Source: Jacobin

If you listen to some liberals — I’m too discreet to name names, but you might know whom I have in mind — Donald Trump’s election was the reflection of a resurgent hegemony of white patriarchy. These arguments are typically made without any supporting evidence, because there isn’t much of that. Here’s some complicating data drawn from exit polls.

First, the swing between 2020 and 2024. The only demographic groups in the graph below to shift significantly toward the Democrat between 2020 and 2024 were over-sixty-fives and those with incomes over $100,000. Over-sixty-fives, often maligned as a bunch of wealth-hoarding reactionaries, went from favoring Trump by five points in 2020 to breaking even in 2024. (They favored Trump by seven points in 2016, though this isn’t graphed.) Over $100,000 voters went from favoring Trump by twelve points in 2020 to favoring Kamala Harris by five. (Data note: you’d need an income of $121,200 today to match one of $100,000 in November 2020, so this is only a rough comparison.)

Viewed as swings, as in the graph below, the youngest voters shifted hard from Democrat to Republica (by eleven points, to be precise), as did voters without a college degree (by six points). Latinos shifted even harder, especially men (nineteen points for them, though the eight-point shift among women wasn’t trivial). Whites of both sexes shifted some away from Trump, and white women, in small numbers, toward Harris.

Changes from 2016 are also interesting, and also not what you’d guess from the standard liberal whining. The share of white men voting for Trump fell by a percentage point in 2020 and again in 2024; white women were little changed. Black men shifted eight points in Trump’s direction over those eight years; black women moved three points toward Trump. The most striking changes were among Latina women, who shifted thirteen points toward Trump, and especially Latino men, who moved twenty-three points. Over half of Latino men, 55 percent, voted for Trump last week, just five points short of white men’s vote. The bottom two graphs show the moves toward and away from the Dems; those are close to mirror images, but since exit polls are rough estimates and there are always candidates other than the two biggies, the inversion isn’t perfect.

Obviously there’s still plenty of racism and patriarchy in the United States, and racists and patriarchs are an important part of the Trump base. It would be otherworldly to deny either. But to claim that some joint outbreak of both explains the election result requires ignoring some actual data. What needs to be explained are the shifts among formerly reliable Democratic voting blocs, notably the young, non-white, and lower income.

And the argument that demographic changes in the United States — notably the decline of the white population share — would guarantee a Democratic majority in the coming decades now looks very wrong. Curiously, one of the analysts most associated with that argument is now a fellow at the right-wing American Enterprise Institute.


ZNetwork is funded solely through the generosity of its readers.

Donate
Donate

Doug Henwood, editor and publisher of Left Business Observer, got his B.A. in English from Yale in 1975. At Yale, Henwood was briefly a conservative and a member of the Party of the Right, which maneuvered his election as Secretary of the Political Union, but he quickly came to his senses. From 1976-79, Henwood did graduate work in English at the University of Virginia, concentrating on British and American poetry and critical theory, fulfilling all requirements for a PhD except for that great stumbling block, a dissertation. After two years working as a copywriter and under-assistant promotion man for a medical publisher in New York, Henwood revived the idea of writing his dissertation, which was to be an examination of the varieties of narcissism in American poetry from Emerson through Whitman to Stevens. To examine the evolution of this psycho-esthetic, Henwood planned to examine the evolution of the U.S. political economy as well, from the entrepreneurial-yeoman capitalism of Emerson`s day to the finance-bureaucratic capitalism of Stevens` - which would have taken seriously Stevens` employment as a bond lawyer for The Hartford insurance group. The dissertation was never written. But in the course of boning up on the theory and history of the U.S. political economy, Henwood got more deeply interested in economic matters and less so in literary ones, supplementing a decent base of undergraduate training with extensive self-teaching. After 5 years of contemplation, convinced that the 1980s experiment with free-market economics was a financial and social disaster and that much "left" writing on economics was usually dry and dated, Henwood decided that there was room for a newsletter addressing both these deficiencies. He founded Left Business Observer in September 1986. Almost from the first issue, the newsletter was a critical success, and, though the publication more than pays its bills, a vast cascade of subscriptions would always be welcome. LBO covers economics and politics in the broadest sense. Recent and persisting obsessions include income distribution and poverty in the U.S. and elsewhere in the First World; the evolving Western hemisphere free trade zone and the Mexican crisis; the globalization of finance and production; the worldwide attack on pensions; Third World debt and development; the transformation of the former "socialist" world; the IMF and World Bank; the media business; the influence of foundations on politics and culture; the meanings of Clintonism. Every issue includes a report on the world`s financial markets and central banks. Besides editing LBO, Henwood is a contributing editor of The Nation and hosts a radio weekly program on WBAI (New York). He has written for numerous magazines and newspapers around the world, and has contributed chapters to a number of scholarly and popular anthologies. His social atlas of the U.S. (in the Pluto atlas series), The State of the USA, was published by Simon & Schuster in the fall of 1994, and his book Wall Street was published by Verso in June 1997, to great critical acclaim. It was also a smashing best-seller, as these things go; an updated paperback version was published in June 1998.

 

Leave A Reply

Subscribe

All the latest from Z, directly to your inbox.

Institute for Social and Cultural Communications, Inc. is a 501(c)3 non-profit.

Our EIN# is #22-2959506. Your donation is tax-deductible to the extent allowable by law.

We do not accept funding from advertising or corporate sponsors.  We rely on donors like you to do our work.

ZNetwork: Left News, Analysis, Vision & Strategy

Subscribe

All the latest from Z, directly to your inbox.

No Paywalls. No Billionaires.
Just People Power.

Z Needs Your Help!

ZNetwork reached millions, published 800 originals, and amplified movements worldwide in 2024 – all without ads, paywalls, or corporate funding. Read our annual report here.

Now, we need your support to keep radical, independent media growing in 2025 and beyond. Every donation helps us build vision and strategy for liberation.

Subscribe

Join the Z Community – receive event invites, announcements, a Weekly Digest, and opportunities to engage.

Exit mobile version