This story originally appeared in GW Today.
Results of the presidential campaign and the re-election of former President Donald Trump came more swiftly than analysts, generally, predicted. In addition, voters gave Republicans control over the U.S. Senate, and possibly, the House of Representatives.
What do the results say about the state of national politics in the United States, the work ahead for the Democratic Party and the direction in which the Republican Party will guide the country?
George Washington University election, politics and campaign experts Todd Belt, Danny Hayes and Peter Loge discussed the issues with GW Today:
Q: Why did Donald Trump win this election?
Belt: It’s not surprising that Donald Trump pulled off this victory. The economy is always the number one issue for voters, and even though nearly all of the metrics are good, people are still feeling the pain of higher prices from years of inflation. When asked which party they trust more to handle inflation, people usually say Republicans. This was borne out in our GW Politics Poll. When we asked people whether they were confident in each candidate’s ability to handle the economy, 52% said they had confidence in Trump and 46% said they had confidence in Harris. Additionally, we found that two-thirds of our respondents thought the country was on the wrong track. All of this, combined with Harris’ association with the current administration as vice president, made it difficult for her to promise something different in an election where many voters wanted change.
Q: What are your first thoughts about Trump’s victory? What does it say about what voters wanted?
Hayes: Trump’s victory suggests that the concerns voters have had about the economy, immigration and other issues for the last couple of years of the Biden presidency were really at the forefront of their minds.
Those seemed to be more important than Trump’s liabilities—his felony conviction and legal issues, the January 6th insurrection and the chaos of his first term as president.
Q: How big a role has mis- and disinformation played in this election? What should we do to minimize its impact in the future?
Loge: There was a ton of mis- and disinformation out there, much of it promoted by the owner of X and close Trump ally, Elon Musk. But given the size of the margin for President-elect Trump, and the strong Republican showing up and down the ballot, it would be a stretch to say that mis- and disinformation was why Democrats lost.
Even if it wasn’t the deciding factor in this election, mis- and disinformation still matters. People ought to get accurate information so they can make informed choices. We can minimize its impact primarily by being better consumers of information. Check your sources, check your biases and double-check anything that sounds too good or too outrageous to be true.
Mis- and disinformation have been part of American politics from the beginning. In 1782 Ben Franklin wrote an entire fake newspaper in which he invented a story meant to turn colonists and Europeans against the British. A difference now is that rumors, lies and nonsense spread more easily, quickly and widely than ever.
Q: Does the size of the victory—it appears he may sweep all the swing states—surprise you?
Hayes: If you look at forecasts of elections based on economic data and presidential approval—what are sometimes called the “fundamentals”—this was a pretty difficult political environment for the Democrats. You’ve got an economy which, on some dimensions, is doing well, but that voters by and large don’t feel good about, especially in terms of inflation. And you have a very unpopular Democratic president. Historically, it’s very hard for the incumbent party to win reelection under those circumstances.
So a Trump victory, in that respect, is perhaps not that surprising. Trump himself is a deeply polarizing figure, but this was always going to be a difficult election for Democrats to win.
Trump’s victory appears to be broad; he gained votes compared to 2020 in rural areas, urban areas and in the suburbs in some places. Of course, the election was still relatively close. If Trump ultimately prevails in the popular vote, it will probably be by one or two percentage points. But given the extremely narrow victories in swing states eked out by Trump in 2016 and Biden in 2020, this one feels more decisive.
Q: Presidential elections give us a quadrennial snapshot of the American electorate. What do you think this year’s snapshot says about us?
Belt: I think the larger narrative about U.S. politics is that the pendulum swings quickly when the distribution of voters is on a knife’s edge. Voters want change, and they want it quickly—and just a few votes in some key states are all that it takes to bring that about in our system. Ultimately, it’s difficult for any president to achieve their goals given all of the constraints on their power, and tough to deal with the external forces over which they have no control.
Q: Early on, do you see any trends or shifts that you want to highlight?
Hayes: One preliminary takeaway is that the shifts toward the Republicans by Black and Hispanic voters that have been evident in the last few election cycles emerged again last night. Since these groups have historically been central to the Democratic coalition, Trump’s ability to erode those advantages is likely to lead to some Democratic soul-searching in the coming days.
Q: Polls continually suggested a neck-and-neck race, but the results seem a little more lopsided. What accounts for this?
Belt: Polls in all seven of the swing states showed a very close election (within the margin of error). So, I don’t think we can blame polls for misleading us this time, but that will depend upon the final vote tally (which at publication time is ongoing).
Q: How soon do you think we’ll know about the House results?
Belt: It may be a few days before we know about the House of Representatives.
Q: What role has AI played in this election, specifically when it comes to “deep fakes” and spreading mis- and disinformation?
Loge: AI has primarily been used to help campaigns identify voters and coordinate outreach efforts. Predictive AI doesn't get headlines, but it’s part of our politics. Generative AI, images and text created by algorithms, has played less of a role because many campaigns are reluctant to use it. Some have, and some have been caught, which makes other campaigns more cautious. The problem with fake images or text generated by AI isn’t AI, it's that the images and text are fake. Images and text generated by computer programs, or scissors and glue, aren’t any less deceptive than generative AI. Benjamin Franklin's fake news was written by hand. The Hudson River School paintings of the American West which helped lead to the creation of the National Parks were not fully accurate representations of the landscape, they were oil paint deep fakes.
One big impact has been contributing to a general decrease in trust in elections and politics. The fear of AI lets politicians dismiss real images they don't like as AI generated, as Trump did with the size of crowds at Harris campaign rallies. If everything can be fake, why should voters believe any image they don't like is true?
Q: What role can GW play in the future of accurate political information and responsible uses of AI in politics?
Loge: GW is already playing a central role in the future of political information and AI. GW is home to programs like the Trustworthy AI Initiative and the Institute for Data, Democracy and Politics. GW offers classes, hosts events and more to bring insights from across the disciplines to AI policy debates.
GW is also increasingly working across the university to improve the quality of political debate in general. AI is raising old questions in new ways. GW can help address those questions by focusing on AI and by engaging scholars concerned with truth, democracy and persuasion. Programs like Politics and Values, events in SMPA, programming at the Corcoran, insights from GSPM and the School of Public Health, and more, can help everyone in our community use AI more responsibly and also be better democratic citizens.