In the time since the election, all eyes have turned to how a race that was forecasted to be so close, turned out to be such a stomping. Nearly every broadcast and pundit has a different analysis; however, a few stand out as especially misleading.

Every time I read takes like “the Left dislikes men” or “the Left went too woke and needs to come back to the center,” or even when I read articles like David Ciorba’s “The price of superiority: How the Left’s rhetoric drives voters to Trump,” I’m left with a resounding sense of disappointment and confusion. Where are all these attacks on the moderate working man?

Instead of the Left being “disconnected” from rural and working-class communities, as Ciorba puts it, it seems to me that there is a disconnect between what the Left says and does and how they are viewed and thought of. For instance, if we have to do a deep literary analysis of a Kamala Harris Instagram post to find evidence of the Left’s superiority rhetoric, then this feels more like a projection of an already-held belief onto the Democratic party instead of convincing proof of a trend.

Indeed, Ciorba’s assertions of the Left laying down ethical “rules,” “codes,” or laws of the land, as well as forcing terms like “Latinx” onto people, seem unfounded. This does not feel like the M.O. of a Harris campaign that rolls with the Cheneys or proudly and openly talks about their gun ownership. These are the actions of an intentionally moderate Left, not an extremist or controlling one.

It’s worth examining the term “Latinx” because it’s theoretically a classic example of the Left’s elitism and enforcement of “strict ethical codes.” I recognize that I’m not the best person to be talking about this; as a white boy at a private university, slipping into elitist rhetoric, as described by Ciorba, is always a risk. However, it’s important to note that, while Democrat politicians have sparingly used the term “Latinx,” there has been no concerted effort to force it onto voters. According to Jean Guerrero’s opinion article on the subject, it is not even a Democrat creation. And while it is understandable for many to be initially off-put by the term, “negative sentiment toward LGBTQ+ issues was the leading reason for the backlash” according to a recent Harvard/Georgetown study, not due to any form of elitist language appropriation.

I am not trying to villainize all those who are uncomfortable with the term “Latinx;” as I said, there can be legitimate reasons. But, these propagations of a “Culture War” are misleading, as the Democrat Party has been very uninvolved. There is no general effort by the Democratic party to push these weird rules or scrutinize peoples’ every interaction and relationship, as Ciorba suggests. I came to WashU straight from an Alabama high school. I get it; it feels different. (There are fewer slurs for one thing.) But it’s not that different; nobody has strapped me down and dyed my hair blue. Yet.

Further, despite Ciorba and others stating that the Democratic party has become “distanced from the working class” or from “the people,” Biden made history by being the first sitting president ever to walk picket lines. Harris also campaigned strongly against Trump’s tariffs which would hurt the everyday working-class American and promised to end grocery price gouging. In fact, a 2022 Pew Research Center poll shows that Republicans have moved far further right than the Democrats have moved left. This seems like a much more obvious “distancing.”

Look, I’m not saying that there are no far-left voters who push these extreme “ethical expectations” or “rules.” However, this should not define the whole political party. I’m sure most Trump supporters would not wish to be defined by their most right-wing extremist counterparts. 

Ciorba’s critique of the Left’s attacks on Trump’s personal life or beliefs instead of policy also surprised me. To quote Eric Garcia’s article on 2024 campaign ads, “most of [Harris’s] ads have gone all in on the economy,” whereas “Republicans, led by Trump, have done a slew of anti-transgender ads.”

Identity politics has been the bread and butter of Trump’s Republican party for years. He has incessantly fear-mongered immigrants, attacked trans people, made strange racial comments, and called cities horrible. J.D. Vance managed to insult every childless family in America. Perhaps it is not surprising how some Democrat voters have become defensive in this context.

Yes, the Harris campaign has called Trump and co. “weird” and a “threat to democracy,” but there are only so many attacks you can make on concepts of plans or a lack of policies before you have to address the moral character of the guy in charge. And, yes, the personal moral failings of a president do matter when they wield such considerable power; this is how we find ourselves in situations like Jan. 6. 

There have also been concerted Democrat efforts to be inclusive and encourage unity, such as after the Trump assassination attempt. Biden straight up wore a Trump hat, and Vance and Walz looked like they were about to become Larry Bird and Magic Johnson during the VP debate. In fact, Walz was about the most inoffensive VP pick the Democratic party could’ve mustered. 

I agree with Ciorba that nobody should be blaming or scapegoating marginalized communities for the outcome of the 2024 election; that’s shameful. However, let’s not start playing the victim or making excuses, either. For the vast majority of Trump supporters, their reasoning is clear: despite the economy being strong on a macro level, it feels weak and depressing to most. It would be nigh impossible for any incumbent party to dig themselves out of that hole; just look at the rest of the world.

I understand feeling disgruntled and disillusioned with the state of American politics today: there should be more and better options. I think it’s stupid that Ranked Choice Voting was banned here in Missouri. However, this radical Leftist “ideological framework” that Ciorba speaks of is not an actual policy of the Left — it has just been wrongly projected onto them. Once again, when reading about the Democratic party’s supposed “purist and elitist” ideology this year, I am left saying: where?