David R. Goldfield is the Robert Lee Bailey Professor of History at the University of North Carolina. He also works as a writer and film director.

THE GREAT REGROUPING OF THE WEST

“The economic situation will decide the American elections“ 

Women are increasingly calling the shots in the US midterm elections, argues David R. Goldfield. One reason why the Democrats have reason to hope. The historian ventures an outlook on the upcoming elections in the US.

INTERVIEW: SASCHA TAMM

THE GREAT REGROUPING OF THE WEST

“The economic situation will decide the American elections“

Women are increasingly calling the shots in the US midterm elections, argues David R. Goldfield. One reason why the Democrats have reason to hope. The historian ventures an outlook on the upcoming elections in the US.

INTERVIEW: SASCHA TAMM

David R. Goldfield is the Robert Lee Bailey Professor of History at the University of North Carolina. He also works as a writer and film director.

They are negligible. I already see that with the students. American students are mostly very provincial. In North Carolina, where I teach, most of them come from this state and are mainly interested in developments here. However, on 30 April we had them take a poll to find out what issues were most important to them. To our surprise, Ukraine appeared on the list of the ten most important issues, in fifth place. But the longer the war lasts, the more interest will wane. It’s also more of interest to younger voters. Older people care much more about inflation, for example. So for the election campaign, there are three important issues. First, the economy, second, the economy and third, the economy. The economic situation will decide the American elections, together with the turnout. 

During the presidential election campaign, both Donald Trump and Joe Biden criticised globalisation. Does that still matter now, in times of great economic growth?

In the United States, we are currently experiencing a shift in the perception of globalisation. In 1972, two young Democrats, Gary Hart and Bill Clinton, started talking about the impact of the then-fledgling globalisation on the American economy. They thought globalisation was a very good thing. Today we know that overall it was a good development. But there are negative aspects – in employment, in supply chains. And there are concerns that we may have gone too far. Today, for example, many people see the construction of new factories in Mexico as the cause of job losses here. When in fact our economic relationship with Mexico has created more jobs in the United States – but the jobs have changed. As for President Biden, he has had a close relationship with labour in traditional industries and with the unions since the beginning of his political career. This has influenced his policies on globalisation.

Will the threat of China as a global competitor be an issue?

No, when Americans think about foreign policy these days, they think about Russia. China is not very popular in the US. However, its poor image is due more to Covid-19 than any economic or geopolitical factors.

In the parliamentary elections, the so-called midterm elections, the party of the incumbent president usually loses. Will it be the same this time? 

If we look at history since 1946, in those 76 years the president's party has only gained seats in the House of Representatives and the Senate in the midterms twice. One time was after the attacks of 11 September 2001, so under very exceptional circumstances. This year we also have exceptional circumstances, but probably not to that extent. 

The truth is that the Latino (both male and female) support for the Democrats is dropping.

The truth is that the Latino (both male and female) support for the Democrats is dropping.

Is the impression correct that religious affiliation is playing an increasingly important role politically?

According to our constitution, there is separation between church and state. But there has never been a separation between religion and politics. Religion has played a huge role in the political process for a long time. Just one example: in the 2016 presidential election, 80 percent of evangelical Christians voted for Donald Trump, in 2020 even 81 percent. 69 percent of Jewish voters opted for Hillary Clinton in 2016, four years later 71 percent of them voted for Joe Biden. The different political sympathies reflect not only differences between religions, but also their history in the United States. For example, the Jewish electorate has supported Democratic candidates by a majority since they voted for Andrew Jackson in 1832. He had opposed the idea of excluding Jews and Catholics from elections. 

One third of the Republican electorate follows Donald Trump unconditionally.

One third of the Republican electorate follows Donald Trump unconditionally.

Do you expect major voter mobilisation this time? 

Voter turnout at midterms has always been very low. But there was one important exception – in 2018, the turnout was more than 47 percent. That may not seem like much, but it is a lot for midterms. Forecasts currently say that the turnout could be about that high again. 

In the 2018 midterms, there was mainly pro- and anti-Trump mobilisation. Does this still exist, even though he is no longer in office?

It still exists, but not to the same extent. If the Democrats think they can get people to the polls with anti-Trump sentiment alone, it probably won't work. Other electoral motives are needed. 

Could the controversy over the right to abortion be such a motive? 

This is very possible. The key to winning any national election is women living in the suburbs. Since 1970, the United States has been a country of suburbs. More people live there than in the cities and in the countryside. Women in the suburbs vote more often than men, and they form the middle of the electoral spectrum. They supported Ronald Reagan in the 1980s, but Barack Obama in 2008 and 2012. This year, their interest in the elections was not particularly high – until the issue of abortion became relevant. The issue will at least matter for voter turnout, especially with regard to white women from the suburbs. That is a good sign for the Democrats. 

In 76 years the president's party has only gained seats in the House of Representatives and the Senate in the midterms twice.

In 76 years the president's party has only gained seats in the House of Representatives and the Senate in the midterms twice.

What is the impact of the different ethnic origins of the American population, of Latin Americans, people of colour or people with Asian backgrounds? 

After the 2010 census, everyone said, "Demographics are destiny, and Republicans will be in the minority forever." And I often hear that the Democrats have the votes of Latin Americans or Asians or some other group for sure. That's not true. The truth is that the Latino (both male and female) support for the Democrats is dropping. The Democrats have the greatest support among Jewish and Muslim voters – consistently higher than 70 percent. Support among voters of Latin American descent, on the other hand, is declining, especially among men. The reason for this is that their Roman Catholic religion plays an important role and that family is very important to them. The Republicans exploit the fact that in this group, for example, there are great reservations about same-sex marriages. Voters from Asian backgrounds are very diverse, but tend to vote Democrat, at around 60 percent. Georgia now has two Democratic senators – mainly because of the Asian electorate in the Atlanta suburbs. But they tend to be conservative on many social issues. There is some potential here for the Republican Party. 

What impact will Trump's public support for certain candidates have in the upcoming elections? 

One third of the Republican electorate follows Donald Trump unconditionally. For another third, his opinion is important and influences their voting decision. Historically, neither current nor former presidents like Trump have played a particularly important role. People are focused on local issues, they vote for their representatives. At the same time, there is this almost cult-like reverence for Trump. That will make its presence felt. Meanwhile, as we see in the primaries, the results are mixed.

Sascha Tamm is head of the Transatlantic Dialogue and Latin America department at the Friedrich Naumann Foundation for Freedom.

Sascha Tamm is head of the Transatlantic Dialogue and Latin America department at the Friedrich Naumann Foundation for Freedom.

Also interesting

Kommentar

Sabine Leutheusser-Schnarrenberger // Kriegsverbrechen verjähren nicht

Zusammen mit Gerhart Baum, Bundesinnenminister a. D., hat Sabine Leutheusser-Schnarrenberger, Bundesjustizministerin a. D., Strafanzeige gegen Wladimir Putin und seine Schergen erstattet. Die russischen Kriegsverbrechen sollen nicht ungesühnt bleiben.

Analyse

Guri Melby // Gewaltige Anziehungskraft

Der russische Präsident hat sich eine NATO-Osterweiterung im hohen Norden eingehandelt. Der zu erwartende Beitritt Schwedens und Finnlands zur Allianz bietet den nordischen Ländern eine Fülle neuer Chancen.

Essay

Wolfram Eilenberger // Dem Lichte zugewandt

Der russische Angriff auf die Ukraine ist eine Zeitenwende wie 1989. Jetzt muss Europa die Freiheit wie ein zartes Pflänzchen beschützen.

Ein Angebot der

Thema

Wir verarbeiten Ihre Daten und nutzen Cookies.

Wir nutzen technisch notwendige Cookies, um Ihnen die wesentlichen Funktionen unserer Website anbieten zu können. Ihre Daten verarbeiten wir dann nur auf unseren eigenen Systemen. Mehr Information finden Sie in unseren Datenschutzhinweisen in Ziffer 3. Sie können unsere Website damit nur im technisch notwendigen Umfang nutzen.

Um unsere Webseite für Sie optimal zu gestalten und unser Angebot für Sie fortlaufend verbessern zu können, nutzen wir funktionale und Marketingcookies. Mehr Information zu den Anbietern und die Funktionsweise finden Sie in unseren Datenschutzhinweisen in Ziffer 3. Klicken Sie ‚Akzeptieren‘, um einzuwilligen. Diese Einwilligung können Sie jederzeit widerrufen.