Racism won the election, but not in the way you think
Disclaimer: I am not a United States citizen, nor do I live there. But I am a sociologist and social statistician. Below, I piece together my thoughts on the US election based on various data points I have seen trotted about in the media and post election coverage. For a first person—and far more visceral—account that draws similar conclusions to my own, you should read Kacy Howe's [1] story and reflections on being attacked by Trump supporters on election night.
In the days since the US election a dominant narrative is emerging about how Trump, "an unstable bigot, sexual predator and compulsive liar," could possibly have been elected to the highest office in that land, and the most powerful on the planet.
So the story goes: the US is racist.
I do not disagree with this assessment, however, I am concerned that common understandings of racism and how it works are likely to cause people to respond to these deceptively plain words in unhelpful ways.
When most people in the United States imagine racism, they imagine people shouting racist slurs, or threatening groups that are not like them with physical violence. Though there are a frightening lot of people in the United States that are comfortable with these forms of overt racism, these are anathema to vast majority.
There are not enough Americans that are comfortable with overt racism to explain an electoral outcome like Trump. Instead, the racism that has lead to his election is of another form, far more insidious, and, arguably, banal.
Early analysis of Tuesday's election result paints a damning picture of white America: they, and nobody else, elected Donald Trump as president.
A popular graphic that has been making the rounds since the morning after the election shows that 63% of white men, and 52% of white women voted for Trump. Representing a combined 70% of the electorate, this was all but enough to hand the election to Trump.
A popular graphic that has been making the rounds on social media. (Source unknown)
Though this result is highly instructive, and underscores the racialized nature of the election result, it does not tell a complete story.
In order to more completely understand things, we have to also consider absolute levels of voting in Tuesday's election, and how they changed, or didn't change, from previous years. The number of voters that turned out for each candidate fell dramatically between elections among many key groups. Crucially, it more often than not fell far more for Clinton than it did for Trump.
Another popular graphic that has been making the rounds on social media. (Source unknown)
In the United States, it is common for only about 70% of 'eligible voters' to register, and among those that do, only about 80% to actually show up to vote. This is how they end up with an overall turnout rate of about 56%. [2] In fact, Trump was elected president with support from only a little over one quarter of eligible voters.
As a result, US election results are determined as much by what experts call 'voter intensity,' as they are by things like preferences and values. In other words, elections often pivot on who cares enough to show up to vote, rather than on what a majority of Americans want.
Going into Tuesday's election there were countless scenarios that could have played out. It is an understatement to say that Trump was an unprecedented candidate in a lot of ways—much of the republican establishment loathed him. There was a very real possibility that a lot of republican voters would not vote for him.
On the other hand, there was also the possibility that the threat of such an extreme republican candidate would motivate democrats to get out and vote. The fact that Trump was on the ticket meant that the stakes would be the highest they have been in living memory.
What ended up happening is that republicans turned out to vote as they ordinarily would. They showed up to vote for their state, congressional and senate representatives, and, while they were at it, they cast their presidential vote for Trump. Crucially, despite their dislike for him, they did not vote instead for Clinton or a third party candidate.
In other words, republicans simply voted as they always have.
Meanwhile, democrats chose not to vote at all. There is an extensive literature on why republicans tend to be more likely to vote than democrats. In this election, democratic voter turnout dropped to levels that we have not seen since the years before Obama's runs for the presidency.
Voter turnout for each of the two major parties over the last three elections. (Source)
It would appear that democrats did not turn out to vote because they did not like Hilary Clinton. There are a number of reasons for why many did not like her, some justified, and others not. But in the end, all that really matters is that this aversion to Hilary lead them not to vote.
Trump was elected President of the United States of America because when they were faced with a presidential candidate that they did not much care for, scores of democratic voters chose not to vote at all, and scores of republican voters chose to hold their noses and carry on, business as usual.
This is how, even though Hilary had much higher support than Trump among educated whites (and likely still does), come election night, she managed to lose this group to Trump ("Among college-educated whites, 45% voted for Clinton – 39% of men and 51% of women.").
Returning now to the matter of racism. A lot of the democratic voters that despise Trump, but did not vote, surely regard themselves as not only not racist, but also likely anti-racist. I suspect that a lot of republican voters that voted for their usual candidate also feel the same about themselves.
Neither of these groups are the types of people that would shout racial slurs and threaten people that are different from them with physical violence. Most of these people are probably very polite and law-abiding, and probably have friends from a variety of social backgrounds.
But as Tuesday night's election results attest, both of these groups are still profoundly racist, only in a different, "indirect"—i.e. 'systemic'—sort of way. Simply stated, neither of these two groups of voters cared adequately enough to consider the importance of their vote choice for people less privileged than themselves.
Voting is a modest form of power, but it is still a form of power. These people had power, and they exercised it. And they did so in a way that will seriously alter the lives of countless people—a friend of mine that is a leading international security expert had this to say on election night: "A shitload of people are going to die because of this."
Every white democrat that did not vote against Trump, could have offset a white vote for Trump. As a population, white democrats always had the power to achieve a greater impact than all the minority groups that are often cited as crucial components of the democratic base. Unfortunately, they couldn't be bothered to use this power—instead they fixated on their dislike for Hilary, reasoned or not.
Meanwhile, every republican that held their nose and voted for Trump, could have also offset a vote for Trump. As a population they too had disproportionate power to really make a difference. Instead, discomfort they might have felt in deviating from their usual voting blinded them from the concerns of people not like them.
Racism reared its ugly head in America on Tuesday, but not because people decided consciously that they disliked people different from themselves. It did so because they didn't bother to make a conscious choice at all. The election of Trump was not a positive action by a white majority to keep non-whites down. It was the result of their inaction.
You would think by now that we should all be very familiar with the common cliche:
The only thing necessary for the triumph of evil is for good men to do nothing. [3]
And yet, Tuesday night's election result suggests this not to be the case.
[1] Unfortunately, I am having a very hard time locating additional information about Kacy Howe. So, I cannot attest to the veracity of their story. However, even if the story isn't all true, I still think the lessons drawn from it are compelling. There have been many other verified reports of assaults by emboldened Trump supporters on election night and since.
[2] Literally, 70%*70% = 49%.
[3] This quote is generally attributed to Edmond Burke, but there are reasons to think he never actually said it.