By John Q. Hosedrinker 
Donald Trump’s victory, while surprising in its scale, can’t be explained by simplistic narratives of an apathetic electorate or the Democratic Party’s supposed shift towards progressivism. Instead, his win hinges on a unique combination of factors. Firstly, voters, despite disliking Trump personally, perceived him as a more competent economic leader due to the perceived loss of the Covid-era welfare state, even though objectively, Biden’s policies improved economic conditions for many. Secondly, the erosion of working-class institutions and the rise of individualism have left many voters prioritizing their own economic self-interest over collective well-being. This has created a climate where people are willing to vote for someone they know will harm others, hoping for personal gain. The key to combating this trend is rebuilding working-class institutions, fostering solidarity, and reminding people of the power of collective action for the greater good.
Read the original article here
The victory of Donald Trump in the 2016 presidential election continues to be a source of bewilderment and analysis. While many explanations have been put forward, none truly hold up to scrutiny. The most common explanation, inflation, falls apart when you consider that inflation had already begun to decrease by the time of the election. It was not the overall economic picture, but specific price increases – gas and groceries, for example – that resonated with voters. The immediate impact of these rising costs was felt much more acutely than abstract economic indicators.
Another explanation focuses on the Covid-era welfare state and its abrupt withdrawal. The massive expansion of the social safety net during the pandemic, followed by its rapid rollback, represented a significant shift in American policy. While many found comfort in the initial support, its subsequent withdrawal left people feeling vulnerable and uncertain. The sense of instability and anxiety created by this policy shift could have contributed to the shift in sentiment towards Trump.
Yet, beyond economic anxieties, there exists a deeper cultural and social context. The erosion of working-class institutions, accelerated by the internet’s influence and the isolation of the pandemic, has led to a decline in social solidarity and an increase in individualistic thinking. This trend has fostered a sense of disillusionment and a lack of faith in traditional institutions.
The “get one over on someone else” mentality, championed by Trump, appeals to this sense of alienation and fosters a belief that individual success can only be achieved at the expense of others. This, in turn, creates an environment where voters may choose to support someone they know will cause harm, if they believe it will personally benefit them.
The political climate is not unique to America, however. Across the globe, incumbent leaders have faced similar challenges, losing voter support amid rising costs of living and global inflation. The perception that those in power are not adequately addressing these concerns has resulted in widespread discontent.
However, the American situation is uniquely complex. It seems the country is divided into two distinct realities. One reality holds that Trump’s victory was the result of a well-orchestrated plan, involving voter manipulation and a deliberate push towards fascism. The other reality focuses on the lack of voter engagement and a widespread lack of awareness about the true nature of Trump’s policies and their potential consequences.
Regardless of which reality prevails, the outcome is the same: a significant portion of the American electorate has demonstrated a willingness to embrace a candidate who espouses divisive and harmful rhetoric. This suggests a deep-seated level of distrust towards traditional institutions and a willingness to accept drastic measures, even if they threaten the fabric of society.
The path forward remains unclear. What is clear is that the conventional explanations for Trump’s victory fail to capture the complexities of the situation. The underlying factors are deeply interwoven and require a nuanced understanding of social, economic, and political forces. Addressing these underlying issues is critical to restoring stability and ensuring a future where democratic ideals can thrive.