Reflections on the 2024 Presidential Election Outcome
For the first time since the night of November 4, 2008, the results of a presidential election unfolded in a manner that I had anticipated. Having experienced numerous surprises in the past, I don’t wish to overly boast about my foresight. However, I believe the outcome of the 2024 election was particularly predictable. Despite the myriad of chaotic elements involved—such as the candidate switch, assassination attempts, and the intervention of figures like Elon Musk—there was a notable consistency in the fundamentals, the prevailing issues, and the overall sentiment of the country. This consistency extended to the choices made (or not made) by the Democrats throughout the election cycle, which repeatedly paved an easier path for Donald Trump’s return to the White House.
It was, first and foremost, predictable that voters would react negatively towards the Biden administration due to its failure to implement a significant policy shift following the midterm elections. Even though the Democrats performed better than expected in crucial Senate races, they still lost control of the House of Representatives, all while Joe Biden’s approval ratings remained dismally low. A strategic triangulation after a midterm defeat is a well-established approach for rejuvenating an administration’s standing, yet the Biden Democrats largely opted against this route. There was no concerted effort resembling Bill Clinton’s push for a comprehensive legislative deal on deficit reduction, no substantial outreach on pressing social issues, no reevaluation of aggressive policies concerning gas-powered vehicles or student loan forgiveness, and only a half-hearted attempt to regain control over the situation at the southern border.
Moreover, it was equally foreseeable that the accumulation of legal challenges against Trump would simultaneously create political advantages for him and pose risks for the Democrats. A single legal case, particularly one centered around the classified documents issue, might have presented a different scenario. However, with several cases emerging from a variety of inventive legal theories, and two of those being pursued by evidently partisan prosecutors, it became increasingly effortless for Trump to rally Republican voters around a narrative of persecution. Additionally, the fact that he faced trial primarily for a case involving misleading information about personal affairs served to trivialize the efforts aimed at holding him accountable.
Instead of reinforcing the rule of law, the entire endeavor of prosecuting a presidential candidate while he campaigned for the presidency ultimately turned the rule of law into a pawn in the political arena. This precarious situation left the Democrats in a challenging position, attempting to argue that Trump posed a significant threat because he might retaliate against his political adversaries—while he was concurrently undergoing multiple prosecutions himself.
