With the shock of Donald Trump’s seismic win still settling like volcanic ash in America, a clearer picture of his voting base is beginning to emerge.
Months of mounting frustration over the misinformation and false leads about who actually supports him is giving way to a better understanding of the people who quietly entered the voting booths with a predetermined intention of shaking their country to its core.
These were not necessarily the angry, vocal mobs who went to Trump rallies and shouted offensive slogans, although those people translated into Trump votes as well. These were the millions who went about their daily lives, who muttered about the direction their country was taking, and who didn’t tell a soul about what was in their hearts.
And no, they were not, as almost everyone imagined, the poor and disaffected, who were bitter after their factory jobs vanished to globalization, and who suffered great economic loss as a result of immigration and trade, although these people voted Republican as well.
Rather, they had higher than average incomes and were no more affected by trade or immigration than any other average American. And as analysts had guessed, they were mainly white, came from blue collar backgrounds, and did not have a college degree.
In an effort to better understand voting preferences, Jonathan Rothwell and Pablo Diego-Rosell conducted a Gallup study this year, analyzing the economic status of 87,000 American adults.
They concluded,
“Surprisingly, there appears to be no link whatsoever between greater exposure to trade competition or competition from immigrant workers and support for nationalist policies in America, as embodied by the Trump campaign. These results make it very unlikely that direct exposure to harm from globalization could be a causal factor in motivating large numbers of Trump’s supporters.”
Max Ehrenfreund and Jeff Guo, who reported on this study for the Washington Post on Aug.12, 2016, concurred:
“According to this new analysis, those who view Trump favorably have not been disproportionately affected by foreign trade or immigration, compared with people with unfavorable views of the Republican presidential nominee. The results suggest that his supporters, on average, do not have lower incomes than other Americans, nor are they more likely to be unemployed.”
Trump repeatedly made the argument that trade imbalances with Mexico and China were to blame for the disaffection of his supporters. Another study, conducted by a team of researchers at UCLA analysed data from thousands of counties with a high incidence of Trump support. They discovered that these counties experienced positive gains from trade, having high levels of exports to Russia and China, so in fact trade agreements actually benefited them.
They report:
“Our results show that, while many people in Trump-voting counties are struggling financially, trade and immigration are not to blame for those struggles,” said primary researcher Raul Hinojosa-Ojeda, “We think it is vitally important that policymakers understand the realities in order to make decisions that have actual potential for improving economic conditions.”
These discoveries led researchers to conclude that economic realities were not the common denominator that attracted the crowds to Trump.
But voters did have some common reasons for their voting preference, and researchers have been on a tear recently in an effort to uncover them.
Jill Filipovic, a journalist and author, in an article published for CNN on Nov. 9, conducted her own research with the following conclusions drawn from gender groups:
Males
-It was white men, regardless of class (education), who voted for Trump overwhelmingly.
-among voters of color, there was close to a 10-point gap between men and women, with men more likely to vote for Trump.
-In other words, two things made voters more likely to support Trump: Being white and being male. The big differences tracked with skin color and gender, not income
or education.
Females
-white women without college degrees voted a lot like white men.
-conservative, evangelical white women over 45, and lacking a college degree (stay-at-home moms) voted for Trump.
-Only 4% of black women (poor, working class and affluent as well), voted for Trump.
Filipovic writes:
“What did sway voters was a combination of race, gender, and power. Most American women voted for Clinton, including majorities of women of color and white women with college degrees. It was white men, regardless of class, who voted for Trump overwhelmingly; and white women without college degrees voted a lot like white men.”
Her key results* were confirmed in an in-depth analysis by Joe Friesen in the November 10 issue of The Globe and Mail, who wrote:
-White people, male and female, all ages (with the largest group comprised of voters over age 45) voted overwhelmingly for Trump.
-All other racial groups (except for Latino men with 33% for Trump) voted for Clinton in large numbers.
-People with college educations voted in large numbers for Clinton.
-People who attended the most religious services voted for Trump (exit polling indicates that he won Catholics by 52% to 45%).
-Among her own demographic group, white women, Ms. Clinton was walloped by Mr. Trump 53 per cent to 43 per cent,
Friesen added:
“Ms. Clinton, vying to become the first female president and boosted by a recording of Mr. Trump making lewd remarks about women, was unable to galvanize female voters any more than previous Democratic nominees.
Mr. Trump’s promise to build a wall on the border with Mexico and crack down on immigration was thought to have hurt him among Latino voters, but Ms. Clinton’s support in that group declined slightly compared to that for President Barack Obama.
And although the anger that spurred Mr. Trump’s rise was often attributed to those left behind in the global economy, his support was highest among middle- and upper-income earners.”
*The numbers are from exit polls conducted by Edison Research on behalf of a consortium of U.S. media organizations.
It might seem counterproductive to devote so much time and effort to analyzing the results of the movement that fueled Trump’s success—after all, the die is cast, he is the President-Elect of America, and now the most powerful man in the world. It is done, move on, some say.
But it is more important than ever to understand the underpinnings of this movement. The election did us all a favor. We now know more about the nature of the unrest in America—and face it, we always knew it was there.
We now know the extent of the resentment ordinary white people have for the media and the liberal political elite, and some effort may now be made to rectify this.
We now know that sexism and misogyny is pervasive in an America which is simply not ready to accept a female president. It is a huge retrograde step in the fight for gender equality in the West, and it is important to understand the role of women in allowing it to happen.
We now know that education is significant in the unfolding of a democratic nation, and we may begin to recognize the importance of teaching values in our schools and communities.
There is much more to be extrapolated from the results of this election. I’m sure they will be chewed on for months and even years. But for now, the healing must begin. I hope that a dispassionate look at the data at our disposal will help that along.
Good post, thank you. I’m still inconsolable…and I don’t even live in the US! In my gut I just know that something has to crack wide open with all this unrest. Maybe then, the light can shine through.
Pat, I think that the answer will come about with the involvement of young people—they are the ones with the most to lose, and it is actually heartening to see them express their fear and concern.
I agree! It was the unexpected educated white male vote.
Yes, Jane. That kind of threw us! Also the women…so disappointed.
??? “We now know the extent of the resentment ordinary white people have for the media and the liberal political elite, and some effort may now be made to rectify this.”
I’m wondering why you are just now learning this. I’ve been reading about it for a long time, but it may be because I have a blue collar background and worked in a factory during my summer vacations when I was in college. I escaped the cultural bubble and can think in terms of real people. Joe Biden warned about “limousine liberals” last July.
You might find I Voted for the Middle Finger, the Wrecking Ball illuminating.
Of course I knew there was resentment—certainly didn’t think it was deep enough to prompt voters to support the destructive candidate DT is. I hardly think I qualify as a “limousine liberal”, coming from a farming background. But I take my vote seriously, so I would never vote with my “middle finger”. Democracy is too precious to squander!
I voted against Trump, but I can understand where some of his supporters are coming from. They believe democracy is precious, too. They’re trying to revive it by shaking up a corrupt Washington. I would feel more comfortable if you seemed willing to understand where these voters are coming from.
I did a tremendous amount of research for just that purpose. When I discovered that economic considerations were not the driving force behind their decision to back Trump (if the reading I did was accurate), I guess I lost patience. Right now, I see them as vindictive and shortsighted, and utterly unconscious that they have been duped by a dangerous and brilliantly manipulative man. I fear we will all feel the effects. What bothers me most is the absolute power voters gave Trump, with no checks and balances. That’s quite dangerous.
You’re still lumping them all together. And you seem to be implying economic motives are more important than other values? I suppose what’s bothering me is the stereotyping.
I guess when you are looking at demographic groups, there is always a danger of stereotyping. I do hammer away at economic themes, because we were led to believe, (in the media, and by what Trump himself said in his speeches), that economic hardship and uncertainty were the primary concerns of citizens. It does turn out that various other issues were at play, and that’s what I tried to say.The people with the most economic concerns (African-Americans, Hispanics) voted for Clinton, by the way. I found that interesting.
From what I’ve read, the demographics favor the Democrats. As The Economist says, “Voter anger was covered in depth; voter apathy was not.” I don’t think Trump won the election, I think Clinton lost it. Bernie Sanders, for one, agrees:
“I think it’s time for a fundamental reassessment,” Sanders tells NPR’s Robert Siegel, “and I think what that reassessment has got to entail is to understand that we cannot have a party that will win, if we continue to become dependent on big money interests and campaign fundraisers all over this country.”
We’ll just have to see. I just hope enough people care about climate change to make that an issue that Trump and Congress can’t ignore. It ain’t over yet.
You are right, Jean. It’s only just begun…
Here’s an article that says Democrats are upset that Clinton didn’t have a powerful economic message. No inflation plus job growth would have cinched the election for the Democrats. It didn’t happen so it was time for a change.
That seemed to be the consensus.
Am reflecting on this election and it came to mind that a factor in coming out for gay people was internalized homophobia. Are we looking at female internalized misogyny?
Were excuses just that for not supporting Clinton?
It was very disappointing that women didn’t see it fit to support Hillary.She wasn’t perfect, but her sins were nothing compared to the antics of DT. But I’ve come across this before—and I’ve never really understood it. Now let’s see how many women are invited into the circle of power in Trump’s government.Thanks for your observations, Catherine.
The Guardian has an interesting article:Can you be a feminist and vote for Donald Trump? Yes, you can
Very interesting article. Obviously much research must have gone into it. Personally, I voted for Bob LeBlanc – at least people would get a good show out of him..
Very cute, Peter!
Thank you for the time you put into this, Diane. You know my feelings from my Facebook posts.
Yes, Virginia. Hope you were able to glean some information from it!
Yes, the healing must begin; and your exploration of research on voters has helped mine along. The paragraph you wrote that had the most impact on my thinking was this one: ‘We now know that sexism and misogyny is pervasive in an America which is simply not ready to accept a female president. It is a huge retrograde step in the fight for gender equality in the West, and it is important to understand the role of women in allowing it to happen.” So much to reflect on in your words, particularly the last line. And I have so few answers.
The answers will come with the passage of time. Meanwhile, we have to keep an open mind, and not become drowned in negativism. Thanks, Aunt Beulah!
Great post Diane. I found it interesting that economics was not the prime factor for most of the votes. I have been staggered at the number of people living below the poverty line (45 million or 14.5% of total popn according to official sources and charities claim it is around double this) and would not have been surprised if economics had been the predominant factor. My husband and I had a discussion this morning where I said we are about to see a new world order. He said “no we’re not. We are going to return to the old world order.” By this he means the English are English, French are French and Germans are germans. I think perhaps this thinking has be borne out in the results you show here. Whatever the cause the results show that we have to look at the divide between people and try to understand all sides and work out ways that we can all come together in peace working for the common good of all. Mr Trump may have been the start of this conversation and as such perhaps something that had to happen. I doubt he is good enough or powerful enough to stem the hatred he has unleashed and the injustices to women that has been accepted but there will be someone in the future that will, and we have to hope that person may come in four years time. Until then we have to hope that perhaps we find ourselves wrong in how we see the next four years progressing. Time will tell.
Thanks, Irene. The analysis of the motives of Trump supporters is continuing in the press and on TV. Much of the research considered basic income, which came out above the poverty level. But I believe that there were other factors, like diminishing hope for the economic future, and people’s loss of housing during the housing crisis. It’s hard to get a firm picture. It does all add up to massive dissatisfaction on many levels. Most disturbing to me are the attitudes toward non-whites. Those values need some looking into.
certainly an interesting kettle of fish…I’ve never understood much about politics; and our system is vastly different in New Zealand. I guess time will tell which fish/es go up and which sink to the bottom…
This has been an election from H…, so I’ve been quite engaged with it. It has world-wide implications, and is very important for Canada.
Comments are closed.