden. Her response, “I wouldn’t do anything differently. I’ve been involved in all the decisions,” was a massive misstep. This answer essentially confirmed to voters that nothing would change under her leadership, solidifying the perception that she was simply a continuation of the status quo.
Her failure to distinguish herself from Biden gave Trump the perfect opening to claim the coveted “change candidate” status. Trump’s aggressive attacks on the establishment, combined with his positioning as an outsider challenging the political elite, resonated deeply with voters who were tired of the status quo. Harris’s reluctance to critique Biden’s administration, coupled with her lack of a clear, distinct message, allowed Trump to build momentum where Harris couldn’t.
The VP Choice
Another critical misstep came with Harris’s selection of Tim Walz as her running mate. This decision was a missed opportunity to strengthen her ticket. Walz, who struggled in the VP debate and even referred to himself as a “bonehead,” failed to make a compelling case for the Democratic Party’s future. His performance became a talking point for GOP strategists who seized on his self-deprecation to frame the ticket as weak. In contrast, Republican VP candidate JD Vance delivered a confident performance that bolstered the GOP’s unified front.
The choice of Walz also reinforced the perception that Harris and her campaign were out of touch with what voters wanted. While a more popular figure with crossover appeal—such as Pennsylvania Governor Josh Shapiro—could have helped mitigate some of Harris’s weaknesses, particularly in a key swing state, Walz’s selection failed to inspire.
Broader Democratic Party Challenges
Harris’s campaign didn’t just suffer from internal missteps; it was also undermined by broader issues within the Democratic Party. As the race unfolded, it became clear that the party had become disconnected from the people it once championed. A trend that has been playing out for well over a decade.
While the Democratic campaign and much of the media celebrated economic growth and touted improvements in job creation, many Americans, especially in working-class communities, felt alienated by this narrative. Rising costs of living and stagnant wages contrasted sharply with the Democrats’ celebration of a booming economy. The party’s obsession with social issues, rather than addressing economic concerns, further fueled the divide between urban elites and rural voters. For many, the Democrats’ narrative about economic recovery seemed disconnected from the daily struggles of everyday citizens.
This disconnection only worsened when policies that prioritized immigrant welfare over the needs of citizens became a central issue. The perception that the Biden-Harris administration was more focused on immigrants than on the economic needs of American citizens alienated a large swath of voters. As Trump and the GOP capitalized on this sentiment, the Democrats found themselves increasingly vulnerable to accusations of neglecting working-class Americans in favor of “luxury beliefs” and elite-focused agendas.
The fracture within the Democratic Party was evident in its inability to unify its traditional coalition. Policies focused on social justice often took precedence over issues that resonated with working-class voters. Furthermore, the party’s alienation of non-college-educated white voters, who increasingly felt sidelined in favor of more progressive priorities, marked a significant misstep. As the race progressed, it became clear that the Democratic Party needed to reassess its approach and find ways to better connect with a broader, more inclusive electorate.
The Donald Difference
Trump’s victory wasn’t just the result of a failure on Harris’s part—it was also a testament to his ability to leverage evolving media, engage a broad coalition of voters, and position himself as the outsider. The Trump campaign tapped into a deep-seated sense of populism and frustration with the political establishment.
New Media Engagement
One of Trump’s key advantages was his ability to engage with voters outside traditional media channels. While his rallies remained popular with his base, they didn’t have the same appeal among independents and moderate voters. In response, Trump’s campaign pivoted to a more modern media strategy, engaging in extended interviews on popular podcasts that catered to younger, independent voters. Appearances on shows like Lex Fridman, Theo Von, Flagrant, Shawn Ryan, and Joe Rogan allowed Trump to connect with audiences in a more relaxed, personal setting. This unfiltered format helped humanize Trump, showing a different side of him that contrasted with the often combative tone of his rallies and the mainstream media’s representation of him.
Trump’s interview on The Joe Rogan Experience, in particular, became a game-changer. Rogan, with his massive and diverse audience, offered Trump the opportunity to reach politically unaffiliated listeners who were tired of the traditional political discourse. The endorsement that followed from Rogan further solidified Trump’s appeal among independents, amplifying his populist message in a way that traditional campaign ads could not.
Strengthening the GOP Coalition
Another significant factor in Trump’s success was his ability to strengthen the GOP coalition. Initially, there was skepticism surrounding JD Vance’s selection as Trump’s VP, but Vance proved to be an asset. His strong performance in the VP debate and on the campaign trail helped reframe the GOP’s image. Vance’s populist rhetoric, coupled with his anti-establishment stance, resonated with voters who felt abandoned by traditional political elites.
Additionally, the Trump campaign successfully built a coalition that included not only conservatives but also anti-establishment figures from across the political spectrum. People like Tulsi Gabbard, Vivek Ramaswamy, RFK Jr., and Elon Musk rallied around Trump’s message of resistance to the political elite. This cross-ideological coalition was crucial in expanding Trump’s base, drawing in disillusioned voters from all walks of life.
Top Moments of the Race
The Assassination Attempt
The most shocking moment of the campaign was undoubtedly the assassination attempt on Trump. The incident sent shockwaves through the political landscape, underscoring the stakes of this election. For Trump’s supporters, the attempt further solidified his image as a leader willing to fight for what he believes in, no matter the cost. Trump’s swift return to the campaign trail following the incident served to reinforce his narrative as a resilient figure undeterred by personal threats.
The JRE week
Among the most memorable moments of the race was what I refer to as “the JRE Week” when Donald Trump, JD Vance, and Elon Musk all appeared on The Joe Rogan Experience within days of each other. This was not just a pivotal media event—it marked a historic shift in how political candidates engage with voters. Traditional campaign strategies were upended as Trump, Vance, and Musk leveraged the influence of one of the most widely listened-to podcasts in America to connect directly with voters. This set the stage for a new era of media and political engagement, where the line between entertainment and politics is increasingly blurred.
Trump’s appearance on JRE was a defining moment. The format of the show allowed him to speak candidly, without the usual filters of mainstream media, and present his vision for the country, with a few weaves, in a way that resonated with listeners who were tired of conventional politics. His discussions ranged from policy to personal anecdotes, giving the audience a more intimate understanding of the man behind the campaign.
This week also saw significant interviews with JD Vance, whose rise in the GOP mirrored broader shifts in American conservatism, and Elon Musk, whose ventures have made him one of the most influential figures in the world. Musk’s endorsement of Trump, along with his commentary on the state of America, became a powerful rallying cry for Republicans. It was a week that brought together major figures in the conservative movement.
The combination of these interviews, Trump’s bold remarks, and the broader media spectacle surrounding them signaled that this election was not just a typical contest. The old rules of campaigning were being rewritten, and the role of digital media and podcasts had become central to shaping the race.
Obama and Biden
The controversy surrounding Barack Obama and Joe Biden’s remarks about voter behavior also loomed large in the campaign. At multiple points, Obama and Biden made dismissive statements about voters who were leaning toward Trump, characterizing them as uninformed or swayed by misinformation. These comments backfired, as many Americans saw them as elitist and out of touch with the concerns of everyday voters.
Obama’s public criticism, and the sentiment that voters who support Trump don’t really know what they’re voting for, only served to widen the divide between the Democratic establishment and working-class Americans. For many voters, this came across as dismissive and arrogant, further alienating those who were already disillusioned with the establishment.
Biden’s own remarks about voters who choose to support Trump being “garbage” drew widespread criticism, as Hillary’s “deplorables” did before him. The party’s failure to reach out to these groups effectively during the campaign, combined with the overall dissatisfaction with Biden’s presidency, eroded Democratic support.
Trump, by contrast, was able to successfully frame himself as the champion of diverse communities, particularly through targeted outreach to Latino and Black voters. His rhetoric, which emphasized economic opportunity and empowerment, resonated with many in these groups who felt ignored by the Democrats.
The Debates
The debates were pivotal moments in the race, giving voters a chance to compare the candidates’ leadership styles and priorities. Trump’s performance was one of the weaker points in his campaign, as his usual unrestrained style alienated moderates and independents. His tendency to take the bait and go down rabbit holes, like his defensive remarks about rally crowd sizes, and accusation of pet-eating illegal immigrants detracted from the more substantive policy discussions. Not only was the latter considered absurd on its face, but it was also a missed opportunity to talk about the real issues relating to the flood of illegal immigrants into the country, a top issue for voters.
Harris, on the other hand, delivered a well-prepared performance, skillfully laying traps for Trump and presenting herself as steady and capable. However, her inability to distance herself from Biden and have substantive policy discussions undermined her appeal, especially to voters seeking change.
During the Vice-Presidential Debate, JD Vance’s strong performance contrasted sharply with Tim Walz’s faltering presentation, highlighting the GOP’s leadership potential beyond Trump. Walz’s lackluster and “bone-headed” performance reinforced the perception of a unified GOP, while Walz seemed like a deer in headlights.
Ultimately, the debates showcased the tickets’ strengths and weaknesses. Trump’s combative style energized his base but alienated moderates, while Harris appeared composed but struggled to articulate her policy platform. Vance’s performance pointed to the GOP’s promising future, reinforcing the party’s prospects in the years to come.
The Republican Party: A Bright Future?
With their victory in the 2024 election, the GOP stands at a critical juncture. Trump’s win not only solidified his status as the undisputed leader of the party but also cemented a shift toward a more populist, anti-establishment direction. The Republican Party now has the opportunity to continue evolving, combining traditional conservative principles with the new wave of populist energy that has become central to its identity.
The key to the party’s future lies in its ability to maintain this balance—leveraging its grassroots momentum while continuing to incorporate fresh, diverse voices. Figures like JD Vance, Vivek Ramaswamy, and Tulsi Gabbard represent a new breed of Republicans who challenge the traditional political orthodoxy, especially on economic issues, trade, and national security. These leaders will likely play a significant role in defining the GOP’s policies in the years to come.
The future of the GOP will also be increasingly shaped by its ability to dominate emerging media platforms. With younger voters turning to podcasts and social media as their primary sources of information, the Republican Party has an opportunity to bypass traditional media and communicate directly with voters. Trump’s success in reaching these platforms will serve as a model for future candidates across the aisle, demonstrating that engagement on alternative media is not just effective, but essential.
This shift towards populism, however, comes with potential challenges. The GOP risks further alienating its traditional establishment figures as it leans more heavily into populist rhetoric. The fracture between the party’s establishment and its new populist wing could continue to grow, but it also presents an opportunity for the GOP to redefine itself. Whether the party will be able to bridge these divides and maintain unity while adapting to an evolving political environment will be key to its long-term success.
Ultimately, the GOP is poised for continued relevance and growth. But whether it can continue to innovate, build diverse coalitions, and adapt to the challenges of the 21st century will determine its future trajectory.
The Democratic Party: Learning the Right Lessons?
For the Democratic Party, the 2024 election signals a period of reckoning. While Kamala Harris’s loss and the party’s overall underperformance have raised serious questions, this moment could also be an opportunity for introspection and a reimagining of its future. In the aftermath of the loss, the Democratic Party will have to grapple with its identity and ability to connect with a broader, more diverse electorate.
To remain competitive, the Democrats must recalibrate their message. The focus on identity politics, social justice, and elite-oriented rhetoric has alienated key voter groups, particularly in rural areas and among working-class Americans. The party will need to find a way to reconnect with these voters, who feel increasingly marginalized by a Democratic agenda that often prioritizes urban elites over everyday concerns. Crafting a message that speaks to both its progressive base and moderate voters will be essential for Democrats if they want to remain relevant in upcoming elections.
Beyond these strategic shifts, the next phase of the Democratic Party will require a new generation of leaders who can bridge divides and present a more unified vision for the future. Figures like Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez and other progressive voices will continue to push the party further left, while moderates will likely seek to pull it back toward the center. Striking the right balance between these competing forces will be crucial as the party seeks to regain its footing.
The younger generation of Democrats is particularly interested in taking the party in a more economically populist direction, one that addresses real economic inequalities rather than focusing solely on social issues. In many ways, this shift mirrors the rising populist wave in the GOP, and Democrats will have to decide whether they will embrace this change or risk being left behind.
Despite her defeat, the Democratic leadership will likely retain its control within the party. How they navigate their role moving forward—whether by embracing more populist rhetoric or continuing to represent the establishment wing of the party—will be telling of the Democratic Party’s future direction.
However, for the Democrats to regain their footing, they must evolve. The future of the party depends on its ability to listen to the demands of both its base and the broader electorate, forging a new path forward that balances social progress with economic solutions. The party has time to recalibrate, but it will need to take a long hard look in the mirror to learn the right lessons, instead of casting blame externally, which has not been in their character.