Emory Undergraduate Journal of Law & Society

By morning of Tuesday, November 6th, the day after the election, the projected winner of the 47th President of the United States was clear: Donald Trump had successfully claimed the electoral votes of Wisconsin, pushing him over the required 270 vote threshold to victory needing to beat his Democratic opponent, Vice President Kamala Harris [1]. Only three days later would it be revealed that he had swept all seven key swing states (Arizona, Georgia, Michigan, Nevada, North Carolina, Pennsylvania, and Wisconsin), securing his presidential win for his second term in office [2]. Even in historically blue states, Trump only lost by a narrow margin against Vice President Harris. Following his loss in 2020, this remarkable comeback marks a first in United States history where a democratically elected president will have been a convicted felon, a reputed insurrectionist, and a sexual assaulter. Nonetheless, Trump’s historic win is more than just a political comeback; it reflects shifts in the American electorate and the issues that drove them to the polls. But even though the majority of the American voting base saw him as a champion of their interests, his track record suggests that his leadership style may further entrench divides rather than bridge them. His reliance on polarizing rhetoric and controversial policy positions throughout the duration of the 2024 election has created as much discord as it has unity. 

Trump built his economic plan in this election to revolve around his hardline stance on increasing tariffs, including the controversial proposal of imposing tariffs as high as 60% specifically on Chinese goods. While Trump supporters may believe his promise that these tariffs are a way to protect American industries and jobs, his previous trade war with China in 2018 should serve as a deterrent example of the economic consequences. The Trump administration blamed China for the ongoing trade deficit, and as a punishment slapped an extreme 25% tariff on China’s goods [3]. China retaliated by increasing their then 5.7% tax to 20.4% [4]. His trade war did not address the root causes of the deficit (which are often driven by factors like government spending and investment flows, rather than simply trade imbalances from any country), and instead, increased economic volatility without delivering tangible benefits for American workers. The reality is that American businesses and consumers ended up bearing the costs through higher prices and by returning to these extreme tariffs, Trump risks repeating further straining relations with China. His first approach ultimately led to slower economic growth, reduced business investment, bankruptcies among farmers, and significant declines in manufacturing and transportation—effectively imposing one of the largest tax increases in years [5]. This aggressive stance created a damaging economic cycle with few winners and will only further alienate the United States from economic partnerships at a time when collective efforts are more essential in tackling global challenges, such as climate change. 

But as much as his policies will shape the economy, his words also shape the national discourse—and it is worth asking whether his approach is creating solutions or exacerbating divisions. NPR has recorded Trump publicly calling over 100 times for investigations or punishments against his political rivals, critics, judges, prosecutors, journalists, and the Democratic leaders Joe Biden, Kamala Harris, and Barack Obama [6]. Donald Trump’s frequent use of such rhetoric should be noted as it demonstrates his inclination to weaponize the legal system against his perceived enemies. His rhetoric in this past election cycle has eroded public trust in institutions as he continues to paint the image that courts, prosecutors, and election officials act as biased actors rather than being impartial. This lack of trust can peel away the American people’s confidence in government institutions and their trust in dedication to the democratic process. Rhetoric that glorifies or excuses violence can additionally strengthen extremist groups and individuals, like the Proud Boys, who are fueled by Trump’s inflaming language to normalize conspiratorial and aggressive ideologies. As demonstrated most clearly by the attack on the Capitol in 2020, which was a direct reflection of the social polarization that Trump has perpetuated. Trump’s comments have incited hostility and violence among his most loyal supporters and this rhetoric will continue to shape political discussions. 

Looking ahead, the future of our country hinges on how Trump will choose to move forward; the decisions he will make will shape the future of our economy, our democracy, and our standing in the world. And as voters in this election, we have collectively decided to move forth with this candidate.

References

[1] News, P. (2024, November 6). Donald Trump elected 47th president of the United States. PBS News. https://www.pbs.org/newshour/politics/donald-trump-elected-47th-president-of-the-united-states.

[2] Chasan, A. (2024, November 4). All the battleground states to watch during the 2024 election. Cbsnews.com; CBS News. https://www.cbsnews.com/news/battleground-states-2024-election/.

[3] Amiti, M., Kong, S. H., & Weinstein, D. E. (2020, May 28). The Investment Cost of the U.S.-China Trade War. Liberty Street Economics. https://libertystreeteconomics.newyorkfed.org/2020/05/the-investment-cost-of-the-us-china-trade-war/

[4] Bown, C. P. (2022, October 20). Four years into the trade war, are the US and China decoupling? PIIE. https://www.piie.com/blogs/realtime-economics/2022/four-years-trade-war-are-us-and-china-decoupling 

[5] Long, H. (2020, January 15). Analysis | Was Trump’s China trade war worth it? Washington Post. https://www.washingtonpost.com/business/2020/01/15/was-trumps-china-trade-war-worth-it/

[6] NPR. (2024, October 21). A look into Trump’s recent rhetoric focusing on revenge and threats. NPR. https://www.npr.org/2024/10/21/1211597189/a-look-into-trumps-recent-rhetoric-focusing-on-revenge-and-threats.