By Matt Underwood Trump barely won the election. Why doesn’t it feel that way? That’s a question echoing across the political landscape, and it’s one that deserves a thorough examination. The narrow margin of victory, often overshadowed by the sheer volume of noise surrounding the outcome, doesn’t fully capture the resulting political reality.
The overwhelming sense of a significant win, rather than a narrow escape, is heavily influenced by the control the Republican party now wields. They hold power across all three branches of government: the executive, legislative, and judicial. This complete dominance allows them to push through their agenda with minimal opposition, creating the perception of a much stronger mandate than the actual election results suggest.
This isn’t just about legislative power, but also about the narrative control. The right-wing media machine, encompassing social media, cable news, and even sections of the mainstream press, has effectively amplified their message, making it far louder and more pervasive than the counter-narratives. This media dominance helps shape public perception, creating a feeling of widespread support where perhaps none truly exists.
Another factor at play is the stark contrast between the close electoral result and the resounding defeats suffered by the opposing party. The complete Republican sweep across the executive, legislative and judicial branches feels like a much larger victory than a narrow win might typically suggest. It underscores the depth of the opposition’s loss, accentuating the perception of a Republican triumph.
It’s also worth considering the very nature of the candidate himself. The fact that a controversial figure, someone seen by many as deeply unfit for office, secured even a narrow win is profoundly unsettling. This reality suggests underlying flaws in the political system, the electorate, or both. The very fact of his victory itself is disturbing to many, regardless of the margin.
The lack of significant opposition also contributes to this distorted perception. Many felt that a candidate of Trump’s nature should have been easily defeated, a landslide loss being the more probable outcome. The absence of such a decisive defeat further emphasizes the perceived magnitude of his victory, even if it was only just barely a win.
Adding to the sense of unease is the lack of faith in those who *should* be holding the winning party accountable. The current political climate leaves many feeling powerless, with the impression that the government is unresponsive and unaccountable. This feeling contributes to the perception of a far more dominant victory than the numbers might suggest.
The power of social media algorithms further compounds the problem. These algorithms have the power to shape information flow, reinforcing existing biases and pushing narratives that serve the interests of those who control them. This controlled information flow contributes significantly to the distortion of reality, creating a perception very different from the actual electoral outcome.
Finally, there is a significant element of psychological manipulation involved. Repetition, particularly of terms like “landslide” or “mandate,” can influence public perception over time. The constant barrage of messages reinforcing the idea of a strong Republican victory, coupled with the lack of strong counter-narratives, can lead people to accept a distorted reality.
The reality is that the numbers don’t lie: Trump secured a narrow victory. But the overall political climate, the media landscape, and the actions of the victorious party have created the perception of something far more significant. The feeling that Trump won by a landslide, rather than a narrow margin, is a testament to the effectiveness of strategic communication and the power of controlling the narrative, rather than a reflection of the actual electoral outcome.