Why Kamala Harris Lost and How Donald Trump Won: A Deep Analysis of the 2024 US Election

By Ifeanyi Abraham

Today, I am mourning, but this too shall favour me—Donald Trump’s victory and Kamala Harris’s loss carry lessons for us all. She joined the race just 107 days ago, facing a former president who began his campaign journey nearly eight years prior. No easy feat.

In 2016, I wrote an article for HuffPost titled ‘Five Quick Lessons From The 2016 US Election Results – What A Donald Trump Win Tells Us.’ Back then, I explored what a Trump victory signified for democracy and how it reflected the people’s power to rise above societal expectations and media narratives. Democracy, in its raw form, had spoken, and I accepted the results as a lesson in the resilience of choice—even when those choices may be bewildering to some.

As I process the loss of Kamala Harris in this election, I find myself in a familiar place. Only this time, my feelings are deeper, more personal. I was wholeheartedly pro-Kamala because I believed her ascent to the highest office was an opportunity for the United States to rise above its historical misogyny, to embrace progress, and to validate the dreams of countless women and people of color who see themselves reflected in her story.

Losing this chance feels like a setback. But, as I reminded myself in 2016, democracy sometimes challenges us to accept results we did not expect or want. Yet, in every loss, there is a lesson, a seed of transformation waiting to bloom.

The journey toward equality and justice is never a straight line. And while today’s results may not reflect the progress we hoped for, they do not erase the strides made or the path forward. Kamala’s impact, her vision, and her voice remain, and so does the fight for an America that lives up to its ideals.

So where did things go wrong, and why, despite everything stacked against him, did Donald Trump manage to secure a win once more?”

Where Kamala Might Have Gotten It Wrong

1. Disconnect with Key Voter Concerns: Kamala’s campaign leaned heavily into issues like reproductive rights, social justice, and healthcare reform. While these are undeniably important to many Americans, they may not have resonated as strongly with voters whose primary concerns were economic stability, national security, and border control. With rising inflation, job insecurity, and worries over crime, many Americans felt an acute need for economic and personal security. In contrast, Kamala’s emphasis on progressive social policies may have seemed less relevant or even disconnected from these immediate, everyday concerns. Furthermore, her focus on issues that resonate with urban and coastal areas may have alienated rural and working-class voters, who felt overlooked or misunderstood by the campaign.
2. The Elon Musk, X, and Former Democrats Factor: The influence of figures like Elon Musk, along with platforms like X (formerly Twitter), created a new dynamic in the political landscape. Musk’s outspoken criticisms of progressive policies and endorsement of more centrist or libertarian values resonated with former Democrats and independents who had grown disillusioned with the party’s direction. His support for free speech and critique of “woke” culture resonated with voters who felt that the Democratic Party had strayed too far left. Musk’s platform, X, became a prominent space for these discussions, amplifying voices that criticized Harris and the Democratic establishment.
3. Concerns Around Her Perception of Ascension: When President Biden stepped aside, Kamala Harris was swiftly positioned as the natural successor—a move that came with both benefits and pitfalls. While it solidified her as the party’s standard-bearer, it also raised questions about whether the Democrats had shielded Biden’s health and cognitive issues for too long. Some voters felt blindsided, questioning the transparency of the administration. The rapid transition to Kamala’s candidacy, though understandable given the need to rally quickly, left little room for a thorough exploration of alternative Democratic candidates who might have appealed to a broader base.

This accelerated timeline and sense of inevitability surrounding Kamala’s candidacy may have alienated voters who prefer a primary process that gives a wider field a fair shot. With other Democratic contenders overlooked or sidelined, some voters felt that the party’s decision was more about maintaining the status quo than refreshing its leadership. As a result, Kamala’s campaign began with a perception of entitlement—an “ascension” rather than a competitive win—leaving her vulnerable to criticisms of being out of touch with everyday Americans who valued humility and felt their voices weren’t fully considered in the process.

4. Perceptions of Competence and Authenticity: Kamala’s past as a prosecutor brought mixed perceptions. For some, her record on criminal justice issues conflicted with her progressive stances, leading to questions of authenticity. The “top cop” label, often used by critics, created an image that didn’t align seamlessly with the values of the Democratic Party’s left-leaning base, who prioritize criminal justice reform. Simultaneously, accusations of being “out of touch” with working-class Americans added to this perception. Even though she grew more effective as she campaigned, her initial challenges in relating to middle America and rural voters left a lasting impression.
5. The Jill Stein, Nikki Haley, and Independents Factor: The presence of independent and third-party candidates such as Jill Stein and Republican Nikki Haley introduced new dynamics that complicated Kamala’s campaign. Candidates like Stein appealed to disenchanted progressives who felt that Kamala was not progressive enough, pulling votes from the left. Meanwhile, Nikki Haley’s appeal to moderate conservatives and independents added pressure from the right, attracting voters who valued a more measured conservative approach. This splitting of the voter base on both sides left Kamala with less room to consolidate support, especially among independents who were disillusioned with the Democratic and Republican establishments alike.
6. Electability and Gender Bias: Kamala faced a persistent double standard, rooted in deeply ingrained biases about gender and leadership. Women in politics are often held to a higher standard of “likability” and perceived strength. Kamala, in particular, faced questions about her ability to handle the presidency with the same assertiveness traditionally expected of male candidates. Voters may have unfairly scrutinised her for appearing “too ambitious” or not “tough enough,” a criticism rarely levelled at her male counterparts. This bias not only influenced perceptions of her competence but also played into narratives that questioned her ability to lead in times of crisis.

Why Donald Trump Won Despite Controversies

1. Message of Economic Strength and Stability: Despite improvements in the broader economic metrics under President Biden—such as reduced inflation, stock market gains, and job growth—many Americans remained unconvinced. For them, the economy wasn’t measured by stock performance or government data but by the money in their pockets, the prices at grocery stores, and a feeling of financial security. Trump’s messaging zeroed in on this gap, emphasizing how he would “make America prosperous again” in a way that spoke directly to the daily experiences of working Americans. By framing the economy in terms of immediate, tangible outcomes rather than complex indicators, Trump won over voters who felt that economic recovery hadn’t reached their wallets.
2. Immigration and Border Control: Immigration proved to be one of the most decisive issues for voters in this election. Trump’s hardline stance and frequent focus on securing borders struck a chord with voters concerned about national security and economic opportunity. His rhetoric painted immigration as an urgent threat to American stability, framing it in terms of job competition, increased crime, and resource strain. This focus played particularly well in states and communities where anti-immigrant sentiment was already strong, amplifying voter concerns that weren’t fully addressed by Harris or the Democratic campaign. Trump’s willingness to embrace the immigration debate, even if it was controversial, attracted voters who felt unheard on this issue by the establishment.
3. Polarizing Yet Relatable Persona: Trump’s persona as an “outsider” and a disruptor made him relatable to a large portion of the electorate that feels disillusioned with career politicians. His blunt, often brash style—and his willingness to push against traditional decorum—resonated with Americans who viewed polished political figures as inauthentic or out of touch. Trump’s unfiltered, often controversial approach gave the impression of authenticity, endearing him to voters who prioritize a “tell-it-like-it-is” attitude. For many, he came across as a leader willing to fight against the elite on their behalf, which helped him energize a loyal base that saw him as genuinely committed to their values.
4. Single-Issue Voters on Social and Cultural Issues: Social and cultural issues such as abortion, religious freedom, and gun rights continue to drive a significant portion of the electorate. Trump’s open support for conservative values in these areas made him a stronghold for single-issue voters who saw him as the steadfast choice to protect their values. Many conservative voters, for example, felt that Trump’s Supreme Court nominations and stance on abortion were directly aligned with their own priorities. For these voters, his personal controversies were far outweighed by his commitment to conservative social policies, making him the clear choice to uphold what they view as American values.
5. Media Influence and Distrust: One of Trump’s most powerful strategies was his ability to leverage distrust of mainstream media. Trump reframed media attacks on him as attacks on his supporters, fueling a sense of solidarity among his base. This loyalty insulated him from many controversies, as his supporters grew to see critical media coverage as biased or even malicious. For these voters, criticisms of Trump only strengthened their support, further fueling his base’s enthusiasm. This distrust toward traditional media allowed Trump to sidestep controversies that might have impacted a more conventional candidate.
6. Embracing Non-Conventional Media to Amplify His Message: Trump took an innovative approach in reaching potential voters by embracing non-traditional platforms like podcasts and long-form discussions. Unlike many politicians who rely primarily on major networks or structured campaign rallies, Trump reached voters directly by appearing on popular podcasts across political and cultural spectrums, appealing to audiences that may not have tuned in to traditional news sources. These appearances allowed him to explain his positions in-depth, unfiltered, and in a style more conversational than combative. By adopting these formats, Trump expanded his reach and tapped into a diverse audience, resonating particularly with younger, independent voters who frequent these platforms and view long-form content as more authentic than sound bites.

What Trump Might Actually Do Right from a Global Perspective

1. Strengthening Economic Ties Through Strategic Trade Agreements: Trump has historically favoured bilateral trade agreements over multilateral ones, aiming to secure deals that directly benefit the U.S. economy. His focus on “America First” trade policies may provide opportunities for revitalising manufacturing sectors, protecting intellectual property, and creating jobs domestically. By striking balanced, mutually beneficial deals with allies and emerging markets, Trump could not only bolster U.S. economic influence but also encourage fair trade practices worldwide. With strengthened economic ties, the U.S. would be positioned as a more stable partner for global trade, potentially fostering closer alliances and reducing dependency on single large economies like China.
2. Addressing China’s Global Influence: Trump’s hardline stance on China remains a defining feature of his foreign policy approach. While his administration’s tariffs and sanctions against Chinese goods were met with mixed reactions, they underscored a commitment to countering what he perceives as China’s unfair trade practices, intellectual property theft, and regional aggression. Trump’s policies may encourage other nations to join the U.S. in adopting a more robust, unified stance against China’s economic monopolisation, especially in technology and infrastructure. A strong U.S.-led coalition could press China to adhere to fair trade standards, promoting a more balanced global economy and checking China’s expanding influence in regions like Africa, South America, and Southeast Asia.
3. Encouraging Energy Independence and Technological Innovation: Trump has consistently advocated for energy independence, historically focusing on fossil fuels. However, this term offers an opportunity to expand into alternative energy sources. By supporting investment in renewables, nuclear power, and technologies like electric vehicles and carbon capture, Trump could position the U.S. as a global leader in sustainable energy solutions. Such advancements would not only reduce reliance on Middle Eastern oil but also create new avenues for global partnerships in clean technology. If Trump embraces innovation alongside traditional energy sources, the U.S. could drive a new era of sustainable economic growth and provide leadership in addressing global environmental concerns.
4. Revamping NATO and International Defense Alliances: Trump has often been critical of NATO allies for not meeting their defense spending commitments, but his pressure has led to increased contributions from European nations. Continuing to push for fairer burden-sharing among NATO members could strengthen the alliance, making it more self-reliant and prepared to respond to security threats. By fostering a more balanced and capable NATO, Trump could also enhance global stability, reassuring allies in Eastern Europe and reducing dependency on U.S. military resources. This approach might help solidify the West’s collective defense stance, particularly as it navigates complex challenges like the Russia-Ukraine conflict.
5. Potential Role in Ending the Russia-Ukraine Conflict: Trump has expressed intentions to broker peace between Russia and Ukraine, claiming he could bring both sides to the table for negotiation. While this claim is controversial, Trump’s unique relationship with Russia may enable him to leverage diplomatic channels that have remained closed to other leaders. If Trump were to adopt a balanced, pragmatic approach, he might help facilitate a ceasefire or peace talks, potentially de-escalating one of the world’s most destabilising conflicts.
6. Engaging Israel and Middle Eastern Politics with a Pro-Israel Stance: Trump has a well-established record of being pro-Israel, with decisions like moving the U.S. embassy to Jerusalem and recognising Israel’s sovereignty over disputed territories solidifying his support. His administration championed the Abraham Accords, which led to historic normalisation agreements between Israel and several Arab states. Given his close alignment with Israel, it’s likely that Trump would continue prioritising policies that bolster Israel’s security and economic interests.

However, there is a hope—especially among Arab Americans and Lebanese Americans with whom he has recently engaged—that he might adopt a more balanced approach to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. Although Trump has yet to show significant interest in addressing Palestinian issues, his recent dialogue with Arab communities suggests that he may be open to listening to concerns from both sides. Convincing Trump to prioritise Palestinian welfare or advance solutions that improve Palestinian living conditions remains a challenge, yet there is cautious optimism that his outreach to Arab Americans may bring some degree of increased awareness.

7. Shaping Middle Eastern Policy for Stability and Security: Beyond Israel, Trump’s approach to Middle Eastern politics could focus on stabilising countries like Iraq, Syria, and Lebanon, where ongoing conflicts have weakened state structures and allowed terrorist groups to thrive. By fostering partnerships that promote economic aid and counter-terrorism efforts, Trump could encourage a more stable Middle East. His strong relationships with leaders in Saudi Arabia and the UAE could enable a more unified stance on issues such as combating extremism, countering Iranian influence, and supporting economic development initiatives in these nations. A strategically focused Middle Eastern policy could reduce threats to U.S. interests, decrease global oil price volatility, and stabilise a region that has long been a hotbed of conflict.

A Global Path Forward

While Trump’s policies are often divisive, he has the opportunity to shape a foreign policy agenda that reinforces American strength and addresses urgent global issues.

If executed thoughtfully, these efforts could foster a more secure, economically stable world order that aligns with U.S. interests and values.

Assembling a Better Team: Leveraging Expertise and Innovation

One of Trump’s key strengths during the campaign was his ability to galvanize a diverse set of influential figures—people who had previously been critical of him or had vastly different political perspectives. By uniting voices like JD Vance, Elon Musk, Robert F. Kennedy Jr., and Tulsi Gabbard, Trump built a coalition that appealed across a broad political spectrum, resonating with traditional conservatives, independents, and even disillusioned progressives.

JD Vance, once a vocal critic of Trump, became a powerful advocate for his agenda, bringing credibility and support from conservative grassroots. Elon Musk, a champion of free speech and unconventional thinking, found common ground with Trump’s anti-establishment messaging, aligning on issues such as government efficiency and economic innovation. Meanwhile, Robert F. Kennedy Jr., known for his strong views on public health and government transparency, became a valuable ally on issues like reforming the FDA and supporting alternative health perspectives. Tulsi Gabbard, a former Democrat and critic of interventionist policies, added to this coalition with her anti-establishment stance, attracting independents and moderates looking for a candidate willing to challenge traditional party lines.

Here are some ways he can benefit from assembling a powerful team;

1. Driving Technological Innovation with Elon Musk: One of the most impactful choices Trump could make is involving visionary leaders like Elon Musk. Musk’s expertise across various tech sectors, from electric vehicles and sustainable energy to space exploration, could guide Trump’s administration in adopting forward-looking policies that position the U.S. as a global leader in innovation. With Musk’s insights, Trump could accelerate initiatives that support electric vehicle adoption, renewable energy infrastructure, and advancements in space technology, aligning economic growth with technological progress. By harnessing Musk’s unique ability to push boundaries, Trump could promote an agenda that not only benefits American industry but also addresses environmental challenges, driving the U.S. to lead in clean energy and high-tech innovation.
2. Economic Policy Grounded in Fiscal Responsibility with Ron Paul: Another valuable addition to Trump’s team could be Ron Paul, known for his commitment to free-market principles and fiscal conservatism. Paul’s emphasis on limited government spending, low taxation, and personal economic freedoms could provide a balance to Trump’s more populist, pro-business approach. Paul’s influence could ensure that economic policies are sustainable, with an eye toward reducing national debt and preventing excessive government intervention. Including Paul in an advisory role would likely appeal to conservative voters who prioritise economic responsibility and small government, reinforcing policies that encourage entrepreneurship, reduce bureaucratic burdens, and maintain a focus on long-term fiscal health.
3. Building a Cohesive Team for Global Impact: Beyond Musk and Paul, Trump’s administration could benefit from assembling a well-rounded team of strategists and defense experts to address complex global challenges. Advisors with expertise in diplomacy, cybersecurity, trade, and national security could help the administration navigate the intricacies of international relations. This cohesive approach could improve America’s reputation abroad and bolster its influence in global forums, creating a foreign policy strategy that is both robust and adaptable.
4. Adapting to Shifting Global Dynamics: With a team of knowledgeable advisors from diverse fields, Trump could adapt to shifting global dynamics more fluidly. As the U.S. faces emerging challenges in areas like artificial intelligence, biotech, and data privacy, advisors such as Musk could inform policies on tech regulation, while experts in international law and ethics could ensure that American technological advancements align with global standards.

Final Reflections

In 2016, I wrote that democracy can surprise us, sometimes forcing us to confront truths we’d rather ignore. Today, I find that this lesson still holds.

While today I mourn, I also recognise that this loss is not the end. America’s future remains unwritten, and Kamala’s campaign—despite its outcome—has left an indelible mark.

Ifeanyi Abraham is a Global PR and Communications Strategist, Founder of The Diverse Business and Tech Summit, FindBlackExperts.com, TechSoma Africa and the Middle East, and Co-Founder of FindExperts