A Week Before the U.S. Election: Who is up, who is down?

American voters’ growing discontent amid the upcoming elections

The outcome of the U.S. election is not only important for the American people but will also impact Japan and other countries across the globe. What are American voters concerned about according to recent polls? Recent polls show that a record high percentage of Americans are dissatisfied with the direction the country is heading in, believing that the country is on the wrong track. Among pollsters, this is considered one of the most important and telling public opinion findings in term of its tendency to aid in predicting election outcomes. There was rising discontent at the end of the Trump administration and Joe Biden was elected. The same was true at the end of the George W. Bush administration and Barack Obama was elected. However, in 28 of the last 36 years, a majority of Americans have voiced this kind of dissatisfaction, with the last time optimism was expressed being in 2002. Therefore, while this finding may help predict the election outcome, it also reflects that there is a deeper-rooted level of dissatisfaction that transcends current reality.

Almost 50% of Americans believe that they were better of four years ago, which has become a key message in Donald Trump’s campaign. While those perceptions of voters contradict the underlying economic indicators of fairly low unemployment, a high stock market, and declining inflation, people tend to vote based on their feelings and not necessarily on facts. There are great differences between Republicans and Democrats concerning what issues they deem important. Republicans focus on the economy, immigration, national security, and terrorism. Democrats are more likely to be concerned about the future of American democracy, the Supreme Court and some of its recent decisions, and women’s right to have access to abortion.

In particular, immigration and abortion are polarizing topics that divide the electorate. A majority of Americans back mass deportation for undocumented immigrants, and a similar majority supports access to abortion. Women are especially concerned about abortion rights and even among Democrats, worries about undocumented immigrants are high. The call for mass deportation, which would affect an estimated 11 million undocumented people in the country, brings back memories of the incarceration of Japanese Americans at the beginning of World War II, one of the dark chapters in the country’s modern history. It raises concerns about human rights implications and the potential for the creation of a police state to achieve that goal of deportation. Such divisions among the electorate may heavily influence voter turnout and election results.

Partisan polarization and the call for strong leadership

The United States is experiencing deep partisan polarization, with Republicans and Democrats disagreeing on almost every issue—from policy topics such as climate change and immigration to cultural issues such as gun rights, slavery and gender identity. This is further amplified by Republicans’ preference for big houses even if it requires driving everywhere, while Democrats tend to accept living in smaller houses if it allows them to live in an area where facilities are located in within walking distance, practically resulting in self-segregation into two separate communities. This leads to a situation in which it is unlikely for people to encounter others with different opinions in their daily lives. Bill Clinton’s political advisor James Carville coined the famous phrase “It’s the economy, stupid.” While this holds true, current data on different views of American culture suggests that “It’s also culture, stupid.”

Nearly half of Republicans, and a quarter of Democrats express a preference for a strong leader unencumbered by the courts or Congress, which in my opinion threatens American democracy. As voters feel dissatisfied with democracy, these results suggest that they are willing to give up their democratic freedoms and rights in hopes that a more authoritarian system would solve their problems more effectively. This sentiment is evidenced by the majority support among both Republicans and Democrats for governing by executive order, bypassing approval by Congress—a trend that has grown with each successive administration, from Barack Obama to Joe Biden. This approach is not only questionable from a democratic point of view, but it is also disruptive since executive orders can be easily overturned by the next president. In light of Donald Trump’s promises to investigate political opponents and reduce the number of civil servants, and with four out of 10 Republicans agreeing that the president should be able to pardon friends, family, and political supporters who have been convicted of a crime, this trend toward support for unchecked executive power is highly concerning within the framework of the rule of law.

International concerns: isolationist trends in the U.S. and their global impact

Obviously, these developments and the election outcome are of international concern. In fact, Americans are increasingly dissatisfied with the United States’ position in the world. Satisfaction on this topic peaked at the end of the Clinton administration and has decreased dramatically ever since. Many Americans have a difficult time accepting the fact that the country is in a “relative decline.” While it still has the biggest military and the biggest economy, America is no longer the only superpower in the world. It now has to compete with China, Japan, and Europe, so the situation differs greatly from the immediate post-war years. Today we live in a multipolar world with other major players, which causes a rise in isolationist sentiments, especially among Republicans, which is partially driven by isolationist initiatives of Donald Trump. Before, for many years it was Democrats who expressed slightly more isolationist views. When Donald Trump says, “Make America great again,” in my opinion this implies making America the only major superpower in the world. Such a unilateral stance, combined with many Trump supporters opposing compromise with allied countries, further complicates international alliances.

Specific international issues that are clearly important in this election include the conflict between Russia and Ukraine, for example. Currently, voters believe by two to one that the U.S. should push for a negotiated settlement in Ukraine, which was not the case a year ago. It seems like the American public is tired of this ongoing war with no end in sight. This year, it took six months for the U.S. Congress to pass an aid bill for Ukraine and it could take even longer next year, if at all. Donald Trump claims that he would end the war immediately if he were to become the next president. Even though this is unlikely, providing further aid to Ukraine would most likely be an uphill struggle as at least half of Republican voters believe that too much aid has already been given to Ukraine.

The war in Gaza is ongoing and has now expanded to Lebanon. Actually, the sympathy of Americans for Israel has rebounded during the last few months. Initially, it was strong immediately after October 7th, but as the war unfolded and the number of victims in Gaza increased, support for the Israeli effort in Gaza declined. One possible explanation for the rebound in support may be that Americans—probably like many people—like to be associated with the winner, and Israel appears to be dominant right now. One trend that should be of concern for Israel, however, is that support for Israel among younger Americans keeps dwindling. It still remains stronger than the support for the Palestinians, but the gap has narrowed dramatically. I have repeated to Israeli officials that they are losing the support of the next generation of American leaders and if they are not careful, when they need support from the American public 20 years from now, they will not be able to receive it.

Of course, the negative views of Americans on China are an issue of great importance, especially for Japan and other Asian countries. In fact, the perception of China among the American public has never been worse, not even after Tiananmen Square. The political ramifications of this are that if an American politician says something negative about China, eight in 10 Americans will agree regardless of the content. It is a dangerous time for U.S.-China relations because of the American public’s strong anti-Chinese stance.

Trade has been an irritant in U.S.-Japan relations for many years, even though that is not necessarily the case today, and America’s willingness to engage with the world on trade is becoming more and more negative, reflecting the findings of survey data on Americans’ attitudes toward globalization and trade. The American public acknowledges that trade is good for the country, but they do not believe that trade benefits them personally. Instead, many Americans believe that trade does not contribute to creating jobs or lead to raising wages or lowering prices. Older, white, blue-collar workers are the strongest opponents to international trade, despite the fact that the decrease in jobs, for example in steel mills, has not been caused by imports, but by advances in technology leading to higher automation and productivity. Nevertheless, lack of support for international trade is influencing politics. It is one of the reasons why the Biden administration has introduced no major trade initiatives, as there was no support for it among Democratic voters. Republican voters also do not support trade initiatives, as witnessed by the negativity of Donald Trump’s rhetoric on trade and his threats to impose high tariffs on imports.

Swing voters and uncertainty: the tight U.S. presidential race

We must understand that the presidential race polls are essentially tied, even though the poll results fluctuate slightly from day to day and differ depending on the media outlet. While all polls have a margin of error, they show that men tend to support Donald Trump and women tend to support Kamala Harris, but only by a very slight margin. White people are more likely to support Donald Trump, whereas minorities are more likely to support Kamala Harris. Kamala Harris’ strongest support is among people under the age of 30, and Donald Trump’s strongest support is among those over the age of 50. One of the biggest differences in the electorate is voters’ educational background: 62% of those with postgraduate education say they support Kamala Harris, while 56% of those who only have a high school education or less support Donald Trump. This particular division in American society has grown over the last few elections. Also, urban areas increasingly lean toward the Democrats and rural areas toward the Republicans, and the election will be decided in the suburbs. Interestingly, pessimists prefer Donald Trump, while optimists prefer Kamala Harris.

However, the national public vote does not determine the outcome of the presidential race. The Electoral College, based on an 18th-century compromise, amplifies the importance of key swing states. This means the election will be determined by the popular vote in a handful of states: Nevada, Arizona, Wisconsin, Michigan, Pennsylvania, North Carolina, and Georgia. If Kamala Harris can win Pennsylvania, Michigan, and Wisconsin, she will likely win the election. Otherwise, her chances to become the next president decrease and many believe that she is at an electoral disadvantage in the Electoral College.

Historically, since 1956, polls have shown a tendency to overestimate Democratic support. In the 18 presidential elections since 1956, polls have overestimated the Democratic vote in 12 and the Republican vote in six of them. Therefore, Donald Trump could be in a stronger position than the tied polls suggest.

If the election is close, most likely it will take weeks for the election outcome to be confirmed. One of the reasons for this is a historically high number of court cases filed to challenge election laws and procedures at the state level. During the first 10 months of 2024, there have already been 119 court cases, of which 78 were filed by Republicans. More court cases after the election could slow the process down as well. There is widespread concern that Donald Trump may not accept the election results if he loses. While this does not mean that all of his supporters would refuse to accept the results, it increases the potential for post-election unrest. Around 30% of Republicans say that “violence may be needed to save the country (if Donald Trump loses).”

Finally, in addition to the presidency, a third of the Senate and the entire House of Representatives will be elected, and it is likely that the outcome will be a divided government, in line with the trend in recent decades. Current projections indicate that Republicans will probably win the Senate and Democrats will regain control of the House of Representatives, leading to a divided government and possibly limiting major legislative accomplishments, regardless of who becomes president.

Q&A

Q:
The division in the United States is unfortunate for the world. Is there any way to improve this situation? If economic disparity is driving this division, is economic growth and the reduction of inequality in the United States the only solution? Also, it seems like Democrats and Republicans are living on completely different planets. Is this cultural polarization worsening, or have these differences always existed?

Bruce STOKES:
The differences in values between self-identified Republicans and Democrats have grown wider over time. While the Democrats have moved further to the left, Republicans have moved much further to the right, and they are not starting to drift back together. If Trump loses, there will be a structural incentive to maintain that polarization. If Kamala Harris loses, I do not expect a shift of Democrats toward the middle. As an economist, I certainly believe that economics are highly important, but this importance is sometimes overestimated. While less inequality would make cultural issues easier to manage, issues that previous generations did not face—such as women’s and immigrants’ increased participation in the workforce—would remain.

Q:
Why haven’t third or fourth parties emerged in the United States, despite the political division? Also, it is shocking to see that one third of the Republicans may accept violence if the Republicans lose the election. Do you think that this could influence more swing voters to vote for Donald Trump rather than Kamala Harris? If so, what can the Democrats do to avoid this situation?

Bruce STOKES:
Even though a third of Republicans and 8% of Democrats say that there may be a need for violence, it does not mean all of these people would resort to violence. However, it is a painful reminder that the U.S. is a large country with over 100 million eligible voters. Also, gun ownership rates are among the highest in the world, which is a cause for significant concern.

Q:
What about the United States’ impact on the international community? If Donald Trump were reelected as president, do you think Ukraine would be abandoned? What about Taiwan? If there were a political power vacuum after the election, how might this situation affect peace in the Pacific region?

Bruce STOKES:
We likely will not know who the next president is for a week or two after the election. Amid this uncertainty, foreign actors such as China, Russia, and North Korea might try to cause trouble as they might assume that the U.S. is distracted with internal issues and therefore may be less capable of making decisions. Such a situation would not at all be beneficial for U.S. soft power.

We have to assume that Donald Trump is serious about the plans he announced, even though he did not follow through with some initiatives announced before his previous presidency. For instance, we must assume that he will try to make a quick deal with Putin to end the Ukraine war. Frankly, the only way to achieve this would be to reward Russia for its actions, and Donald Trump’s approach might resemble the 1938 appeasement policy, which might allow Putin to regain strength and repeat in 10 years.

It is unclear how Donald Trump would handle the situation in the Middle East. He is very close to Netanyahu and would likely enjoy being seen as the peacemaker in the region, but he would need someone in Hamas or Hezbollah willing to negotiate with him, which may not necessarily happen. Likewise, Taiwan is a big question mark. While Donald Trump has threatened not to defend Taiwan, he also prides himself on being tough toward China. The outcome will greatly depend on how China’s leader Xi Jinping tries to handle Donald Trump. One of the bigger issues to consider is that the Biden administration, along with Japan, South Korea, the Philippines, and Australia, has effectively been building a security alliance resembling an Asian equivalent to the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO), even if they do not openly admit it. It remains unclear whether Donald Trump would commit to continuing these efforts.

Q:
How will the relationship between Japan and the United States evolve moving forward? What kind of risks from the United States should Japan be prepared for?

Bruce STOKES:
There are two issues. First, if Donald Trump is elected, we should anticipate that he will demand that Japan spend more on defense. However, his approach to North Korea, China, and the Taiwan issue cannot be predicted, which will undoubtedly cause some anxiety in Japan. On the other hand, if Kamala Harris is elected, there will be a different set of issues. I think she will be very steadfast in defending Asian allies and will continue to build the aforementioned Asian security alliance. However, we cannot expect much initiative from her on trade. The Democratic Party is wary of increased trade liberalization, trade deals, and trade agreements, so it is unlikely that there will be a renewed American initiative in this area. What would not happen, though, are 20% tariffs on every import to the United States.

A specific issue concerning Japan is whether the U.S. government will allow Nippon Steel to acquire U.S. Steel. I assume Donald Trump’s supporters would oppose it, although there has not been much discussion about this while Kamala Harris and Joe Biden were specifically against the deal. In my personal opinion, if U.S. Steel is willing to be acquired by Nippon Steel, we should be grateful that Nippon Steel is interested. However, this may be a difficult issue for Kamala Harris.