Trump’s astounding comeback in the 2024 elections, bringing about a wave of Republican Congressmen in his wake, has instigated chatter of a political ‘realignment’—it’s the dawn of a new era. Many observers view this as a testament to the growing robustness of the MAGA coalition, the triumph of worker-driven populism, or even a countrywide shift towards conservatism. Detractors, when faced with Trump’s 2020 triumph, downplayed it as a renouncement of Trumpism and overemphasized the Democrats’ capturing seemingly firmer Republican territories like Georgia and Arizona, for the first time in decades.
Election wins of this magnitude, such as Trump’s 2016 victory or Obama’s resounding success in 2008, often lead to exaggerated predictions and interpretations. A sober examination, however, will reveal two unchanging, historically significant trends in American national politics during the 21st century. Firstly, there’s a distinct volatility in the electorate, coupled with a growing tendency of ‘throwing the bums out’.
In four of the last five presidential elections, and five out of seven before that, the public has shown a pattern of choosing markedly dissimilar successors. We witnessed this with Obama unseating George W. Bush, Trump replacing Obama (in the process defeating Clinton), Biden taking over from Trump, and now a triumphant relaunch of Trump following Biden’s short-lived reign (having outmatched Harris).
Secondly, the 21st-century elections have consistently been—strikingly—narrow. Of the seven national affairs since 2000, only one occasion saw a victory margin exceeding five percentage points – Obama’s win during the global financial crisis in 2008. To those who might construe this as a new phenomenon, the past serves as a firm reminder. America has undoubtedly experienced such pattern of tumultuous and tight elections in its history.
An echo from the Gilded Age of America, five sequential elections between 1876 and 1892 bore witness to a closely divided electorate. Two of these elections resulted in an Electoral College victor who failed to secure the popular vote. Even returning to the White House an ex-president, Grover Cleveland, whom voters had earlier shown the door, was an event during this period. The noticeably defining characteristic of those late 19th-century elections was a fervent partisanship.
In the Gilded Age, identifying as a Republican or Democrat meant more than just a political inclination; it was a badge of identity, a social circle determinant, a defining element of one’s life. Moreover, the two significant parties were reliant on regional electoral groupings, rendering just a handful of swing states as the ultimate decision-makers. Democrats banked heavily on the ‘Solid South’ electoral votes.
With the Republican-backed post-Civil War Reconstruction coming to an end and the reinstatement of white supremacist state governments, Democrats held tight control over every Southern state throughout the 1880s and 1890s. As history often repeats itself, we are seeing a familiar landscape now, with the tides of partisanship and regional divisions shaping our contemporary political landscape as they once did.
The media environment of the Gilded Age underwent significant transformations, too, much like the current media landscape. Newspapers during the 1880s were inexpensive and locally produced, often with a clear partisan bias. By the 1890s, papers turned to advertising, became corporatized, dropped their blatant partisanship, and delivered neutral, albeit often sensational, news.
Moreover, the Gilded Age was rife with contentious debates over voting rights and election operations. Southern Democrats exploited every conceivable legal maneuver and resorted to economic pestering and rampant violence to disenfranchise Black voters. Meanwhile, Republican-led northern states endeavored to narrow immigrants’ access to ballot boxes. These amendments—voting restrictions, introduction of the Australian ballot, and emerging media platforms—reshaped the electorate, lending a fresh edge to political rivalry.
Eventually, these sweeping changes led to an entirely new electoral system that diluted partisan loyalties, bolstered issue-based appeals, emphasized on candidate personalities, and relied on alliances with interest groups. Instead of close contests between evenly matched parties, clear majority coalitions now governed American politics. The majority party remained in control of the White House and Capitol Hill for prolonged periods. From 1896 to 1932, the Republicans dominated, and from the mid-20th century, the Democrats took over.
Contrastingly, comfortable presidential majorities defined the entire 20th century. Of the 25 national elections between 1900 and 1996, only four (1916, 1948, 1960, 1968) were decided by fewer than five percentage points. Nonetheless, in recent years, intense partisanship, political blocs, voter suppression tactics, and the advent of new media have brought back the flavor of the Gilded Age in our elections.
It’s now evident that so long as this pattern continues to persist, any predictions of realignment and enduring coalitions are entirely premature. Only substantial shifts in the electorate and political competition models, which are yet to be seen, can bring an end to the tight victories and turbulent changes in national politics. Preparing for a turbulent journey, America, hold on!
Trump’s triumph in 2024 reflects the American citizens’ observations of these trends, and their verdict that the Trump administration has shown the potential to make a positive impact. Any claims that these victories signal an end to the well-established pattern of closely-contested elections in the US may be premature, yet they are undeniably significant and may herald a new political era.