Decoding the U.S. Election: Voting Trends, Issues, and Systems

Panelists: Dr. Danny Hayes, Dr. Sanjay Kumar, and Dr. Sandeep Shastri

Moderator: Dr. Deepa Ollapally

Date: 12 December 2024

Time: 6:30 PM to 8:00 PM (IST)

Venue: Virtual Panel Discussion

Introduction

The panel discussion, "Decoding the U.S. Election: Voting Trends, Issues, and Systems," was successfully held on December 12, 2024. Part of the US-India Cooperation Circle’s dialogue series, the session explored U.S. electoral processes, key voting patterns, critical domestic and foreign policy issues, and implications for global partnerships, especially U.S.-India relations. Distinguished academics, policymakers, and diplomats provided in-depth analysis of the U.S. elections within a global context.

The diverse audience underscored the importance of dialogue between the world’s oldest and largest democracies. Panelists included Dr. Danny Hayes (American elections and media), Dr. Sanjay Kumar (Indian electoral processes), and Dr. Sandeep Shastri (political analysis). Dr. Deepa Ollapally (George Washington University) moderated, and Mr. Eric Atkins (U.S. Consulate in Chennai) delivered opening remarks on U.S.-India relations.

Opening Remarks 

Dr. Manoharan N opened the session, emphasizing the importance of understanding the complexities of the U.S. electoral system. He noted that U.S. elections serve as a global benchmark for democratic processes and outcomes, making their study crucial for academics, policymakers, and civil society. He also highlighted the value of comparative perspectives, particularly given the challenges facing democracies globally.

Following this, Mr. Eric Atkins from the U.S. Consulate Chennai delivered his special remarks, congratulating the USICC on its work and expressing his appreciation to the organizers and participants for their dedication to fostering mutual understanding between the two nations. Mr. Atkins highlighted the bipartisan support in the United States for strengthening relations with India, emphasizing that these ties have reached unprecedented levels of cooperation in recent years. He reflected on the shared democratic values and growing strategic interests that have solidified the partnership between the two countries, both at the institutional and people-to-people levels. His address eloquently framed the event as a platform to deepen intellectual exchanges and promote collaborative dialogue.

Panel Contributions

The central themes of the discussion revolved around the U.S. electoral framework, emerging political trends, comparative electoral experiences, and their broader implications. The panelists brought unique insights to the conversation, addressing both structural and contextual factors that defined the 2024 U.S. elections.

Dr. Danny Hayes, ‘Analysing the Voting Trends, Issues and Electoral Systems of the U.S. Presidential Election’

Dr. Danny Hayes provided a detailed analysis of Donald Trump’s 2024 presidential victory, describing it as both surprising and predictable. It was surprising because, in the history of American politics, it is rare for a candidate to win, lose, and then win again. Trump’s legal troubles, including his conviction for falsifying records to cover up payments made to silence an adult film star, further added to the unexpected nature of his comeback. His first term was characterized by significant turmoil, including two impeachments, and his loss in the 2020 election—an election many believed he should have won as an incumbent—cast doubts about his ability to reclaim the presidency. His advanced age and the challenges of overcoming a polarized electorate also made his victory seem unlikely.

However, Dr. Hayes pointed out that Trump’s success was not entirely surprising. The highly polarized political environment, coupled with the lack of a strong alternative within the Republican Party, created favorable conditions for his return. Many voters remain loyal to their political party rather than individual nominees, ensuring a baseline of support for Trump. Additionally, the electorate's perception of the incumbent party contributed to his victory. Despite objective improvements in the economy, many Americans felt that the country was stagnant or moving in the wrong direction and placed the blame on the party in power, making Trump’s candidacy appear as a vehicle for change.

Dr. Hayes also emphasized that the nature of Trump’s victory was broad but not deep. While he managed to secure the presidency, his margin of victory was slim, particularly when compared to his loss in the 2020 election. On the question of whether his victory signals widespread endorsement of his policies, Dr. Hayes argued that the answer depends on the policy area. On issues such as immigration and deportation, there is significant public support for Trump’s stances. However, his economic policies have received a mixed response, with public opinion appearing fragmented and inconsistent. Furthermore, the success of his policy agenda will depend heavily on securing congressional support.

Dr. Hayes also noted that Trump’s approach to foreign policy, particularly his emphasis on reducing U.S. involvement in global conflicts, resonated strongly with conservative voters. For instance, his decision to avoid deep entanglement in the Syrian crisis was viewed favorably by many. Dr. Hayes argued that the 2024 election outcome, while narrow, represents a significant shift in voter sentiment across a diverse array of demographics and underscores the complexity of contemporary American politics.

Dr. Sanjay Kumar, ‘A Comparative Analysis of Electoral Systems and Domestic Issues’

Dr. Kumar delivered a nuanced and comprehensive analysis of the Indian electoral system and the potential learnings it could adopt from the U.S. system. He began by addressing the 2024 Indian general elections, stating that while the result of the BJP returning to power was an outcome that was largely expected, the magnitude of their victory was much smaller than anticipated, similar to what happened in the U.S. Dr. Kumar then shifted focus to the broader electoral system in India, highlighting the recent parliamentary passage of the “One Nation, One Election” initiative. Dr. Kumar drew parallels with the U.S. electoral system, where elections are held on a fixed schedule—the first Tuesday in November—and suggested that India could gradually move towards a similar model by designating a fixed month or window for elections. However, he expressed concerns about the potential implications of simultaneous elections, particularly the overshadowing of regional parties and issues by national campaigns, which could undermine the political diversity and representation of India’s states. He argued that while the U.S. and U.K. systems may work well in their contexts, India’s multi-party system is better suited to its unique socio-political landscape.

Dr. Kumar also highlighted the importance of focusing on substantive issues in electoral campaigns. He observed that while unemployment and price rise are consistently identified as top concerns in voter surveys, these issues rarely shape voting decisions. Instead, election campaigns in India often shift focus to religion and caste-based polarization, overshadowing critical topics like public health, education, and infrastructure. He urged Indian political parties and voters to prioritize these real issues, noting that the U.S. elections often revolve around economic and foreign policy debates, which could serve as a model for India.

Lastly, Dr. Kumar emphasized the value of introducing structured debates into the Indian electoral process. Drawing inspiration from the U.S. presidential debates, he argued that similar debates among Indian political leaders could elevate the quality of political discourse and shift focus to substantive issues. He suggested that party-nominated candidates for prime minister or alliance leaders should engage in open debates, presenting their manifestos and policy agendas. This, he believed, would make Indian politics healthier, cleaner, and more meaningful, reducing the reliance on divisive issues like religion and caste.

Dr. Sandeep Shastri,  ‘A Comparative Analysis of Voting Trends and Foreign Policy Issues’

Dr. Sandeep Shastri delved into the interplay between identity politics and policy priorities in the 2024 U.S. elections. He highlighted his dual perspective as an outsider analyzing American elections and an insider studying Indian elections, offering five key points of analysis.

First, he observed that 2024 has been a year of challenges for incumbents globally, with over 60 national elections witnessing significant setbacks for ruling parties, including slimmer majorities or outright defeats. He drew parallels between the United States and India, where challengers often perform well, and incumbents face uphill battles.

Second, he noted the often-overlooked role of losing candidates in shaping election outcomes. Using the U.S. elections as an example, he suggested that Vice President Kamala Harris’s paradox of still having to propagate Biden’s plans and limited foreign policy involvement during her tenure may have contributed to Donald Trump’s resurgence. Similarly, in India, losing candidates have historically influenced the scale of winners’ victories.

Third, he emphasized the growing polarization among electorates in both the U.S. and India. Surveys revealed stark divides in voter preferences, with supporters of one candidate often perceiving their opponent as too extreme. This phenomenon is not unique to these two nations but extends to elections across Europe and other regions.

Shifting to foreign policy, his fourth point focused on how domestic priorities often overshadow international issues in elections. He compared Trump’s “America First” agenda, which prioritized economic and domestic concerns, to India’s BJP-led government, which has increasingly used foreign policy achievements to distinguish itself from opposition parties.

Finally, he examined the interplay between foreign policy and domestic politics, highlighting key issues in the U.S. elections, such as the Ukraine war, developments in Gaza and Palestine, relations with China, trade tariffs, and immigration policies. He noted that Trump’s rhetoric around ending wars and resetting trade dynamics resonated with voters but raised questions about its practical implementation. Drawing parallels with India, he observed a shift from foreign policy consensus to its use as a political tool under Prime Minister Modi, particularly through initiatives like “Make in India.”

In conclusion, Professor Shastri predicted the outcome as visibly unpredictable. He noted that both American and Indian elections reflect a complex interplay of domestic and foreign policy considerations.

Youth Perspectives

Himanshi Gupta, a master’s student in international relations from Nalanda University, shared her perspectives on the US electoral system and the critical domestic issues influencing the 2024 elections. She highlighted that while the US Electoral College provides stability and decentralization, it has faced criticism for amplifying the voices of swing states and being impacted by gerrymandering. She suggested that practices from other countries, such as India’s proportional representation system, could help address these challenges. On domestic issues, she focused on the effects of ‘Bidenomics, noting that despite strong job growth, high inflation, and historically low internal migration left voters dissatisfied. Trump’s Republican party leveraged this discontent, attracting voters with promises of tax cuts and reduced spending. She also pointed to Trump’s education policy, which emphasizes returning control to states, and the Republican manifesto’s call to “renew pillars of American civilization,” which she suggested hints at suppressing the American notion of secularism while reinforcing his “America First” approach.

Himanshi further discussed healthcare issues, highlighting the challenges with insurance checks, which have contributed to a collective debt of $2.2 trillion, causing outrage among the population. She noted that the Republicans’ promise to address this provided some solace. On gun control, she criticized the Republican stance for creating fears of increased violence, particularly with the issue of ghost guns. She also touched on abortion and LGBTQ+ rights, noting that the overturning of Roe v. Wade has sparked global debates amidst the rise of right-wing politics. Concluding her remarks, Himanshi emphasized the global impact of US elections, arguing that while “America First” is a priority domestically, the world closely watches these elections due to their far-reaching consequences. Whether on climate change or abortion, US policies shape global dynamics, as breaking hegemonies takes time.

Mohammad Sabtain, a senior research affiliate and PhD candidate from Christ University, reflected on the voting patterns in the world’s largest democracies—India and the United States—emphasizing the role of youth in shaping the future of democracies. He highlighted the growing electorate in India, which increased from 89.6 crore in 2019 to 98.88 crore in 2024, with youth voters accounting for 22% of the total. However, youth voter turnout has stagnated around 50-55%. Similarly, in the US, only 60% of the 245 million eligible voters cast their ballots in 2024, with youth participation declining from 19% of the total vote in 2016 to just 14% in 2024. He noted that only 42% of young voters in the US participated in 2024, down from over 50% in 2020. Sabtain attributed this to disillusionment, as young voters in India care about employment, social justice, environmental sustainability, and inclusive governance but feel ignored. Similarly, US youth prioritize socioeconomic concerns, yet identity politics overshadows their priorities.

Sabtain discussed how identity issues manifest differently in both nations, framed as “American versus the outsider” in the US and as caste, regional, and communal divisions in India. While some youth reject these narratives, many remain influenced by them, posing a challenge for the demographic. Despite this, he sees hope in young voters’ practical approach, focusing on socioeconomic policies over rhetoric. In India, youth resonate with foreign policy and nationalistic issues, while in the US, they focus on climate action and economic reform. He stressed the importance of youth participation, urging them to vote to demand leadership and policies that matter. While the current trends highlight areas for improvement, the growing young electorate represents a promising future. Sabtain concluded with a call to action for youth to make their voices heard, not just in discussions but at the ballot box, emphasizing that participation is key to driving meaningful change.

Q&A Session 

Q. How can we situate, theoretically, the populist construction of identity with the America First policy?

Asked by: Dr. Shrijita Biswas, Answered by: Prof. Sandeep Shastri

A. America First, Trump’s key slogan, reflects the cleavages within society rather than creating them. This parallels India’s societal divisions, where identity politics manifest differently but deeply influence democratic processes. These identities are entrenched in democratic frameworks, symbolizing authentic aspirations while often being polarizing. Populism, in this context, represents the diversification and deeper engagement of democratic politics.

Q. What can India expect from America’s foreign policy under Trump 2.0?

Asked by: Abhishek Jain, Answered by: Prof. Sandeep Shastri

A. India can expect uncertainty in US foreign policy under Trump due to both policy and personality. Historically, no conclusive evidence shows a president from one party being better for India. The relationship will depend on domestic political priorities in both nations, as leaders cater primarily to domestic audiences.

Q. How do we protect the integrity of the ballot in India?

Asked by: Nasir Soh, Answered by: Prof. Sanjay Kumar

A. In India, elections are conducted using electronic voting machines (EVMs) supplemented by Voter Verifiable Paper Audit Trails (VVPATs). While these technologies represent advancements in the electoral process, concerns persist regarding issues such as battery life, the maintenance of vote secrecy, and the overall accuracy of the system. These concerns have not been fully addressed by the Election Commission.

Q. What role did growing wokeism and the LGBTQ+ movement play in the rise of the new right in America?

Asked by: Vishwa Pramod, Answered by: Prof. Danny Hayes

A. While the 2024 election largely focused on the economy, woke politics and LGBTQ+ rights have become rhetorical tools for the right, framing the Democratic Party as culturally out of step with mainstream America. These issues help organize critiques of liberalism, even if their direct impact on election outcomes remains unclear.

Q. How can Democrats win back voters amidst polarization and rising populism?

Asked by: Jairam Prabhu, Answered by: Prof. Danny Hayes

A. Democrats face two challenges: stemming the shift of conservative Latino and Black voters to the Republicans and deciding whether to adopt a populist working-class strategy. As ideological realignment progresses, Democrats may need to choose between courting working-class voters or solidifying their base among educated, liberal constituencies.

Q. Is populism in the US a recent phenomenon introduced by Trump, or is it longstanding?

Asked by: Jairam Prabhu, Answered by: Prof. Danny Hayes

A. Populism is not new in the US, but Trump’s version is distinct. Historically, populist movements have emerged from the left, but Trump represents a right-wing populist success. His rhetoric appeals to working-class frustrations, a shift in populist politics that reflects long-term societal and economic trends.

Conclusion and Closing Remarks

The session concluded with a vote of thanks delivered by Ms. Avishka Ashok on behalf of the Centre for East Asian Studies. She extended gratitude to the distinguished panelists—Professor Danny Hayes, Professor Sandeep Shastri, and Professor Sanjay Kumar—for their exceptional contributions to the discussion. Their insights provided a nuanced understanding of the American electoral system and its comparative implications for India, fostering a meaningful dialogue on global democratic practices. Special thanks were conveyed to Professor Deepa Ollapalli for her adept moderation and continued support of the Centre’s initiatives. The U.S. Consulate in Chennai, represented by Mr. Eric Atkins, was also appreciated for their steadfast partnership in organizing this enlightening series on U.S.-India relations.

The enthusiastic participation of the audience, marked by their thought-provoking questions, was acknowledged as a critical element that elevated the session’s impact. Ms. Ashok encouraged all attendees to stay engaged in future events and requested them to complete the post-session survey. The event ended on a note of gratitude and optimism for continued collaboration and exploration of critical themes in U.S.-India relations.