Thread by @omni_american

Many of my Dem/left friends feel rage at Trump voters and masochistic hatred for America, which they see as having succumbed to its own latent transhistorical forces of racism and sexism.

This belief is not only false, as @Musa_alGharbi shows in this 🧵, but it also destroys mental health and, I think, makes it nigh impossible to rebuild the party to regain broad appeal.

Harris didn't lose because of racism or sexism, nor because of wealthy elites, third parties, or turnout.

Check it out:

2/

Did Trump win because of racism? No:

"The GOP has been doing worse with white voters for every single cycle that Trump has been on the ballot, from 2016 through 2024. And there’s tons of evidence that Trump’s racialized language has been a major driver of this trend – it’s been a drag on his support among whites rather than serving as the key to his success.

Meanwhile, Harris did quite well with whites in this cycle. She outperformed Hillary Clinton and Joe Biden with white voters. The only Democrat who put up comparable numbers with whites over the last couple decades was, incidentally, another black person: Barack Obama in 2008.

Across the board, Harris and Walz improved their numbers with whites – men and women alike. Democrats lost because everyone except for whites moved in the direction of Donald Trump this cycle."

3/

Did Trump win because of sexism? No:

"Kamala’s performance with men was solid. It was her performance with women that destroyed her prospects.

Put simply, it was young and non-white women – the very people who were supposed to ensure Kamala’s victory – who instead helped usher Trump back into the White House.

In fact, even as Kamala’s candidacy went down in flames, women did pretty well at the ballot box this year. For example, as a result of this election cycle, there will be a record number of female governors in the U.S. in 2025. So far, 17 non-incumbent women won House seats; 105 female House incumbents won reelection. 3 non-incumbent women won Senate seats. There were many firsts this cycle as well, including the first transgender woman elected to U.S. Congress.

Voters didn’t seem to have any problem electing women this cycle. They just didn’t respond well to the specific woman that Democrats put at the top of their presidential ticket."

4/

Did Trump win because of wealthy elites? No:

"Kamala had 60 percent more billionaire backers than Donald Trump did.

Overall, Democrats raised roughly twice as much money as their opponents this cycle.

Wealthy voters shifted even further towards Democrats this cycle than they did in 2020 – a significant feat given how heavily these voters were consolidated into the Democratic Party over the course of the last decade.

When we look at education and income simultaneously, it becomes even clearer that Democrats have become the party of elites. The class composition of the Democratic and Republican parties has basically flipped over the last 30 years."

5/

Did Trump win because of third parties? No:

"If Harris received 100% of all the third-party votes nationwide, she’d have ended up with 251 electoral votes (instead of 226), but she’d still have lost the election. Under this scenario, Trump would still win 287 electoral votes (instead of 312) – but you only need 270 to win the White House. In fact, in a world where we reallocated all third-party votes to Harris, she might still have lost the popular vote too (votes are still being counted, but she’s currently trailing him by 3.5 million)."

6/

Did Trump win because of turnout issues? No:

"Democrats keep trying to 'rock the vote' and expand voter access under a mistaken belief that low-propensity voters are 'on their side.' We saw the fruits of this miscalculation in 2020: Democrats invested tons of resources into areas of swing states with heavy concentrations of non-white voters. Those voters were, in fact, mobilized — and the areas where these low-propensity voters went to the polls were also the areas of those states that shifted the most towards the GOP.

Meanwhile, Republicans keep operating under the assumption that broad-based turnout is a threat. And so, they have tried to complicate voting through Voter ID laws and discouraging early or mail-in voting – moves which may have actually cost Trump the election in 2020. Had still more low-propensity voters cast ballots in key states, it probably would have been to his benefit.

If more of these folks had been mobilized this cycle, Trump’s popular vote victory likely would have grown larger, not smaller – even as the Electoral College outcome probably would have gone unchanged."

7/

So, what happened?

"If I was taking a longer view and trying to explain why the election went the way it did, in my opinion, there were two big stories at work:

1. Ongoing alienation among 'normie' Americans from symbolic capitalists [i.e., people in the 'knowledge economy'], our institutions, our communities, and our preferred political party (the Democrats) – which has been going on for decades, and has analogs in most peer countries as well.

2. Backlash against the post-2010 'Great Awokening' — including (perhaps especially) among the populations that were supposed to be empowered or represented by these social justice campaigns. As detailed in We Have Never Been Woke [Princeton University Press, 2024], as Awokenings wind down, they are usually followed by right-wing gains at the ballot box. The post-2010 Awokening, now on the downswing, seems to be no exception to the general pattern."

8/

How could it have gone differently?

"It would have been an uphill climb to 270 regardless of who the Democrats nominated…unless perhaps they put someone forward who

1. Promised a major break from Biden and other Democrats on culture issues, and/or

2. Who vowed more aggressively populist economic policies.

The 'symbolically conservative [e.g., patriotism, etc.], operationally liberal [e.g., safety net, etc.]' quadrant of political views seems to represent a plurality of Americans but has no clear representation among the political parties. If Democrats had moved more aggressively into that quadrant in a way that showed a clear disjunct from the incumbent administration, that could have plausibly helped win over some of the voters who defected or abstained. But shy of that, this race was likely going to be a tough sell even for a compelling and effective mainstream Democratic nominee. Which Harris was not."

9/

Read all of @Musa_alGharbi's "A Graveyard of Bad Election Narratives" and get his new book, We Have Never Been Woke, for more on the dynamics described here:

musaalgharbi.substack.com/p/a-graveyard-…