Opinion: It’s the Economy, Not Ideology, That Decides Elections

While Democrats were busy defending pronouns and debating issues like Palestine, Donald Trump was speaking directly to the working class about jobs. The message was clear: the economy, not identity politics, sways voters.

Trump entered the race with more baggage than most candidates could carry—legal troubles, a history of scandals, a previous election loss, and even the disdain of many in his own party. Despite this, he won. On the other hand, Kamala Harris seemed to have every advantage: financial backing, media support, the loyalty of the Democratic base, endorsements from Hollywood, Silicon Valley, the Ivy League, and even cultural icons like Oprah and JLo. Yet, she lost.

The problem wasn’t just the Democratic Party’s left-wing—it was the influence of the radical left. This vocal minority, nurtured in academic bubbles, pushed postmodernist ideals that alienated moderate Democrats and swing voters. The perception that the party was consumed by these ideas hurt its credibility with everyday Americans, who are more concerned with tangible issues than ideological battles.

Issues like abortion became centerpieces of the Democratic campaign, driven by activist rhetoric. While slogans like “my body, my choice” resonate with some, they fail to address the nuanced concerns of many Americans. Lily’s mom, for instance, might sympathize with the idea but worries about long-term consequences and views it as part of a broader, more complex moral debate. These voters don’t reject progressive values outright, but they expect leaders to balance ideology with practical solutions to everyday problems.

The deeper problem wasn’t the culture wars but the Democrats’ failure to address kitchen-table issues. The heart of America is still deeply conservative, valuing tradition, pragmatism, and economic security. Swing voters accepted progressive ideals outright; they turned away from a party that seemed more focused on ideology than action.

Trump, on the other hand, capitalized on this disconnect. While his rhetoric was often flawed and polarizing, it was anchored in economic concerns—jobs, wages, trade, and border security. His messaging resonated with voters who felt ignored by a Democratic agenda overshadowed by debates on gender, identity, and their opponent’s moral failings.

Joe Biden’s campaign needed more energy, while Kamala Harris’s approach often felt out of touch and overly rehearsed. Meanwhile, though simplistic and riddled with inaccuracies, Trump’s narrative gave voters something tangible to latch onto. Even if unrealistic, his promises of economic focus appealed to those who felt left behind by globalization and urban elitism. The relentless focus on what matters most—paychecks, rising costs, and job security—helped Trump recapture the confidence of disillusioned voters.

Ultimately, voters swung right not because they embraced Trump’s character but because they believed he talked about the issues that mattered most: rent, food, wages, and jobs. The Democrats’ economic agenda was drowned out by cultural debates, leaving voters unconvinced they could deliver meaningful change.

Trump’s victory won’t transform the average American’s fortunes overnight. However, it has bought him something invaluable: time. His legal troubles, while far from over, are now deferred for four years—a lifetime in politics. This allows Trump to solidify his grip on the Republican Party, shape policy, and possibly prepare for a lasting legacy if he delivers on his promises.

For Democrats, this election was a wake-up call. America’s heartland cares about action, not abstraction. Suppose they want to win back the middle ground. In that case, they need to focus less on ideology and more on the economy—because, as history keeps proving, it’s always the economy, silly. Families struggling with rising inflation, stagnant wages, and job insecurity are unlikely to rally around blue-sky ideals. They want leaders who prioritize tangible results over lofty rhetoric.

In a polarized political landscape, the side that addresses voters’ bread-and-butter concerns often emerges victorious. The question for Democrats moving forward is whether they will adapt and prioritize these core issues—or risk being sidelined by a growing divide between their ideals and the practical needs of everyday Americans.

Read More: The Risks of Cryptocurrency to the Economy and Ordinary Citizens: Insights from the RBI