In light of Donald Trump’s second election to the presidency, many observers, especially those in the luxury-belief class, are bewildered. Branding Trump and his supporters as everything from “fascist” to “deplorable” to “racist” to “garbage” did little to sway public opinion or the electorate’s support.
Though preelection polls suggested a tight race, the former president has achieved a clear-cut victory and is now on track to win not only the Electoral College, which he has secured, but also the national popular vote. This is the best showing for a Republican presidential candidate since George W. Bush in 2004.
Trump lost the popular vote by about 3 million votes in 2016 and 7 million in 2020. Though votes are still getting tallied in California and elsewhere, he’s projected to win the popular vote this time by several million votes. As the Free Press pointed out, not a single state saw Harris outperform Biden’s 2020 tally by 3 percent or more.
If Barack Obama’s first win in 2008 was the Facebook election and Trump’s first win in 2016 was the Twitter election, then 2024 is the Podcast election. Podcasts and independent media have made it possible for political ideas to circulate instantly and unfiltered by the legacy media or other gatekeepers.
The online and offline worlds converged to influence politics in ways we have never seen. The Republican campaign leaned into this new era. At age 40, J. D. Vance will be the third-youngest vice president in U.S. history and is the first millennial on a major political party ticket. Vance used his platform on The Joe Rogan Experience and other popular podcasts to communicate complex ideas in simple, relatable terms. He is also active on X and seems aware of online vernacular in right-leaning spaces.
In his recent interview with Rogan, Vance stated, “The entire modern Democrat party grew up in an era where there was consensus. They grew up in a high social trust era. A lot of them are trying to reimpose that social trust from the top, not recognizing that social trust came organically from the way American society worked. If you have people trying to reimpose it from the top, it degrades the very thing you’re trying to create.”
Interestingly, a candidate like Trump, who has repeatedly accused the system of being “corrupt” and “rigged,” could only win an election in a low-trust society. If voters believed that their society was obviously functional and fair, such accusations wouldn’t resonate with them. As of 2024, public trust in the U.S. government stands near historic lows. Vance’s words resonated with a generation accustomed to questioning authority. He showed them a party willing to challenge the status quo.
The results of the 2024 election suggest a remarkable shift in the traditional base of support for both parties. Trump not only retained his core voters but also significantly increased his appeal among nonwhite men, a demographic that Republicans have long struggled to reach.
Early exit polls estimate that he won 46 percent of Latino men and 24 percent of black men. These groups, historically Democratic, are signaling a change in attitude. Perhaps Democrats’ endless hectoring about “toxic masculinity” alienated some members of their most reliable voting blocs. A recent Pew survey found that nearly half of black Democratic men and 39 percent of Hispanic Democratic men identify as “highly masculine.” They evidently see nothing shameful about that identity, no matter how the political Left frames it. These shares are much larger than the 22 percent of white Democratic men who rate themselves as highly masculine. Perhaps the relentless cries of “toxic masculinity” are most effective against this particular group.
Many believed that the abortion issue would sink the Republicans, but it doesn’t look like Harris performed any better with women than Biden did. Others suggested that immigration would hurt the Republicans among Hispanics, but Trump will likely receive a higher share of the Hispanic vote than he did in 2016 or 2020.
Meantime, mainstream media outlets have largely missed the mark in understanding this political realignment. To listen to many elite news outlets, one would think that most of America is horrified by Trump and his policies. A journalist from Germany’s prestigious Süddeutsche Zeitung newspaper remarked last week, “In a few days, the Americans might elect a criminal to be their president.” Pundits from elite outlets abroad and at home dwell on Trump’s numerous flaws. Trump’s campaign, however, focused on the perceptual gap between these media outlets and everyday Americans. The media seem oblivious as to why their rhetoric fails to connect.
As one might expect, this contrast in views is not without consequence. Large segments of the country no longer believe that the legacy media understands or represents them. If these institutions wish to regain credibility, they might consider hiring more journalists who seek to understand American life as it is, rather than viewing it merely as an ideological battlefield.
As Trump prepares to take office once more, the question that Democrats face is not just about political strategy; it’s about cultural understanding. Labeling Trump a fascist, a racist, and a sexist failed to diminish his support enough to cost him the election. His critics exhausted every label in the book. It didn’t work.
Maybe it’s time that our media and elites learn what people actually care about, rather than coercing them into mouthing slogans (left-wing activists tell us that “silence is violence”) or silencing them (left-wing activists also tell us that “speech is violence”).
Luxury beliefs sound appealing in theory—safe in the bubble of academia or in affluent neighborhoods—but they fail to address the daily struggles of working-class families, small-business owners, and communities concerned about safety, jobs, and education. As I wrote in my book Troubled, “ordinary people have real problems to worry about.” And further:
Perhaps most voters like public safety and law and order.
Perhaps voters like border security.
Perhaps voters believe in competitive college admissions and in hiring on the basis of merit rather than racialist DEI principles.
Perhaps voters believe that the education establishment’s abandonment of standardized testing was misguided.
Perhaps voters don’t believe America is a structurally racist, white supremacist society.
Perhaps voters don’t believe patriotism is a bad word, and don’t see U.S. history as a bleak landscape filled with racism, sexism, and oppression.
Perhaps voters don’t believe that sex is “assigned at birth” and can be changed by coercing those around you into using different language.
Perhaps voters don’t think it’s a great idea to police people’s language for “microaggressions” and bias against the “marginalized.”
Perhaps voters don’t want to “disrupt the Western-prescribed nuclear family structure.”
Perhaps voters don’t see murderous terrorists like Hamas as righteous liberators.
In other words, perhaps it’s time to listen to what voters are actually concerned about, rather than demanding their adherence to luxury beliefs.
Respect for the views of others, however unfashionable or uncredentialed they seem, just might be the key to rebuilding trust between the elites who govern and manage our institutions and the people they’re meant to serve.
Photo by ELIJAH NOUVELAGE/AFP via Getty Images