top of page

Trump's "Mandate"

Paul Lenchner

By Paul Lenchner

Presidents are not known for their modest sense of self-worth. It takes an ego of considerable size to believe that you are the person best-equipped to lead the world's most powerful nation. Presidents, with fulsome encouragement from their aides and supporters, are eager to claim every bit of credit they can from news that is positive or can be positively spun. For example, presidents love to bask in good economic numbers even if they are largely the result of actions of individual producers and consumers, the Federal Reserve, and the vagaries of global markets, not to mention decisions made by Congress (sometimes, but far from always with presidential encouragement) and thousands of state and local governments.

Even among a group not known for its members' reticence to beat their own drum, Donald Trump stands out for his braggadocio. He boasted, "Only I can fix it" at the 2016 Republican convention. And he has repeatedly referred to himself as "a very stable genius." His failure to build a wall and have Mexico pay for it, replace the Affordable Care Act with a superior health insurance plan, and drain the swamp in Washington, among numerous other disappointments, has not stopped him from making outlandish claims about his 2024 victory and the prospects for his second term.

This brings us to Trump's claim that the 2024 election results give him "an unprecedented and powerful mandate," as he said in his election night speech. Though he won the election fairly, the numbers were hardly overwhelming. He did not receive a majority of the popular vote, defeating Kamala Harris, 49.9% to 48.4%. His electoral vote margin, 326 to 212, was roughly comparable to other elections since 2004. Moreover, Democratic Senate candidates won in four states that he carried, Arizona, Michigan, Nevada, and Wisconsin, suggesting a lack of presidential coattails.

Why, then, did Trump win? The most revealing explanation is that voters were dissatisfied with the way things were going in the country and blamed the Biden-Harris administration for the problems. Exit polls showed that 73% of respondents were dissatisfied or angry with how things were going in the country. Those voters went for Trump 62% to 35%. Fifty-nine percent of respondents disapproved of Joe Biden as president. Their ballots went to Trump, 82% to 16%. Among the 45% of respondents who strongly disapproved of Biden's presidential performance, the split for Trump was 94% to 4%. (It's of more than passing interest that only 15% of respondents strongly approved of Biden as president; they voted for Harris 98% to 1%.) In short, people wanted change, and Trump was their ticket to something different.

A standard observation among candidates and political commentators is that elections are about the future. While there is undoubtedly something to this, voting is often about the past. Political scientists have found that much voting is retrospective. In other words, people look back on the party's performance in power. If they like it, they vote to keep it in office; if not, they vote for change. In contrast, prospective voting is rooted in expectations about what candidates and parties will do if they win the election.

The 2024 election was a case of retrospective voting. Donald Trump's "mandate" is to be different from Joe Biden. It is not to deport most undocumented immigrants, which 56% of exit poll respondents opposed. It is not to severely restrict abortion. Respondents to a 2024 Pew poll said it should remain legal in all or most cases by a 63% to 36% margin. Even though exit poll respondents favored Trump to handle the economy better than Harris by 53% to 46%, there is no evidence that his signature tax cut proposal is especially popular. A December 2024 poll showed that among respondents able to offer an opinion, a plurality (42% to 32%) said it "would hurt people like me" rather than "help people like me."

No matter how often he claims one, Trump does not have a mandate to pursue particular changes. His only mandate is to do better than Biden. We shall see.

Comments


bottom of page