Trump takeaways: UTM profs discuss what happened, and what’s next

As the world ponders the aftermath of the recent U.S. election, a panel of six political experts from the University of Toronto Mississauga gathered Nov. 14 to dissect the results. They looked at the election from a number of perspectives, including what issues motivated voters, the environmental implications of a Trump presidency and speculation about what the future might hold for global politics.

Department chair and associate professor Ed Schatz moderated the event, joined by associate professor Mark Lippincott, assistant professors Erin Tolley and Andrea Olive, lecturer Spyridon Kotsovilis and post-doctoral researcher Randy Besco.

Besco and Tolley discussed voter motivation and behaviour at the ballot box. “It was an extraordinary election when you consider the candidates and what they said, but the results are totally typical,” Besco said. “Despite the fact that Donald Trump is an extraordinary candidate and all the reasons we have for thinking something different should have happened, it didn’t. Overall, voters cast their ballots along partisan lines.”

“Trump won because he appealed to the nostalgia of white, working-class voters, people who work in service and manufacturing jobs,” Besco said. “Trump attracted working-class voters, people who are better off than average, but used to do better—people whose parents had better jobs and remember a time when they could earn more money. Donald Trump appealed to their economic anxieties and worries about the future.” This worry tied directly to voter fears that non-Americans were taking jobs, and Trump’s promise to clamp down on illegal immigration. “We don’t know whether race or economics mattered more to voters,” Besco said. “Untangling these things will take a while.”

Tolley, who studies the intersection of ethnicity, gender and politics, noted that there was no radical shift from partisan ideals, and that race seemed to matter more than gender when it came to voter behaviour. “Overall, Hillary Clinton did win the women’s vote, but when you look at the demographic breakdown, 53 per cent of white women voters and just 6 per cent of black women supported Donald Trump,” she said. “In the past, we’ve seen shared race motivate affinity between voters. In the 2008 and 2012 elections, some voters left the Republican Party to support Barack Obama. But Clinton did not see Republican women leaving the party to support her. Partisan identification has typically been a stronger predictor of people’s vote choice.”

Lippincott noted that lack of voter trust in political leaders, and the importance of single issue platforms were major influences in voter behaviour. “Donald Trump was seen as the more honest candidate. In the previous seven weeks, one fact checker found 490 lies issued by the Trump campaign in the previous weeks, yet voters found him to be the more honest candidate. What does that say? The voting population appears to be immune to the difference between lies and truth,” Lippincott said. “If voters can’t make a choice on the basis of truth, they will support the one candidate they think will come through on the issue they care about—the wall, abortion, jobs, protection of religious freedom or eradication of ISIS.“

Olive reviewed Trump’s statements about environmental issues, including his disavowal of climate change, the possibility of reopening the Keystone Pipeline issue, and his intentions to leave the Paris Accord, cancel the Clean Power Plan and appoint a climate-change denier to the Environmental Protection Agency transition team. “Canadian Prime Minister Justin Trudeau will have to follow through on climate change commitments, standing with other European Union countries in the Paris Agreement,” she said. “Canada will have to lead, when traditionally we have followed.”

Kotsovilis provided a global perspective on the implications of the Republican victory, noting that Trump’s success could be a sign of things to come in upcoming elections in France, Germany and the Netherlands, where right-wing candidates are vying for power. “Trump is part of an expanding populist, globalist, nativist phenomenon of reaction to global integration processes, like globalization or Europeanization,” he said. “We’re seeing people, who are anxious about their incomes, voting against policies that appear to be eroding their protections and exposing them to world markets. They vote for whatever hope is thrown their way.” Noting the reactive votes to the Greek bailout package and the recent Brexit vote in Britain, Kotsovilis also said many countries are concerned about whether Trump will be able to follow through on his statements about ending U.S. participation in global trade deals and treaties. 

Panelists noted a few silver linings in the results. “The glass ceiling wasn’t cracked, but there were examples of minority women making some gains,” Tolley said. “We saw the election of four female visible minority candidates. That’s important because women in the Senate have a history of working across partisan lines to achieve goals, like legislation on sex trafficking and violence against women.”

According to Olive, “there is a lot of great environmental work happening in the U.S. by cities and states, just not at the federal level. We have every reason to believe they will continue what they’re doing. At the sub-national level, provinces like Ontario and Quebec, who have agreements with California for carbon caps and trade, will have to invite other states who want to get involved.”

And what lies ahead once President-Elect Donald Trump assumes office in January? In Lippincott’s view, Trump will have a difficult time delivering on his campaign promises. “He is riding two wild horses,” Lippincott said. “He has a group of people who can’t stand the establishment, along with a wing of the Republican Party who detest him.  A lot of Republican Senators are not followers of Donald Trump’s policies. He’ll have to figure out how to make a deal and get them on his side.“

“This is a shaky coalition and it’s not clear how Trump will govern,” Schatz said. “Trump has never governed before, and never had to run on a record. His approach to social relations seems to be a scorched earth approach. That might not work over four years and he will have to tread more lightly than his rhetoric suggests.”