Several political science professors discussed the factors that led to the electoral victory of president-elect and 1968 Wharton graduate Donald Trump at a roundtable on Nov. 14.
The discussion at Irvine Auditorium, titled “Election Roundtable: A Look at the 2024 Presidential Election," was moderated by the Executive Director of the Penn Program on Opinion Research and Election Studies Stephanie Perry. Professors John Lapinski, Matthew Levendusky, Marc Meredith, and Diana Mutz discussed their thoughts on the election and had a question and answer session with an audience of about 100 undergraduates and faculty.
The event was part of the School of Arts and Sciences' Knowledge by the Slice series. It was co-organized by the Robert A. Fox Leadership Program, PORES, and the SNF Paideia Program.
Panelists cited voter disenchantment with Kamala Harris on several key issues — the economy, immigration, and the Israel-Hamas war — as factors that led to increased Republican voter turnout and Trump’s ultimate victory.
“This was an election that was going to be decided by which party is better able to get their supporters to the polls, and that, in fact, was the story this election. Republicans more effectively got Republican [voters] to show up to vote more than Democrats did,” Meredith said.
Lapinski is the director of the NBC Decision Desk, which analyzes election data and calls races. He told The Daily Pennsylvanian that signs of increased Republican turnout in exit polls and vote totals from early states meant that, on Election Day, Lapiniski knew that Trump was going to win “very early on.”
He noted that help from the 40 Penn undergraduates who work for PORES aided the decision desk in making an early prediction and analysis that “was different from [NBC’s] competition.”
Levendusky and Mutz also cited Harris’ ties to the “generally unpopular” Biden administration as another plausible reason for her defeat on Nov. 5. Levendusky suggested that, if Biden had chosen not to run for reelection and a candidate that was not tied to the administration had run, the election outcome may have been different.
“It still probably would have been an uphill battle, but this is an election that’s decided in a handful of states by a couple of percentage points, so a small change could well have made the difference,” Levendusky said.
The event also featured discussion of Congressional races, including the Pennsylvania senatorial race between incumbent Sen. Bob Casey (D-Pa.) and Republican candidate Dave McCormick, which is heading to a recount.
Levendusky and Meredith clarified that, while money raised by a campaign may not greatly impact a presidential race — Harris raised considerably more money than Trump — it has a more noticeable impact in more local, down-ballot races.
Meredith cited several cases, including four senatorial races, as instances in which voters chose members of different parties in the presidential and senatorial races. Meredith also referenced the House of Representatives of the Pennsylvania General Assembly, which has maintained a slim Democratic majority despite most of the state having voted for Trump’s election to the Oval Office.
The talk brought together a diverse group of attendees, from underclassmen students to Penn professors.
College first-year Alessia Gaetani said that she attended the event because she felt as though Penn has a “left-leaning campus, and there was a lot of momentum on the Democratic side versus the Republican.” She said she hoped to hear experts share their theories regarding the election results.
Gaetani added that she found the discussion about down-ballot races and split-ticket voting fascinating.
College senior Diya Amlani also said that she found the differences in presidential and down-ballot voting most interesting because she had thought that “most people will just vote down party lines.”
While political scientists may continue to dissect the factors that led to the 2024 victory of Trump and the Republican Party, Mutz suggested that now may be the time to take a break from politics.
“I think politics at its very best is a means to an end,” she said. “It’s a means to having a time to pursue interests and concerns in our lives, and I think going home to enjoy time with our families and not constantly talking about politics is an acceptable choice.”
The Daily Pennsylvanian is an independent, student-run newspaper. Please consider making a donation to support the coverage that shapes the University. Your generosity ensures a future of strong journalism at Penn.
Donate