By Ron Cheong | Photo by A.I. 

Donald Trump did not win the Election, well intentioned Democrats precipitated their Party’s loss by lower turnout as shown in the table of latest available numbers below: 

Pro-Palestinian Protest Vote

Trump held onto his base with inroads into Latinos and other minorities (mainly Black males) and roughly kept abreast of the increase in electorate size with the intake of young, less educated, low-income voters.   

These gains amounted to 2.2 million, but the main factor that allowed his win was that Democratic turnout, as reflected in their vote count, shrunk by 7.5 million (9.3%) compared to 2020, even if we ignore the growth in the size of the electorate and attribute all of Trump’s gain to cannibalization of Democratic votes, that leaves a 5.3 million or a 3.4% decline from in the overall vote, which translates into 6.5% decline from the 2020 Presidential Democratic vote, attributable to staying away, failing to mark the top box, or writing something else.

A substantial part of the slippage was attributable to the pro-Palestinian vote abstention. The Muslim community was traumatized by the Biden administration’s support for Israel and a large number of deaths in Gaza

Although Trump is a known quantity, they might have figured that they couldn’t make things any worse and, throwing caution to the wind, switched to Trump.

Other dissatisfaction with the Gaza situation manifested in widespread Pro-Palestinian protests across the country, in cities, and on campuses. The Gaza tragedy also mobilized the left wing of the Democratic party. They tried and failed to get the Palestinian issue on the DNC convention agenda in exchange for not leaving the presidential vote on the ballot unfilled or writing in someone else’s name, resulting in no doubt in many of them abstaining.

From Rallying Support for Trump to Regret

Rabiul Chowdhury, a Philadelphia investor who chaired the Abandon Harris campaign in Pennsylvania and co-founded Muslims for Trump, said, “Trump won because of us….” In the seven swing states combined with 93 electoral votes, it is estimated that the Muslim population accounted for 470,000 of the vote. Trump won all seven swing states with 764,000 votes over Harris. It is plausible that the Muslim vote plus the non-Muslim Palestinian protest vote pushed Trump over the top in the swing states, which was the key to winning the election. 

An NBC analysis supports this. Harris’ losses in Michigan, Wisconsin, and Pennsylvania “were driven by weak turnout in heavily Democratic cities,” like Wayne County, Philadelphia County, and Milwaukee County. 

But regret seems to have set in quickly, “… we’re not happy with his Secretary of State pick and others,” said Chowdhury.

Trump picked Marco Rubio, a staunch Israel supporter, for Secretary of State. Rubio has called Hamas vicious animals and said he would not call for a cease-fire in Gaza.

He also picked Mike Huckabee, who has long called himself a Zionist Ambassador to Israel. Huckabee is against a two-state solution and has said that the West Bank belongs to Israel and that “the title deed was given by God to Abraham and his heirs.” There is no such thing as a Palestinian.

And Elise Stefanik, who called the UN a “cesspool of antisemitism” for the agency condemning the deaths in Gaza, was picked to be the ambassador to the United Nations.

The Collapse of the Democrat Vote

It’s not hard to see how the Palestinian protest vote could have driven much of the Democrat’s collapsed vote in 2024. The Muslim vote, which is traditionally overwhelmingly Democrat, is estimated at 1.4 million. Many of them could have abstained, and others supported Trump.  

Third-party candidates also garner some of the protest votes. Independent candidate Robert F. Kennedy pulled in 746,000 votes, and Jill Stein of the Green Party garnered 769,000 votes. A Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR) survey found that in Michigan, 40 percent of Muslim voters supported Stein, 18% supported Trump, and 12% supported Harris.

Other Democrats may have stayed home, not checked the Presidential box on the ballot, or written in someone else’s name.

Some undecided Black male voters were also upset about the Gaza situation. Some went to Trump, and others likely just sat it out.

Biden’s Unwavering Support for Israel – Harris Trying to Thread the Needle

Biden, who came out of the Cold War era, believes that the US needs strong allies in the region to counter Russia’s influence in the Arab world, keep the oil flowing, and counter Iran’s growing potential as a nuclear nation. In addition, Israeli lobby groups like the American Israel Public Affairs Committee (AIPAC) wield considerable influence in Washington. When Netanyahu’s aggression privately angered Biden, he did not waiver in his support.

On the other hand, Harris was trying to thread the needle while remaining loyal to Biden. When she became the Democratic Party presidential nominee, she declined to meet with Netanyahu when he visited the White House.

In her acceptance speech to the DNC convention, she tried to strike a balance:

“President Biden and I are working to end this war such that Israel is secure, the hostages are released, the suffering in Gaza ends, and the Palestinian people can realize their right to dignity. Security. Freedom. And self-determination.”

Even with her husband staunchly Jewish, while campaigning, Harris announced an anti-Islamophobia strategy –  amid the pro-Palestinian protests and soaring antisemitism across the country, on college campuses, on the streets of major cities, and in the halls of Congress.   Her stepdaughter was raising money for the Palestinian Children’s Relief Fund on her personal Instagram account.  

Some sections of the media nevertheless portrayed Harris as deceptively delivering different messages to Muslim and Jewish voters.

Non-Muslim pro-Palestinian protest voters believed that under Harris, there would be no changes to Biden’s Israeli policy, which they were seeking.

Unintended Consequences

Though traditional Democratic voters’ moral outrage was an ethical stand, withholding their vote has not, in the end, resulted in a more receptive administration, judging by the cabinet picks so far.  

Indeed, many of them may have made the decision of conscience singly or in small groups. However, each small decision cumulatively eclipsed their expected impact on the election.  

What lessons can be drawn from this situation? It might be that in an existential election like this one, with so much at stake and where every last vote counts, try your best to stand back and consider the larger picture and possible consequences of the action you are about to take.

Sometimes, you have to stand back and weigh the consequences. You don’t want to cut off your nose to spoil your face.

____

Ron Cheong is a retired banker with extensive international experience, including the Caribbean, and is a Fellow of the Institute of Canadian Bankers with a BSc from the University of Toronto.

  #BlackMaleVoters, #DemocraticTurnout, #DonaldTrump, #ElectionAnalysis, #ElectionResults, #GazaTragedy, #LatinoVote, #MuslimCommunity, #ProPalestinianProtests, #ProPalestinianVote