Turning Down the Electoral Temperature

A new poll from NBC News finds that 62% of respondents believe that who wins the 2024 election will “make a great deal of difference in [their] life.” Cook Political Report’s Amy Walter notes that this finding continues an upward trend: 56% of respondents said the same in 2020, up from 48% in 2016.

Americans didn’t always see elections this way. As Walter notes, in 1992, only 21% of respondents thought this way. What happened? How could a country that agrees on so many things be so fearful of the result of a democratic process?

Part of the problem, no doubt, stems from the constant refrain that this is the “most important election” repeated ad nauseum by both the media and partisan actors. The stakes of Trump’s return are apocalyptically described by his opponent, Vice President Kamala Harris, as an “unhinged” threat to the country. In recent remarks, she went so far as to refer to him as a “fascist.”

The media have done much the same: “Trump’s extreme vision for America hikes pressure on Harris,” a CNN headline recently declared. The Washington Post worried about “Trump’s erratic endgame: Dark threats, personal insults and some dancing.” 

Across the pond, a Guardian article ominously describing “what’s at stake” explains, “If Trump wins the election, US cities are at risk of military takeovers…” The New Republic’s July cover featured an image of Trump’s face grafted onto a famous picture of Hitler, mustache and all. 

Trump has, of course, only added further fuel to this fire, suggesting repeatedly at rallies that, if he loses the election, America as we know it is done for. 

Some on the right will claim that the solution to this quandary is an easy one: Get the government out of people’s lives, and they won’t have to be so concerned about who is leading it. 

But that perspective requires an enormous degree of suspended disbelief. There’s no libertarian revolution coming to shrink the administrative state to something so small it can be drowned in a bathtub. Yes, the administrative state needs reining in, and with Chevron deference now well and truly dead, we may begin to see its power wane. But that undoubtedly won’t be enough to restore a sense of normalcy to American voters. 

What’s needed is a renewed focus on building a durable governing majority based on the actual—often shared—desires of the American people. 

American Compass polling in late 2023 found that five major political positions—increasing private sector competition, supporting domestic semiconductor production, reducing drug prices, investing in infrastructure, and tariffs on China—were overwhelmingly supported across party lines, with an average net-positivity rating of 43%, meaning respondents preferred doing so by a wide margin.

The shared perspective doesn’t end there. Take more recent polling about the size and role of government. While politicians on the Left and Right dogmatically cling to an either-or choice of tax increases or budget cuts, voters across both parties support commonsense budget cuts to address the deficit alongside tax increases to pay for the areas where federal, state, and local governments provide benefits. 

And then there are the issues where Americans of all stripes see Washington’s perceived uniparty as working against their interests. While Republicans and Democrats play-act at addressing America’s immigration crisis, a CBS News poll last summer found that 62% of respondents—including Republicans and Democrats—favored a theoretical “program to deport all undocumented immigrants.” A similar consensus has formed on globalization, free trade, and China, revealing “a yawning disconnect” between an elite supportive of all three and a general public much more skeptical. 

The problem is that, rather than focus on cultivating productive debate on these and other areas where Americans agree and tweaking policies on the margins, politicians instead focus on the hot-button political issues where voters have real differences. 

If you look at polarizing subjects like climate policy and student loans, these issues pit a small, elite minority opinion against a much larger, working-class majority. President Biden has focused his policy and PR energy on these issues, from “the largest public investment in climate action in history” to attempting to forgive student loans.

When this type of approach, married to executive-only action, applies to the candidate’s biggest proposals—President Obama’s DACA designs, Trump’s border wall, Biden’s, well, everything—it makes sense that voters feel the world could shift under their feet depending on an election’s results.

This presents a massive opportunity. By building on the shared interests of Americans, a durable majority can help make easier the hard stuff of politics—the coalition building and horse trading that defined the mushy era of bipartisanship. While the Old Guard’s idea of “good” policy was corrosive, and the artifice constructed to support elite and corporate interests very much worth smashing, the idea that people of different persuasions could find common cause is a worthwhile one. It just needs to flow from responsive politics, not the will of Old Washington or a small segment of highly educated, affluent voters.

Thankfully, dark as our political moment may seem, this kind of politics is quietly ascendent in certain corners of Washington. Just last year, the political odd couple of progressive champion Sen. Elizabeth Warren and GOP vice-presidential nominee Sen. JD Vance teamed up on a bill to hold banking CEOs accountable. Or notice the conservative affinity for Democratic FTC Chair Lina Khan and her willingness to go after big business. Then there’s the largely bipartisan response to the threat from China, and concerning revitalizing domestic manufacturing as well.

The unifying thread throughout all of these efforts is that they’re broadly popular and manifestly in the public interest. More of that spirit—and less “most important election of our lifetime” fear-mongering—is desperately needed.