A Post Election Assessment Of The 2016 American Presidential Elections (Research Paper Sample)

Name:
Professor:
Course number:
Date:
Post-election Assessment
According to an American reporter, Anthony Zucker, many people thought that the winner of the hotly contested presidential elections could never run for the top office job. They thought he couldn’t manage to rise in the polls, then he actually did. Others also thought that he wouldn’t win the Republican nominations, he managed all that. Most importantly, some even thought of him unfit for the job, and he surprisingly went against all the odds to win the United States, 2016 presidential elections. Donald Trump, a Republican and the president-elect is the man in question here. He won an election that was also contested by other three candidates: Hillary Clinton, Gray Johnson and Jill Stein who were all nominated by their parties and also took part in the three major national polls. Therefore, the apparent intent of this paper is to present a post-election analysis of the factors and the strategies that determined the results of those elections.
FACTORS THAT DETERMINED THE OUTCOME OF THE ELECTIONS
The presidential candidate. In this time of strong party polarization among voters, it is very easy to overlook the fact that the strengths and the weaknesses of a candidate are very significant elements during the elections. Supporters may switch allegiance, but the intensity of support can influence the voter turnout, funds donations and volunteer activities. In the November elections, the Democrats side had Clinton’s image as a factor that posed serious challenges to them. Since she had been in the political picture for quite some time, the voters had a very fixed view of her. Others and even her observers used that to question her intelligence and grasp of the policy. Also, some people found her to be an unexciting campaigner; therefore many people, and not just the Republicans used that to vet her out. The gender card may have also played a better part in the general elections. Some partisans might have been demotivated of having a woman in power. On the other hand, the Republican candidate whom people less expected to win, dramatically recalibrated his ground for the entire electorate. He pulled off a massive rebranding task through his established suggestions and outrageous statements. Also, his personality and appeal were very strong. That automatically drew more people to his camp and the effect was quite evident in the just concluded elections.
The approval of the incumbent’s job. The incumbent, President Barrack Obama was never on the ballot, but he indirectly affected the race. Many scholars critique that his performance has remained stagnant throughout his regime. In the previous year, he had a consistent 45% national approval that had some variations. The average 47% approval of his presidency is known to be one of the steadiest in the current history. Also, the history of the country has always indicated that political parties do pay the price of performance approval of the sitting president. The public standing of former presidents like Jimmy Carter, George Bush, Gerald Ford and Harry Truman gave an automatic win to their opponents. However, in some other circumstances performance standings for presidents such as Bill Clinton, never favored their successor's victory. Therefore, the fact that Clinton was a Democrat, who is also very close to the president might have affected her image in the eyes of the electorate. Trump being from the other front, some people got attracted to that, and as a result, he won the elections.
State of the economy. Concerning the American economy, there has been a recession in every five years since the beginning of the nineteenth century. Statistics show that one of the greatest recession occurred in 2009 with a 25% standing of unemployment rate. Besides, a study that was conducted by the national bureau of economics in 2011 also show that some Americans still believed that the country was still going through a recession. Therefore, it is one of the related factors that the Republicans also took the chance of exploiting. Before the elections, the other leading poll aggregators also indicated that a majority of the American citizens felt that the country was headed in the wrong direction. These polls are broader measurements of the economy than the growth itself because they are based on perception. The persistent negative responses might have influenced the merit in the elections.
Foreign policy and terrorism. The Democrats once attacked Senator Rob Portman for insinuating that considerations of the foreign policy and terrorism would give the Republicans an upper hand in the elections. In his statements he said, “We’re in a period in our country’s history sadly where we have a threat from abroad again, and, you know, people tend to look to Republicans to help protect the country” (Williams 1). His statements were probably right because the Americans have always viewed the Republicans to be very firm in dealing with terrorism. Americans have also been on the spot for fear of terror attack since the ordeals of San Bernardino and Paris. Therefore with foreign policy taking the center of stage in the elections debate, it might have worked politically well for the Republicans. Since countries like China and Russia are consistently working on stretching their military and economic might, Donald Trump hinted on easing these tension through working together with the Russian government. He also touched on the deportation of illegal immigrants and building a security wall along the southern border. In his statements, he said “When Mexico sends its people, they’re not sending their best...They’re sending people that have lots of problems, and they’re bringing those problems with us. They’re bringing drugs. They’re bringing crime. They’re rapists” (Zurcher 2). It can be argued that his sentiments might have appealed to the people, and together with the public view of the Republicans, it readily granted them a victory in the previous elections.
Scandals. One may never speculate when and whether scandals matter in the election campaigns. Fair enough, one may also fail to identify the candidate who suffers severely in such terms. Since the Bill Clinton’s survival of the “battleship fire” scandal, people argued that revelations of a person’s private life might have heard very minimal impacts on the outcome of the elections. However, in the 8th November elections, these scandals really mattered. For example, Hillary Clinton’s usage of private server reduced her support. Weeks before the expose, the polls were very tight for Clinton and Trump. Weeks after James Comey, the director released letters implicating Clinton on the use of a private mail server, things changed. The Republicans quickly managed to consolidate their supporters and brought back some of Clinton partisans into the fold. On the contrary, the scandals allegations that were levelled against Trump seemingly had no effect on his followers. Contrary to the usual business of bigger issues determining the election outcome, the allegations levelled against the Democrat candidate partially affected her bid.
The ever-changing American demographics. In 2012, the demographics granted Obama victory after an increasing portion of the non-white voters voted 80% for him. In 2016, it seemed that the elections were based on the firm backing of white and wealthy Americans. This population also included the white graduates. The poor whites and the middle class also came out in large numbers to support the Republican candidate. However, a majority of those who earned relatively low income voted for Clinton. That is a result of the backing of the economically deprived white blue-collar voters that Trump appealed to using his stands on the state of the economy. Also, Trump managed to appeal to the older voters, as compared to Clinton who had an overwhelming support of the older people.
The outsider factor. Trump being a Republican candidate, he ran against the Democrats and initially, against the forces within his own party. He built pressure to some of his Republican opponents like Ben Carson and Ted Cruz, who consequently conceded to his candidature. Zucker is of the opinion that his attitude likely demonstrated his independence and the outsider brand...