Sociology
Donald Trump’s victory was not just won simply by the campaigns that he did. Trump’s victory was mainly influenced by education, race and gender, which were very different as compared to other elections in the US. Trump was able to win white voters by a margin which was similar to that of Mitt Romney, who ended up losing the popular to the then president of the US Barrack Obama. Trump therefore became the fifth president to lose the popular vote in the country. The white non-Hispanic voters supported Trump over Clinton, by a margin of 21% (Tyson & Maniam, 2016). Even though Trump had little to no support from Hispanics and Blacks as compared to Romney, in the past four years, Hillary Clinton was not considered to be as strong as Obama was considered in the year 2012, by these groups (Meko, Lu & Gamio, 2016). Therefore, Clinton had an advantage of 80 points, among the African Americans as opposed to Obama’s edge of 87 points in the past four years. In the year 2008, Obama had a fair advantage among the blacks, with a 91 points advantage (Rebecca et al, 2016).
When it comes to gender, women appear to have supported Clinton as compared to Trump, making Clinton to lead by a margin of 12% (54% to 42%) (Rebecca et al, 2016). The same outcome was also experienced in the 2012 elections, whereby Obama had 55% against Romney’s 44%, in the year 2008, Obama also won women’s votes with 56% against McCain’s 43%. On the other hand, more men offered their support to Trump as compared to Clinton where by Trump garnered 53% against Clinton’s 41%. This margin is therefore similar to margin which Clinton against women’s votes (Tyson & Maniam, 2016). As compared to the Republican’s 2012 candidate Romney, Trumps advantage for men was high since Romney had a 7 points margin in the 2012 elections against Obama. This huge difference was mainly caused by the female candidate who was running against Trump, thus making most men to support Trump. The same also applies when it comes to Clinton’s advantage in women’s votes against Trump (Balz, Rucker, 2017).
Educational level was also an issue in the 2016 elections, since there was a difference in presidential preference between those with a college degree and those without (Balz, Rucker, 2017). Those with a college degree supported Clinton, making her to win with a 9 points margin against Trump, Clinton therefore garnered 52% against Trump’s 43% (Meko, Lu & Gamio, 2016). On the other hand, those without a college degree supported Trump, making him to win with an 8 point margin against Clinton, Trump garnered 52% against Clinton’s 44% (Tyson & Maniam, 2016). This was therefore the elections which was mainly constituted by those who had a college degree and those who did not have it. In the 2012 elections, people did not vote according to their academic levels, even though Obama was supported by those with college degrees whereby he won with a 2 point margin against Romney, Obama therefore scored 50% while Romney got 48%. In addition, those without a college degree also supported Obama, and he therefore won with a 4 point margin against Romney, whereby he scored 51% against Romney’s 47% (Rebecca et al, 2016).
Trump was therefore able to win a very huge share from those who did not have college degrees, among the whites (Balz, Rucker, 2017). In addition, Trump was also supported by a huge number of college graduates, even though Clinton won against Trump. College graduates were the main determiners of Clinton’s victory, and so she won with a very small margin as it was thought before, making Trump to beat her by a 4 points margin. Trump therefore had the highest margin among those whites who did not have college degrees. 67% of those without college degrees therefore supported Trump, as opposed to 28% who offered their support to Clinton (Tyson & Maniam, 2016). This therefore led to a 39 points advantage for Trump in the group of people without college degrees. This really helped in giving Trump an advantage, since the number of people with college degrees who turned out to vote was less than the number of those without college degree who turned out to vote. When it comes to young voters, they preferred Clinton over Trump, a move whereby Clinton won with a very wide margin against Trump, Clinton therefore ha 55% against Trump’s 37%. Older voters voted in support of Trump, with Trump garnering 53% against Clinton’s 45%, this is also similar to the number of votes which Romney garnered against Obama, where Romney scored 56% against Obama’s 44% (Rebecca et al, 2016). On the other hand, Clinton performed poorly when it comes to the votes of the youths as compared to Barrack Obama.
Most of the whites thought they did not have a political voice, since most of them are xenophobic (Rebecca et al, 2016). They therefore preferred Trump against Clinton, since he was able to address the issue which other politicians had not been able to address. This issue therefore included immigration and the deportation of all African Americans. The issue of terrorism, which has become a disaster in the world, also allowed the whites to consider voting for Trump since he was more than dedicated to deal with terrorism through deporting all Muslims from the country (Tyson & Maniam, 2016). In addition, Trump also talked about the Mexican wall, whereby he would be able to build a wall which would be able to prevent Mexicans from entering into the country. Trump was more of a no nonsense person as compared to Clinton, who minced her words, and talked of uniting all Americans regardless of their race or class (Meko, Lu & Gamio, 2016). In addition, Trump had never before practiced politics, a thing which made his supporters to give him a benefit of doubt when it came to the issue of deporting all immigrants and also building the Mexican wall.
For many years, most presidents in the US have not been able to deal with the issue of Mexico, a thing which most citizens have always anticipated for (Rebecca et al, 2016). The border between Mexico and the US is very wide, and most drug lords tend to use the border as a means of smuggling drugs into the US. Cases of drug abuse have therefore risen, making it very hard for the youths to be able to concentrate in their studies due to addiction. Moreover, the drug lords have therefore formed gangs in the US, whereby they usually kill residents particularly those who tend to oppose them (Tyson & Maniam, 2016). Drug menace in the US has therefore led to insecurity, and most people in the country are now living in fear simply because some of their family members were killed by the drug lords in the country. This therefore made most US citizens, particularly the whites, to see the logic in building a wall along the US, Mexico border. According to them, if Trump became the president, then this would allow the country to be able to control the issue of drug smuggling in the country, thus making it easy for people to be able to live peacefully in the country (Balz, Rucker, 2017).
The issue of terrorism and immigration has also affected the country negatively, since most terrorist move to the US as immigrants and end up recruiting US citizens into terrorist groups. Most terrorists are usually Muslims, and they also believe in the Islamic teachings which have been altered in order to suit their actions (Tyson & Maniam, 2016). When Trump stated that he was going to send all Muslims from the country, most whites also saw the logic in sending Muslims out of the country, since the state could not be able to distinguish between a clean Muslim and a Muslim who participates in terrorist activities (Marx & Engels, 2016). On the other hand, the issue of immigration has also made most whites to be xenophobic, since they feel that when immigrants move into the country, they take up their jobs, thus leaving them with bad jobs (Rebecca et al, 2016). The whites therefore new that in order for them to be able to get good, immigrants had to be sent away. Sending immigrants back to their countries would therefore allow the whites to be able to easily select the types of jobs they want, thus being able to secure white collar jobs. Trump was therefore their savior, since he was able to address very critical issues which had been affected them. Clinton had been a politician, and she was not able to help the whites in being able to secure their jobs, and so they thought of Trump as a better candidate as compared to Clinton (Meko, Lu & Gamio, 2016).
Trump was therefore able to win the elections, according to Karl Marx’s Manifesto of the community, since the community did not have someone who could be able to air their view. Marx therefore explains how the community can be able to support a leader simply because he addresses the issues which other leaders have been able to address. Politics in the US had been dominated by politicians, and most politicians could therefore easily become presidents (Tyson & Maniam, 2016). The community therefore decided to change that monotony, they therefore decided to change the phase of politics in the country, through electing a leader who had never participated in politics before. Moreover, they were used to political leaders who would always tell them what they would do for them and immediately after being elected, they would talk the walk (Balz, Rucker, 2017). Trump therefore became the leader they thought would not trick them only to get into the white house. On the other hand, the German ideology, also explains how trump was able to win the elections. The citizens became conscious, and they therefore decided to elect a person who they thought was going to address their problems, and not a person who was favorable to hold the position (Rebecca et al, 2016). The US citizens they decided to rely on a person who would be able to work and enable them to be able to leave peacefully, other than electing a leader who would not trick but one who would provide what they actually want. The leader was therefore none other than President Donald Trump (Marx & Engels, 2016).
Reference
Alec, Tyson & Shiva, Maniam. (2016). Behind Trump’s Victory: Divisions by Race, Gender, Education: Pew Reearch Center.
K.K Rebecca, Alicia. Parlapiani, Jeremy White & Karen Yourish. (2016). How Trump Won According to Exit Polls: The New York Times.
Tim Meko, Denise Lu & Lazaro Gamio. (2016). How Trump Won the Presidency with razor-thin Margins in Swing States: The Washington Post.
Dan Balz, Philip Rucker. (2017). How Donald Trump Won: The Insiders Tell their Story: The Washington Post.
Marx, K., & Engels, F. (2016). Delphi Collected Works of Karl Marx (Illustrated).
