What the U.S. Presidential Election Results Tell Us

Source: Rosemary Ketchum / Pexels

Americans who felt more financially squeezed at the time of the election voted overwhelmingly for Trump over Harris (82 percent versus 16 percent) whereas others who felt more comfortable voted decidedly for Harris over Trump (83 percent versus 14 percent). More Americans who didn’t have college degrees voted for Trump, while the majority of college graduates voted for Harris (56 percent each). The majority of Americans who earn less than $100,000 voted for Trump, while the majority who earn more went for Harris. Because many more people feel economically squeezed today, don’t have college degrees, and earn less than $100,000, the election tipped in Trump’s favor.

As a social psychologist who has spent 25 years designing programs to increase educational opportunity and social mobility, what jumped out at me in this exit poll was the huge social class divide in voters’ opinions about which candidate would help them and why (CNN, 2024). People who were financially insecure amidst a rollercoaster economy felt the system was rigged and that political leaders were not listening to them. Others who were financially comfortable and could absorb the shocks of the rollercoaster felt the system was fair and felt heard by political leaders.

It’s clear that working-class support for Trump is more multiracial and multigenerational this time than in 2020, eroding Democrats’ traditional advantage among African Americans, Hispanics, and young people (Associated Press, 2024). Trump picked up small but consistent shares of young, Black, and Hispanic voters, many of whom said the economy was not working for them. Among Hispanics, 42 percent preferred Trump in 2024 compared to 35 percent in 2020; 56 percent preferred Harris in 2024, down from 63 percent who supported Biden in 2020. Trump got more support from Black voters, too: 16 percent voted for him in 2024, up from a mere 8 percent in 2020. Although most Black voters supported Harris, her margin was down compared to Biden in 2020 (83 percent versus 91 percent). These gains came especially from Black and Hispanic men.

Our Identities and Voting Behavior

I am not surprised that deep-seated financial insecurity made class identity prominent for working-class people from diverse backgrounds regardless of their race and ethnicity, age, and gender. Social psychological research shows that we humans hold multiple identities and group-based interests within us; external circumstances increase the prominence of specific identities and needs especially when they are threatened (Bataille & Vough, 2022). In this election, financial insecurity made social class interests stand out for low- and middle-income people, guiding their voting behavior. But upper-income people who were cushioned from economic shock by wealth didn’t experience financial threat as much. Without the financial pinch, their class identity may not have been prominent to their sense of self. Other identities such as race, gender, gender identity, professional interests, and so on, may have been more salient in guiding their voting behavior.

The Democratic elite didn’t understand the resentment that working-class people felt about the status quo and about political leaders who weren’t delivering on the promises they had been making for years (Williams, 2019). As the governing party, Democrats are the establishment. Trump is seen as anti-establishment. Even though some who voted for him don’t like his vulgar behavior, they are willing to ignore it because of what he promises to deliver: a shake-up of the system that isn’t working (Bowman, Tabet, Doshi, Kamisar, & Wardwell, 2025). Whether he can deliver what he promised remains to be seen.

The social class gap in opportunity isn’t recent. It has been widening since neoliberalism became the dominant ideology in the 1980s, shaping political and economic policies. A good society, according to neoliberalism, is one that privatizes public resources and property, privileges free market and trade, reduces government spending on social safety nets, and minimizes regulation of businesses (Harvey, 2005). Decades of neoliberal policies have been associated with yawning inequalities in income, health, and education, crushing middle- and working-class people whose pent-up despair and rage was recognized and used by Trump.

Living in Separate Bubbles

The fact that Democrats were surprised tells us we don’t understand each other. We live in separate bubbles. Research shows that upper-income people draw a large share of their friends from college, work, and recreational groups whereas low-income people draw a large share of their friends from neighborhoods and religious groups (Chetty et al., 2022). Because neighborhoods and professions are segregated by social class and because college is an experience that many low-income Americans won’t have, upper- and lower-income people are unlikely to cross paths, mix, and become friends. They don’t know each other or the circumstances of each other’s lives.

As I write in my new book, Change the Wallpaper: Transforming Cultural Patterns to Build More Just Communities, if we want to change our country for the better, we need to step out of our bubbles and walk into new local spaces where we mix with people who are different from us (Dasgupta, 2025). Let’s have real conversations with individuals from different social class backgrounds than ourselves, become curious about each other, listen to each other’s stories, and learn about the material conditions of others’ lives that may not be visible from the outside. These stories may make us question assumptions about deservingness, meritocracy, and the American Dream. With real conversations come “a-ha” moments, empathy, weakening stereotypes, and friendships. Behind the stories, we may see structural barriers that were previously invisible.

Only then will we see the wallpaper: unspoken norms and customs, stories that signal who is valued and who is not, and the physical design of places that keep us apart. It’s the stuff in the background that’s barely noticed. And, yet, it nudges our thoughts and actions, quietly creating and reinforcing inequalities.

President Donald Trump Essential Reads

Donald Trump’s So-Called “Alcoholic Personality”

Is Trump Using Psychological Biases in His Cabinet Picks?

When people have genuine conversations across group lines, listen actively, interact often, and feel empathy, there’s an increased desire to act together on issues of shared interest in local communities, motivated by solidarity, to meet the needs of the vulnerable.