An esteemed panel discussed the future of Trump’s presidency and potential explanations for how Trump won.
On November 12, the School of Government and International Affairs hosted a 2024 Election Recap, featuring Dr. Jeff DeWitt, Dr. April Johnson, Dr. Benjamin Taylor and Dr. Carl Snook. The panel covered a range of topics including Trump’s second term in office, the current state of electoral politics and what the election results mean for the future.
Much of the panel discussed the importance of Trump’s Cabinet members and advisors. His team currently includes picks like Susie Wiles as Chief of Staff, Pete Hegseth as Secretary of Defense, Matt Gaetz as Attorney General, Gov. Kristi Noem as Department of Homeland Security Secretary, John Ratcliffe as Central Intelligence Agency Director, Marco Rubio as Secretary of State, Tulsi Gabbard as Director of National Intelligence, Mike Waltz as National Security Advisor, and Elon Musk and Vivek Ramaswamy to lead the potential “Department of Government Efficiency.”
Trump’s pick for his team are large indicators of how this upcoming term will pan out. When asked about how likely Project 2025’s implementation is, Dr. DeWitt explained the pick for “border czar,” Tom Homan, who was a co-author of Project 2025, could mean a potential alignment with Project 2025. Dr. DeWitt explained that Trump is going to continue “recruiting a lot of thinkers that contributed to that project and certainly the principles and ideas.”
Dr. DeWitt continued talking about the future of Project 2025 and its goals.
“Pay close attention to who he appoints as secretary of education… that’s the one they really want to zero in on…[considering] talks about abolishing the department of education.”
According to the panel, Project 2025’s goal is not the same as most republicans, as they believe in giving control of public education to individual states.
“Here, it’s centralized control in the white house” Says Dr. DeWitt. This includes restricting funding in school districts that teach things they disagree with and changing the accreditation services for colleges at the national level.
Looking past the upcoming presidential term, the panelists discuss what a second Trump presidency will mean for the 2028 election. One audience member asked “Is JD Vance the heir-apparent, if not, what is the future of the republican party?”
Dr. Taylor explained that JD Vance’s lack of popularity means there is no clear republican nominee in a post-Trump election.
“I think 2028 is going to be very very bloody on the republican side… It’s going to pretty much be a free for all for both democrats and republicans.”
The panel also discussed the projected outcome of the 2026 midterms. Dr. Taylor explained that the president’s party is nearly guaranteed to lose congressional seats in the midterms. Since there is currently a narrow three seat Republican majority in the Senate, the midterm elections could mean a shift in power.
“Look at President Trump in 2018. He went from having a 241 seat majority in the House, he lost 41 seats. So if you’re a republican, the next two years are good times for you.” Dr. Taylor continued. “They are not going to be good times two years after that.”
A shift in voting demographics was a topic heavily covered during the panel as well. Not only did all seven swing states vote for Trump, but key demographics shifted as well. According to Dr. Johnson, 25% black men, 50% of latino men, and 40% of Asian men voted for Trump in the 2024 election. “These are traditional locks for the democratic party.”
While there was still a large voter turnout, there was less this election than the last. According to the panel, those who earned $50,000 a year or less voted 50% for Trump, which Biden won in 2020 with 55%.
83% of people who described themselves as enthusiastic/satisfied about the way things are going in the U.S. voted for Harris, while 62% of people who described themselves as dissatisfied/angry about the way things are going in the U.S. voted for Trump.
Those who have no college degree voted for Trump 14% more, and those with a college degree voted for Harris 13% more. 4% of people who identify as Democrat voted for Trump, while 5% of people who identify as Republican voted for Harris.
Something else that could have affected the results of the election, according to Dr. Johnson, was sexism. “Are we ready to have a woman as our president? Over the last few years our answer has been no.”
A study presented during the panel showed that 14% of Americans do not believe women are as qualified as men to hold the highest offices in government, and 17% of Americans believe women should take care of running their homes and leave running the country up to men.
Another key aspect of this election was the rise of new media. “This is one area that democrats, I think, fall short on. And if they want to compete they need a media infrastructure that can at least counter the drum beat barrage that you get from conservative media,” said Dr. DeWitt.
Dr. Snook used the Joe Rogan podcast as an example. According to him, the 35 million people that watched Trump and Rogan could have had a huge impact on the election.
“Everybody has their own silo now, where they get all their information,” continued Dr. Snook.
“Maybe walking into someone else’s space, like on Joe Rogan, is one of the things that made the difference in this election.”
