In a surprising turn of events that took place in Philadelphia, Pennsylvania on September 10, 2024, former U.S. President Donald Trump faced off against former U.S. Vice President Kamala Harris. This memorable faceoff marked the first-time the Republican presidential nominee collided with his Democratic counterpart during the pivotal presidential election period at the famed National Constitution Center. However, despite the excitement this debate sparked, some Democrats were left bitterly disappointed as accusations centering around phantom millions of stay-at-home progressives potentially costing Kamala Harris the presidency crumbled under new findings.
A detailed analysis conducted by Pew Research fed an inconvenient truth to Harris’ supporters: she would have been defeated all the more resoundingly, even if the voter turnout had climbed. One might argue that this striking revelation pulls Harris’ political prowess into question, considering it contradicts the popular narrative that progressives could have saved her.
According to Pew’s study, the claim that disinterested voters may have favored Harris remains largely unfounded. The data suggested an ambivalence among nonvoters, with their preferences almost evenly split. A concerning 44% of eligible nonvoters admitted they would have supported Trump, while only a slightly lower 40% admitted they would have backed Harris had they voted.
Contrary to this, a startling 11% of nonvoters seemed to favor Biden in the 2020 elections. This glaring contrast dislodged Harris’ standing further, corroborating the fault lines in her election campaign. The stats also insinuated a seeming political shift, which begs the question: Is the oft-quoted theory that higher turnout is beneficial for the Democratic Party gradually becoming redundant?
Between voter ID laws and voter apathy, Pew’s data paints a compelling picture. It indicates that the seeming lack of enthusiasm is not amongst potential democratic supporters held back by regulations, but rather within a demographic who appear to have swung towards the right or simply opted for preferential apathy.
The wave of indifference was so overwhelming that despite a laudable 64% voter participation in the 2024 race, a staggering 26% of eligible adults failed to cast their ballot in three previous national contests. This demographic was primarily comprised of younger individuals who are less likely to possess college degrees, bringing to light the widely ignored crisis of political engagement in America.
Further analysis revealed Trump’s significant influence across various ethnic groups. According to Pew, he managed to secure 40% of the Asian vote, 48% of the Hispanic vote, and 15% of the Black vote, significant percentages that broadened his multiethnic coalition, thereby weakening Harris significantly in the process.
A surprising revelation emerged when comparing the voting patterns of men under 50. This age group had favored Biden by a significant 10 percentage point margin in the 2020 elections. However, in a twist typical of political theater, the group swung one point in favor of Trump over Harris during the 2024 race. It leaves one wondering how Harris, who was once celebrated as a symbol of change, could not replicate Biden’s appeal among these voters.
Trump’s success didn’t end there. His loyal base demonstrated steadfast commitment, with a remarkable 89% of his 2020 voters showing up for him once again, compared to 85% of Biden’s. This portrays an undeniable energy in Trump’s supporters, a clear majority of which were ready to stand by their choice, unlike the unsure backers of Harris.
Harris saw her support tapering off even among the voters who abstained from the 2020 elections but chose to vote in 2024. A disconcerting 54% of these individuals voted for Trump, while only 42% voted for Harris — another blow to the unsuccessful Democratic nominee.
The loyalty gap became even more apparent among registered Democrats who chose to stay at home. A lukewarm seven in ten of those voters stated they would have supported Harris, further cementing the idea of her diminishing popularity, even within her own party.
In contrast, Trump faced no such loyalty concerns among Republicans, highlighting the stark dichotomy between the two candidates’ standing within their respective parties. The unequivocal support for Trump verified the resilient confidence the Republicans vested in him.
In the end, the 2024 presidential election painted a vivid picture of a political landscape drastically different from the one assumed by many. It seems the Democratic party, and Kamala Harris herself, may need to reevaluate their strategies if hoping to win the hearts and votes of Americans in the future.
This account of the 2024 elections, followed closely by a Pew Research study, adds to the growing body of evidence that the Democratic Party’s assumptions about their hold on various voter demographics may need to be reassessed. Particularly, it’s worth pondering whether the party’s strategic focus needs to shift away from the failing tactics that led to Harris’ defeat to more dynamic, inclusive strategies that could potentially appeal to the widespread American electorate.