The Grievance Machine
A Look at How Victimhood Became the Path to Power in the 2024 Election
To start with here is some data as of Nov 11, 2024.
Current Estimate:
Harris 76.2 million votes (48.4%)
Trump 78.5 million votes (49.9%)
Others 2.6 million votes (1.5%)
Total turnout 156.2 million votes (vs 158.6 million in 2020)
Trump margin +1.5%
Trump’s margin of popular vote win will be less than Hillary’s popular vote win margin in 2016.
So, yes, he won.
And yes, he has the senate and the house.
But it’s not a blowout.
Let us take a step back and put things in context first.
Eventually, it’s about 250,000 votes in three states that cost Kamala Harris the election.
And Donald Trump probably will end up with less than 50% of the popular vote (out of the 59% of the total voting age population in the country).
And yet, every pundit has been going on and on about how the country has rejected Democratic agenda and what caused the Democrats to perform so pathetically in these elections, etc. Again, just for context, see the numbers above.
Now let me get on with what I really want to talk about in this post. Why I am done with the lazy post-poll analyses.
If you recall, every analyst asked us to do the same thing after the 2016 loss and unsurprisingly every analyst is asking us to do the same thing in 2024.
“Oh!! You should listen to the working class. Democrats don’t listen to the working class.”
“Oh! It’s the economy stupid!”
But sorry. I am not buying that lame excuse this time. Just take a moment and see who is giving you these insights. You will see a pattern.
You know what this lazy post-election analysis that blames everything on economic anxiety and working class angst really is? This is nothing but a code word for “Listen to the white people grievances!!”. So, yeah. I am not buying the same old cowardly excuse this time. I know for majority of white Americans, it’s hard to accept this uncomfortable truth. And it’s also very very hard for many priviliged immigrants to accept this simple fact too. Especially for people like me, Indian immigrants, the so-called model immigrants, because majority of Indian immigrants want to be white. They want to think like white. And it’s also very hard for majority of men to accept this uncomfortable truth. Again, no one would say this out loud.
The “economic anxiety” argument has resurfaced, mirroring the same rationalizations we heard in 2016 about Trump’s victory. Despite years passing, too many people are still leaning on this explanation, justifying the actions of a majority who voted for a candidate openly advocating authoritarian rule. From threatening to detain millions in camps, targeting transgender individuals, promoting racial and gender discrimination, to making threats against political opponents, news outlets, and dissenting voices, this choice embodies something far more troubling than simple economic frustration. This drive to normalize or rationalize such behavior reveals a deep-seated need to absolve the electorate, even though America holds the world’s strongest economy. While people are struggling, polling shows it’s largely perceptions of the economy — not the actual economic state — that pushed voters toward Trump.
You still insist it’s economic anxiety?
Let us look at some data (source epi.org):
White unemployment rate: 3.2 percent
Black unemployment rate: 6.3 percent
Highest white unemployment rate in the nation: California at 4.8 percent (The highest white unemployment is lower than the average unemployment rate for Black Americans)
Highest Black unemployment rate in the nation: Kentucky at 11.3
White homeownership rate: 74.2
Black homeownership rate: 45.7
The 28-point gap is wider than it was during legal segregation.
Black poverty rate: 20.6
White poverty rate: 9.5
Average student loan debt.
White borrowers: $46,000
Black borrowers: $53,000
Wealth gap between white and Black Americans is $172,000, the widest it’s been since 2007.
Black families are the most impacted by inflation.
Percent of Black households that experience food insecurity: 21 percent
Percent of white households that experience food insecurity: 8 percent
Despite the fact that Black Americans — disproportionately working-class, with minimal collective wealth and persistently high unemployment, even in strong economies — DID NOT support a leader whom his own former generals labeled as a fascist. This choice speaks volumes: their vote was about more than immediate economic gains; it was about rejecting a perceived threat to democratic principles. What drove Trump’s election was demographic anxiety — his campaign was explicit about it — and yet many of those tasked with objective analysis refuse to acknowledge it.
Now, even if we assume that economic concerns were the primary motivation, this does not erase the uncomfortable reality: a majority of white voters were willing to support someone who has threatened to dismantle the Constitution, who has been called a fascist by his own generals, because of issues like high grocery prices or housing affordability. This pattern is precisely how autocrats gain power. If you are going to be a responsible journalist or political pundit, one must see what’s unfolding with clarity to fulfill one’s responsibilities. The self-delusions of these pundits have failed us, and the stakes are too high to cling to them.
When 2016 happened, the shock was intense, but I moved on, telling myself — and believing along with others — that this was just a blip, that voters wanted an outsider, or some other spin we were led to accept. But 2024 isn’t a blip. It’s a confirmation — a confirmation of all the issues this country is not prepared to face. That’s what makes this hurt, and it’s a pain that’s only going to deepen.
I live in one of those Midwest states — one of the seven swing states. I live right in the middle of many MAGA households. Let me tell you, I’ve been in a serious doom-and-gloom spiral for the past week. Coming to terms with what happened has been anything but easy.
This post isn’t here to deliver a verdict on where the Democrats or Kamala Harris’s campaign faltered. But across the internet and in legacy media, Democrats and liberal pundits alike are already dissecting how Trump’s campaign managed not only to overtake Harris in the “Blue Wall” states of the Midwest and Rust Belt, but also gained ground in regions that should have been safe Democratic territory. Almost everywhere, Trump expanded his coalition (or so it is perceived)— and this time, unlike 2016, he didn’t need the Electoral College as a narrow path to victory. He can now claim the legitimacy of winning the popular vote.
In response, Trump’s critics are debating Tim Walz’s role, the influence of Russian interference, the impact of right-wing media, and whether President Biden should have stepped aside for Harris. Going back to my earlier point, even the familiar refrain of “economic anxiety” is making a reappearance.
These explanations each hold some truth but largely miss the heart of the matter. Yes, there are still voters who mistakenly believe presidents control the prices of essential goods. Others have genuine concerns about immigration and were drawn to Trump’s loud appeals to nationalism and nativism. And for some, there was simply no chance they’d support a woman — especially a Black woman — for president.
In the end, more American voters chose Trump because they wanted what he offered: a relentless reality show fueled by rage and resentment. Some Democrats and pundits, still lost in policy talk, are puzzling over which proposals might have won more votes — but that was always a losing game. Trump’s base was never after policy, and he rarely offered any. (Opting to be eaten by a shark instead of electrocuted may be a choice, but it’s hardly a policy.) His rallies were endless grievances — more like massive therapy sessions or family gatherings with an irate, rambling grandparent.
To me, this marks the rise of “illiberal populism” — a destructive force that leads some societies to embrace democratic rituals like voting while holding a deep hostility to democracy itself. Many cast ballots to punish others, to strip away rights — even their own. These movements are often fronted by enormously wealthy pseudo-populists who lure in voters with promises to fix a set of grievances that usually center around money, immigrants, and minorities. And strangely, these appeals resonate most not with the very poor but with a bored, relatively affluent middle class uncomfortable with racial and demographic shifts within their countries.
Read this again. In case it’s not clear.
It’s the white people with a baggge of grievances.
Read below a snippet from inquirer.
Above is an example of how an average Trump voter ended up voting the way he/she did. This also is a quick primer on how Hitler came to power in 1933 in Germany.
And so it happened: a lineup of millionaires and billionaires grinned and applauded Trump as soon as the election was called in his favor. They’re part of an alliance that includes the very people another Trump term will harm — the young, minorities, working families among them.
Trump, as he’s shown time and again, has no real concern for any of these groups. He ran for office to control the machinery of government and evade legal consequences for his past actions as president. Now that he’s secured his position, he’ll focus on the one project he truly seems to value: dismantling the rule of law and any obstacles to expanding his power.
Americans hoping to defend the constitutional order against Trump’s assault should dismiss the idea that this election hinged on a better candidate or a stronger pitch to a handful of voters in Pennsylvania or better perception of economy. Biden, too old and fatigued to campaign effectively, likely would have lost by a larger margin than Harris; but more fundamentally, even a more energized Biden — or a less, well, female candidate — couldn’t have changed the outcome. Racial grievances, resentment over personal struggles (from addiction to lack of education), and bitterness toward distant elites aren’t issues that housing policy or interest rate cuts can resolve. And no, it’s not the egg prices and fuel prices, stupid. But how Trump used them to dig these racial and gender grievances out.
No candidate can engage in a rational discussion about facts and policies with voters who aren’t really interested in them. What they want from Trump is the promise of social revenge, his tough-guy rhetoric, and his easy “I’ll fix it” assurances. He’s compelling to them because he validates and fuels their conspiratorial beliefs. You want to know how easily well-educated and well-off people fall for conspiracies?
Take this example: A well-off business owner and devoted Trump supporter in Pennsylvania earnestly believed that Michelle Obama had teamed up with the Canadians to alter the state’s 2020 vote count.
As Jonathan Last, editor of The Bulwark, put it in a social-media post: The election went the way it did “because America wanted Trump. That’s it. People reaching to construct [policy] alibis for the public because they don’t want to grapple with this are whistling past the graveyard.” Last fears we may be sliding into an authoritarianism similar to Russia’s in the 1990s. Russia’s democratic collapse was driven by truly harsh economic conditions and the breakdown of basic services. Americans have chosen this path in a time of peace, prosperity, and high living standards. An affluent society that believes it’s living in a hellscape is primed to fall for strongmen who are all too willing to play along with these illusions.
The usual discourse on voter attitudes often circles back to disbelief: how could so many support Trump, given his track record? How could they overlook his criminal convictions, his inflammatory remarks, and the stark contrast with someone like Harris, who — despite her flaws — demonstrates intelligence, honesty, and respect for constitutional norms? But clearly, not enough people did. This often leads to collective exasperation, as people say, “I give up.”
However, this reaction misses a critical question: why didn’t the majority see these things? That answer is the influence of right-wing media. Today, right-wing outlets — Fox News, Newsmax, One America News, Sinclair networks, iHeart Media, Bott Radio, Elon Musk’s X, and top conservative podcasts — set the national news agenda. They fed audiences a distorted narrative, helping pave Trump’s path to victory.
Let’s be honest. The right-wing media now leads the news narrative in America — not The New York Times, not The Washington Post, and certainly not the major networks. Even influential outlets like the Times follow the tone they set. When Fox News launched in 1996, it was an irritant to mainstream media, while figures like Rush Limbaugh barely competed in the mainstream arena. But by the late 1990s, with the rise of the internet and Bush’s presidency, the right-wing media sphere began expanding rapidly. Initially, liberal media grew too, with influential sites like HuffPost emerging. But over the past two decades, conservative billionaires have outpaced their liberal counterparts in media investment, especially as ad revenue declined.
The result? The mainstream media, once a beachball to right-wing media’s golf ball, is now the size of a volleyball, while right-wing media has become a basketball. And in 2024, it’s clear the latter is more powerful, not only because it’s larger but because it projects a unified message that liberals are elitist and unpatriotic, while conservatives are defenders of traditional American values.
This influence is why Trump won. Imagine him launching his campaign in 2015 without right-wing media support. In a media landscape still ruled by CBS and The New York Times, Trump’s rhetoric would have been marginalized, viewed by Republicans as a liability. But Fox News gave him the platform he needed, hosting early debates he won not with depth, but with spectacle, feeding on the grievances Fox had cultivated among its viewers.
In 2024, Fox and the broader right-wing media ecosystem drove the election outcome. As Media Matters’ Matthew Gertz points out, nearly all the extreme narratives circulating during the election cycle didn’t originate from Trump or even his campaign but were generated within the right-wing media sphere. Take the rumor about Haitian residents in Ohio eating pets; it began with a fringe Facebook post, circulated on X, and was amplified by right-wing influencers before it was echoed by J.D. Vance and Trump himself. Or the baseless accusation that ABC fed Harris debate questions in advance — it originated from a random pro-Trump X post and snowballed through right-wing media.
Perhaps most impactful was the idea that Harris and Biden redirected hurricane relief away from southern states to undocumented immigrants, a claim that began on Fox before gaining traction in conservative circles. This narrative emerged just as Harris’s polling momentum began to falter.
For those not steeped in right-wing media, it’s easy to assume Trump originates these claims, with the media simply amplifying them. But more often, the reverse is true: these ideas emerge in the conservative media ecosystem, only to be adopted by Trump and his allies.
Yes — inflation is real. But the Biden economy has been great in many ways. The U.S. economy, wrote The Economist in mid-October, is “the envy of the world.”
But in the right-wing media, the horror stories were relentless. And mainstream economic reporting too often followed that lead.
Allow me to make the world’s easiest prediction: After 12:00 noon next January 20, 2025, it won’t take Fox News and Fox Business even a full hour to start locating every positive economic indicator they can find and start touting those. Within weeks, the “Bustling Trump economy” will be conventional wisdom. Eventually, as some of the fruits from the long tail of Bidenomics start growing on the vine, Trump may become the beneficiary of some real-world facts as well, taking credit for that which he opposed and regularly denounced.
Anyways, for posterity sake, I am going to record some economic data here.
This is as of Nov 6, 2024. I will come back to revisit this in February, 2025.
November 6, 2024
Stock Market 43,492
Annual Inflation 2.2%
Unemployment 4.1%
Back to the campaign. If someone moved to America from let’s say the most remote place on earth, in the summer of 2024, and watched only Fox News, what would that person learn about Kamala Harris?
“He would come to the conclusion that she is a very stupid person,” “He’d know that she orchestrated a coup against Joe Biden. That she’s a crazed extremist. And that she very much does not care about him.”
Same question about Trump?
That he’s been “the target of a vicious witch-hunt for years and years,” that he is under constant assault; and most importantly, that he is “doing it all for you.”
To much of America, this isn’t seen as just one viewpoint. It’s simply “the news.” This is the reality that many Americans — especially white Americans — watch across about two-thirds of the country. If you’ve traveled through red or even purple regions, you’ve likely noticed that in hotel lobbies, hospital waiting rooms, or even bars, where you might expect a quiet screen playing ESPN, at least one TV is tuned to Fox News. That’s reach. That’s influence. Then, people hop in their cars and turn on a right-leaning talk station, often owned by iHeartRadio. They get home, and their local news, often owned by Sinclair, reflects a similar conservative slant. Even if their local paper is still around, the op-ed section likely includes voices like Cal Thomas and Ben Shapiro.
Now, here’s the unsettling part: if you think this reach is enough for them, you’re mistaken. They aren’t content with rough parity or even a slight advantage. They’re aiming for media dominance. Sinclair recently acquired the Baltimore Sun; this won’t be the last acquisition. One day, Sinclair or News Corp. may even own The Washington Post. It could happen sooner than we think.
If you’re old enough, you may remember revolutions in what was once called the “Third World”. What was the first thing every guerilla force did upon seizing power? They took over the radio or TV stations — always. There’s a reason for that.
It’s the same reason Viktor Orban told CPAC in 2022, “Have your own media.”
Consider this example: Missouri voters recently passed initiatives for abortion rights, a higher minimum wage, and mandated paid leave — all Democratic positions. Yet, when it comes to electing high-level officials, Republicans hold a decisive advantage. Trump won over Harris there by 18 points, and Senator Josh Hawley beat his Democratic challenger by 14.
The reason? Right-wing media, which only keeps growing. I haven’t even touched on social media, TikTok, or other platforms where even more people are consuming news. The right dominates these spaces too. The left needs to wake up to this reality and take action before it’s too late — if it isn’t already.
In summary, for those who believe the major problem for Democrats lies in information silos — particularly the way Trump targeted livestreamers, podcasters, and YouTubers, where a lot of young people get their news — that theory is not entirely off the mark.
Let us deep dive into this.
Let’s start by making something clear: it wasn’t Gen Z who handed Trump the White House. Despite his stronger-than-usual performance among them, the real factor was Gen X (my generation). It’s hard to ignore — Gen X has its flaws and Gen X sucks, even if we like to convince ourselves otherwise.
Now, as for the alternative media — yes, it played a part, but it’s not the whole story. The question remains: what exactly were people listening to on these platforms? And this is the crux of it — the actual content matters.
Want to know what that content was? Surprise.
It wasn’t about inflation, gas prices, or trade policies. The livestreamers, right-wing YouTubers, Rogan, and others weren’t hashing out economic strategies. What they were pushing all day was male victimhood, misogyny, casual racism, transphobia, and wild conspiracy theories about vaccines, globalism, and more. MAGA’s favored corner of the internet wasn’t talking policy or egg prices — they were tearing down women, cracking rape jokes, gay and trans slurs, and spewing hatred.
So, if Democrats think they can win back these voters by simply repackaging NPR or MSNBC-style content in a “cooler” format, they are mistaken. They’ll need to address the very content head-on, acknowledging the role it plays in shaping MAGA’s base.
The problem? They are hesitant to do this. Admitting that racism and sexism are central to MAGA’s appeal is something they just won’t do. But it’s been the reality from the beginning.
Sure, other factors are at play, but without the racism and sexism, MAGA would have no legs to stand on — just a flat, lifeless thing.
As a family member of mine succinctly put, they, these MAGA folks always carry a smorgasbord of grievances.
Take your pick from the smorgasbord of grievances. Racism not work for you? We have misogyny, if that doesn’t work, we have religion, anti-trans, anti-choice, anti-legal immigrant, anti-illegal immigrant, anti-this, anti-that. And if none of those works, we have cruelty!
But the real question is can Democrats go beyond simply urging people to stop being racist or sexist and engage with these people. Can they confront the culture of victimhood that thrives in these spaces and ask them: “Why are you blaming everyone else for your issues?”
“Isn’t that pretty un-manly? How about you take responsibility for your own life?”
Can they tell these voters, “If you can’t find a job, don’t point fingers at immigrants, women, or anyone else. Don’t blame people of color, liberals, trans people, or anyone else for every misfortune.”?
Can they honestly make this work?
“Stop blaming feminism, China, or whatever else fits the narrative. Stop being whiny.”
I don’t know the answer but it may be more effective to take these messages into these spaces than the usual policy-laden, fact-heavy rhetoric. The facts have their place in 2024, but they won’t break through the misinformation wall.
Even the conspiracy theories that right-wing influencers use to reel in young men — a predominantly male audience — can be flipped on their head. And no, not with our own version of conspiracy theories, but by understanding why they’re so appealing. Why do these conspiracies work?
Because they promise “secret knowledge”. Things the elites don’t want you to know. Well, guess what? There’s plenty of real “forbidden knowledge” that could be presented in the same way: the hidden history of class struggles, the manipulation of political systems and economies by the wealthy, the untold stories of cross-racial solidarity (even in rural areas), the real history of American imperialism, and how corporations became “people” with rights greater than actual human beings. There’s so much buried knowledge — not by shadowy conspirators, but because it’s inconvenient for those in power. What if Democrats leaned into that kind of content? The kind that makes people feel like they’re getting access to something secret and powerful. After all, that’s what those alternative spaces excel at — making people feel like they’re in on the inside scoop.
There’s a ton of work to do. Maybe Democrats, liberals, and the left will need to prioritize listening to 18–25-year-olds, putting them in positions of influence within the party, and stop listening to the over-50 consultant class that’s out of touch with today’s issues, modes of communication, and messaging tools.
The one silver lining in all this is that Trump and his inner circle now have to govern. Last time, he was backed by a small group of relatively competent individuals, and these so-called “adults” did their best to put safeguards around the more reckless aspects of governance. This time, however, Trump will wield more power and have fewer excuses to hide behind. He and his supporters will be forced to own the chaos and controversies he’s already planning to unleash.
Many of his voters seem to believe that Trump will hurt others, but not them. They’re in for a rude awakening, much like during his first term. (After all, there’s a reason he was voted out of office.)
The unfortunate truth is that Trump often means what he says. In this election, he’s tapped into the unrefined anger and unfounded grievances of millions of voters. Right now, a portion of his base seems to have conveniently forgotten that experience, as if they live in the United States of Amnesia, pretending that his cruel attacks on fellow Americans are just empty threats.
I’m not holding out hope. It’s going to be worse than anything I can imagine over at least the next two years. But I’m not concerned about how it will impact his supporters — they’ll figure it out eventually. I don’t wish the worst on them, but I have my own family to prioritize. After all, I’m not from the United States of Amnesia.
