The College of Humanities and Social Sciences and the School of Public and International Affairs came together on Tuesday to discuss the 2016 elections. The discussion took place in Caldwell Lounge from 6–7:30 p.m. and was led by NC State professors of political science Michael Cobb, Steven Greene and Andrew Taylor.
Each professor gave a short presentation on the various aspects of the election that interested them.
Greene started off by citing “shy Trump voters” as a factor that obstructed the polls from being accurately predictive.
“[Trump’s rhetoric was] expected to have a heavily negative effect on his campaign, but 90 percent of Republicans were willing to overlook that and voted for Trump,” Greene said. “Not to offend people, but that’s the reality.”
Greene also discussed the impact of cultural and identity politics on the election results as well as the overpowering strength of sexual and racial resentment over economic anxiety. He described what he found to be the four biggest characteristics of the Trump administration: isolationism, opposition to free trade, immigration policy and support for authoritarianism.
Taylor was the next to speak on the election. He found it interesting that Trump did no better among white voters and Hispanic voters than Mitt Romney did in 2012, but did do better with African-American voters and young voters.
“Desire for change was an important underlying factor [in this election],” Taylor said.
Taylor also noted the significant amount of abstention: 14 states had higher voter turnout for down-ballot elections than the presidential race.
“Trump’s understanding of politics, and life in general for that matter, is very transactional,” Taylor said. “It may be that Trump puts more emphasis on getting things done than on the actual content of what’s being done.”
Last to speak was Cobb, who first discussed why the public conversation is about Trump’s victory, rather than Clinton’s loss.
“Why isn’t the conversation about Hillary’s failure?” Cobb asked. “Usually, this is because it would mean that Trump was merely a blimp on the predicted downward spiral of the Republican Party, and who knows? Trump could be wildly popular over the next four years.”
Cobb then went on to discuss the theories that explain Trump’s success including the “shy Trump supporter,” or social desirability, the assumption that citizens actually go vote, false prediction of what kinds of people showed up to vote and simple sampling, in which data is adjusted to reflect the assumed opinions of a population.
“This was not just a personality contest,” Cobb said. “There was a stark difference between the candidates’ opinions and policies.”
He listed some of the extremely polarized topics of the election, such as Supreme Court nominations, issueless campaign coverage and the gap between elitist leaders and the white working class, who felt a strong economic anxiety in this election.
The panel then hosted a Q&A session, which addressed questions about polling, the Electoral College and the policies of a Trump presidency, among other things.
“I thought it was a great event because I got a perspective from people [who] really know what they’re talking about,” said Josh Rees-Jones, a junior studying computer science. “I don’t claim to know what I’m talking about, so that’s why I came, to get an educated perspective on the election.”
