The world witnessed an historic U.S. election. Incumbent Democratic President Joe Biden shockingly dropped out of the race, tapping his V.P. Kamala Harris to run in his place, leaving her just 107 days to campaign against Republican nominee, former President Donald Trump.
When Americans went to the polls on Nov. 5, many expected to be waiting days for a result. But before the night was over, it became clear that Donald Trump would become the 27th President of the United States, leaving many people wondering where the Democratic campaign went wrong and, especially here in Canada, what a second Trump presidency could bring.
“He did really well with younger voters–who generally tend to be lower propensity voters.”
Matt Farrell, who teaches politics at Fanshawe College, says there were a few factors he believed would influence this election.
“The first one was the fact that, around the world, incumbent governments were getting defeated,” he says. “More often than not for things like inflation.”
In exit polls across the U.S., the majority of voters cited the economy as their biggest issue, and Trump had been consistently reminding voters that the economy was better under him, beginning his rallies by asking Americans: “Are you better off now than you were four years ago?”
While it can be argued that much of the credit for the economy from 2016 to 2020 belongs to the previous Obama administration, and many of the financial woes of the last four years can be blamed on the Covid-19 pandemic (from which the U.S. has recovered better than any G7 nation), the message clearly struck a chord with many American voters.
“Another factor is differential turnout,” Farrell continues. “If one of the candidates was able to expand the electorate, and convince voters who don’t often vote to vote for them… and it looks like President Trump was able to do that, he did really well with younger voters–who generally tend to be lower propensity voters.”
Trump did especially well with male Gen Z voters, and part of this could be thanks to his strategy of appearing on podcasts like the Joe Rogan Experience.
“Just in terms of accessing potential voters, some of these podcasts, they have incredible reach,” says Farrell. “It’s a ready-made marketing bundle. You can access that huge potential market… and the Harris campaign got there eventually, but a little late.”
Kamala Harris did make an appearance on the Call Her Daddy podcast, late in the campaign, which has a following comprised mainly of Millennial and Gen Z women. While popular, it has consistently ranked second on the list of most popular podcasts on Spotify, behind Joe Rogan.
“But this time around, it sounds like they’re going to be wielding a much bigger stick in the threat of tariffs.”
The question on the minds of many Canadians after this election is what Trumps second term could mean for the Canada-US relationship, both in terms of trade and our commitments to organizations like NATO.
“We are definitely attentive to what’s going to happen on the trade front,” says Farrell.
He says that during the first Trump term, from 2016 to 2020, Canada managed to hold its own, especially with the renegotiation of NAFTA, the free-trade agreement between Canada, the U.S. and Mexico, which was rebranded as the United State-Canada-Mexico Agreement, or USMCA.
“But this time around, it sounds like they’re going to be wielding a much bigger stick in the threat of tariffs,” Farrell predicts. “And for Canada, with our auto industry, oil sector, forestry, dairy… there’s a lot of potential harm that could come to the Canadian economy through protectionism.”
A major talking point during Trump’s last presidency was that other NATO countries are not paying their fair share into defense budgets. In 2006, NATO members agreed that they would spend two per cent of their respective GDPs on defense, but so far, roughly two thirds of member countries are meeting this mark. Canada certainly is not, with spending currently at about 1.37 per cent of its GDP.
“I don’t disagree that Canada should meet its obligations in that regard,” says Glen Morgan, who also teaches politics at Fanshawe. “And perhaps, under a Conservative government, should that happen in the next year or so, (those obligations) will be met.”
For reference, if Canada was to reach its target, military spending would need to amount to $81.9 billion.
“Even Trudeau said he was going to fund it, but that it would take years to get there,” Morgan continues. “But what that means for the rest of the budget at that point… well, there’s the question, because if you’re gonna pay more to the military, where are you gonna take the money from?”
(credit for video thumbnail: X.com/KamalaHarris)
