More than 200 people, many
sitting on the floor to fit into the
space, assembled Wednesday at the
Ford School of Public Policy to listen
to a panel of five professors and
politicians analyze the results of
the election and give projections on
how future policy will be affected
by President-elect Donald Trump.
The
panel
also
answered
audience questions on the social
implications of Trump’s rhetoric
and reasons for the election’s
outcome.
Ron
Weiser,
former
U.S.
Ambassador and newly elected
member of the University of
Michigan’s
Board
of
Regents,
began his speech by saying he was
just as shocked by Trump’s victory
as everyone else. As a Republican
on campus, he said he felt he was
viewed in a different light by
students.
“Yes, I’m a Republican, and
yes, quite often on campus I feel
unwelcome,” Weiser said. “I was
surprised with the outcome, as most
of the people in this room were.”
According to a Michigan Daily
poll, 19 percent of students identify
as Republican.
Speaking to the months to
come, Weiser said he thinks there
are positive outcomes of a Trump
presidency. He added that he has
seen a lot of political campaigns,
and candidates say things that they
don’t usually follow through on.
Following his remarks, multiple
students
directed
questions
toward Weiser regarding Trump’s
controversial rhetoric throughout
his campaign. Weiser said he had
been accused of “Trumpism” in
the past, adding that he finds those
views despicable. Clarifying his
views, Weiser said he supports
Trump’s economic policies but does
not agree with all of his rhetoric.
“We all make choices, and I’m
an economic conservative and I
think that some of the things that
I believe in are fundamental, and
I don’t believe that they’re being
promoted in order to take advantage
of the disadvantaged,” Weiser said.
“I spent most of my life trying to
help the disadvantaged, not take
advantage of them.”
Former U.S. Rep. John Dingell,
a panelist, said he was optimistic
that the country will come together
and work for the greater good of
the people. He said the United
States is still the greatest nation
in the world and systems like the
peaceful transfer of power between
the president and his successor are
what make it so prosperous.
“I am hopeful that we will find
that those will not be thrown out
the window, although Trump has
said that he will do away with most
of those things,” Dingell said.
The rest of the panel was not as
optimistic, with all three female
panelists noting citizen frustration
as a driving force of Trump’s
campaign and election win.
Political Science Prof. Mara
Ostfeld, who was part of a research
team that analyzed exit polls
Tuesday, discussed three trends of
the election: female voters, white
male voters and Latino/African-
American voters. She said 40
percent of white voters, according
to the polls, felt that minorities
are more privileged than white
Americans, marked by a trend of
white men shifting away from the
Democratic Party.
Ostfeld said she believed that the
race angle of these results is notable
in analyzing the social identities and
types of meaning that the parties
are conjuring.
“It is important to contextualize
in the Trump campaign that when it
started immigration policy was the
only policy on his website,” she said.
Ostfeld noted Florida, which
went to Trump, was also a surprise
in the polls, as analysts thought
Democrats had a strong hold over
the state due to its Latino voters. She
added that, though Cubans moved
away from the Republican Party in
previous elections, this year was a
dramatic shift back.
Public
Policy
Prof.
Betsey
Stevenson, shifting from discussing
poll results to policies, noted
stagnant wages as the motivation
behind citizens looking for a
difference in voting for Trump.
However, she said she was not
prepared to speak on Trump’s
platform, as she was expecting a
Clinton win and thought his policy
plans were weak.
“I can tell you it’s not for lack
of studying that I don’t know the
Trump policy platform very well,”
she said.
Stevenson added that because
Obama focused on mostly partisan
Democratic policy, there is a lot that
can be undone by Trump. However,
she said she thinks Trump is a big
talker and likes to tell stories to the
American people, but questioned
whether he would follow through.
Building
on
Stevenson’s
comments, Public Policy Prof.
Marina
Whitman
discussed
international
trade
policy
and
said there is a lot of asymmetry in
a president’s power with respect
to trade issues. As a result, she
said Trump could tear up trade
agreements with little concession
from
the
other
branches
of
government.
He
has
openly
criticized NAFTA throughout his
campaign.
However,
Whitman
noted that she did not believe
he could totally alter all trade
agreements.
“Will he tear up NAFTA? I don’t
think that omelets can be converted
back into eggs,” Whitman said.
Rackham
student
Harry
Wolberg, an attendee, said he was
disappointed by the results of the
election and thought that the results
did not follow a logical process.
“I liked that it was a diverse
panel,” he said. “I want to hear
people talk more about policies
that are going to be involved in the
next administration. So there were
a lot of questions devoted to that
and it’s hard to tell what’s going to
happen in the future, but I want to
see how both sides respond to using
evidence-based research for foreign
policy.”
Panel of professors and politicians analyze unexpected Trump win
At event, Ron Weiser, incoming University of Michigan Regent, defends choice to support GOP nominee to students
KAELA THEUT
Daily Staff Reporter
gender and educational status
— among other deviations — for
voters in the 2016 presidential
election.
While there is still much
analysis to be completed in the
coming days, so far it appears that
middle-class, white America was
the tipping point demographic in
winning Trump the election.
Exit polls illustrate that women
overwhelmingly
supported
Clinton overall, as did voters under
the age of 45. Other than gender
and age, race proved to be a strong
indicator
of
which
candidate
demographic
groups
would
support. As predicted by pollsters
in previous samplings, 58 percent
of white voters overall supported
Trump while 74 percent of non-
white voters voted for Clinton.
Delving
deeper
into
each
demographic, race consistently
emerged as a point of divide. Each
age bracket of white voters had
a majority that voted for Trump,
while all age brackets of minority
groups overwhelmingly supported
Clinton.
Additionally,
white
woman voted for Trump in much
higher numbers than women of
color.
For Josh Pasek, a professor
of communication studies, one
possible explanation of the failure
of the polls stems from which
voters were included.
“I’m
guessing
that
what
happened here is that a lot of the
models that worked in the past …
ended up undercutting the actual
enthusiasm among Trump voters,”
Pasek said. “That is largely because
Trump voters aren’t traditional,
regular, habitual voters. They were
energized this time. And a lot of
that is because the voter models
under-predicted
whether
they
turned out or not.”
Other than failure of the voter
models, Traugott said there is also
national pattern of rising rural
support for Trump that likely
wasn’t captured.
“The analysis of the exit polls
show not only about who people
voted for but why the selected the
candidates that they did,” Traugott
said. “It’s clear that Trump was the
anti-establishment candidate. He
campaigned against Washington.
In hindsight, that turned out to be
a powerful message.”
Educational
attainment
also
proved to be a key indicator among
voters in this election. Across
almost every demographic, the
majority of college graduates or
postgraduates voted for Clinton,
except for white college graduates
who supported Trump by 4 percent
over Clinton.
Turnout data is still being
collected, but the data thus far
suggests that 2016 voter turnout
was up 4.7 percent around the
country from the 2012 election, a
trend that included Ann Arbor and
the surrounding counties.
However, Pasek said despite
the rise in voter turnout, it wasn’t
enough for the Clinton campaign.
“If you look at the areas that
have reported their full turnout
numbers, it’s clear that the highest
turnout was not in the city of
Ann Arbor itself, it was in the
surrounding areas,” Pasek said.
“That is very telling. The kinds of
turnout rates we were seeing were
not the kinds of rates the Clinton
campaign was hoping for if they
wanted to have a clean win in the
state.”
On
campus,
the
average
millennial voter both did and
didn’t match up to national exit poll
averages according to Michigan
Daily survey data.
Similar
to
what
the
exit
polls show, student voters at
the University overwhelmingly
supported
Clinton
—
in
the
most recent poll, 76 percent of
respondents said they planned
on voting for her. University
respondents differed from the
national norm, however, in that
more whites and males on campus
showed
support
for
Clinton
rather than Trump, though it is
worth noting that exit polls have
suggested individuals nationwide
concealed their vote for Trump in
pre-election surveys.
In terms of partisanship, the
election was broadly similar to past
ones — young people, as well as
minorities and women, continued
to support Democrats while older
generations and more white males
continued to vote Republican.
Traugott said mobilizing every
voter base was key in this election.
“Young people have a tendency
to
support
the
Democratic
candidate over the Republican
candidate, and it looks like the
margin of victory is going to be
very small,” Traugott said. “This is
an example of how every little bit
helps.”
Pasek said while this election
continued to show an ideological
divide based on age, the past few
cycles are suggesting that electoral
divisions are shifting more toward
geographical differences.
“When
you’re
older,
you
accumulate more wealth, so the
tendency is for people to become
more conservative because they
don’t want to see their wealth
redistributed,” Pasek said. “But
I think we are moving away
from that, we are seeing larger
demographic differences that are
less about age and more about
other things.”
POLLS
From Page 1A
the end of the campaign, Trump
challenged
those
assumptions,
claiming in his final campaign rally
in Grand Rapids Monday that he
would win the state, propelling his
victory in the election as a whole.
“If we win Michigan, we will
win this historic election and then
we truly will be able to do all of the
things we want to do,” he said at the
time.
While the state did not ultimately
secure Trump’s victory, the rapid
changes in the state over the last few
days before the election mirrored
those in the states that did, such as
Wisconsin.
Communications Studies Prof.
Josh Pasek, an expert in public
opinion and polling, said the race
both in Michigan and across the
country came down to a matter
of turnout. The counties Clinton
won, he said, had a lower turnout in
groups that tend to favor her — such
as minorities and young people —
than she needed to win.
“The big notes have been that
more white voters — in particular
blue collar and rural — have voted
in this election than in the past,”
he said. “We did see that if Hillary
Clinton wanted to win Michigan,
she needed to turnout slightly
better numbers than she did in the
cities of Ann Arbor and Detroit than
she did,” she said. “She didn’t do
that, and it stops there.”
In Washtenaw County, which
houses the University of Michigan,
voter turnout was 65.6 percent.
However, in the four precincts that
feature many student voters, with
polling locations in the Michigan
Union and Michigan League, voter
turnout ranged from 42.8 percent to
49.71 percent.
Overall,
voter
turnout
was
noticeably higher in the more
rural areas outside of Ann Arbor,
according to a Washtenaw County
map. Most voters in precincts in
and near Ann Arbor voted for
Clinton, while the areas farther
from campus in the county cast
more votes for Trump.
While the majority of students
supported
Clinton
throughout
the election season, according
Michigan Daily election surveys,
students
didn’t
appear
very
enthused about either Clinton
or Trump while waiting in long
polling lines at some locations
on campus. Compared to 2012,
when the youth, Black and Latino
voters enthusiastically re-elected
President Obama, this year seemed
different.
Pasek said it is possible that if all
students at the University had voted
in the election, Clinton could have
secured enough votes to win the
state.
“There probably were enough
non-voting
students
at
the
University of Michigan to be darn
close in making up the difference
between Trump and Clinton,” he
said. “I think there is a case to be
made that if you had gotten perfect
University of Michigan turnout,
Michigan would have had a much
better chance of going Democrat.”
Democrats
attempted
to
encourage the student vote on
campus through Get Out the Vote
efforts by campus organizations
such as the University’s chapters
of College Democrats and Students
for Hillary, and campus visits
from surrogates such as Sen. Tim
Kaine (D-VA), Democratic vice
presidential nominee, Sen. Bernie
Sanders
(I–Vt.)
and
President
Barack Obama, who drew a crowd
of 9,000 the day before the election.
However, Pasek said these efforts
were not enough to overcome the
traditionally low turnout numbers
among young people.
“An
enthusiasm
difference
makes a big difference,” he said.
“The more people are hearing
from surrogates they want to hear
from, the more they want to turn
out, and that is clearly the case for
students, but we did see that Hillary
Clinton still needed better turnout
numbers.”
In
her
concession
speech,
Clinton appealed to young people,
asking them to not give up hope
because of her loss.
“To all of us, and to the young
people in particular, I hope you
will hear this. I have, as Tim said,
I have spent my entire life fighting
for what I believe in,” she said.
“I’ve had successes and setbacks
and sometimes painful ones. Many
of you are at the beginning of your
professional, public, and political
careers — you will have successes
and setbacks too. This loss hurts,
but please never stop believing that
fighting for what’s right is worth it.”
Pasek
noted,
however,
that
Clinton’s loss may deter voters
from participating in the electoral
process future.
“I think losing does diminish
future
participation,”
he
said.
“When people first vote in an
election and they win and feel like
they made a difference, that is much
more empowering than being on the
losing side. It probably will for most
college students mean that they will
vote less often in the future.”
Beyond student concentration,
turnout among other demographics
in counties statewide also had a
large impact on the state’s overall
vote, similar to other late-emerging
battlegrounds.
Wayne County, which houses
Detroit, had an even lower voter
turnout rate than Washtenaw at
58.8 percent. In the city of Detroit
turnout reflected that of Ann Arbor
at 48.5 percent.
In
contrast,
Trump
saw
unexpectedly
high
turnout
numbers nationwide, including in
many Michigan communities, from
his core demographic: working
class white men.
LSA junior Nick Kolenda, the
president of a Students for Sanders
group active on campus during
the Democratic primary, wrote
in an email interview that he felt
the Democrat Party’s shift toward
the center on trade affected the
outcome.
“Trump will likely have won
due to high rural and white-
working class support which has
become reactionary over the past
decades,” he wrote. “Clinton and
the center Democratic party’s
neoliberalism/trade policy caused
Clinton to underperform in the
upper Midwest. The white working
class, having been frightened off of
socialism and unions, believed that
a strongman could make their lives
better.”
Throughout
her
time
campaigning, Clinton and her
surrogates made appeals to white
working class voters through visits
and speeches with union workers,
but it was Trump’s message of
change that swung their vote.
According to the CNN exit poll in
Michigan, 39 percent of voters said
a candidate’s ability to bring change
is the most important quality, with
the number rising to 83 percent
among Trump supporters.
Pasek said the white working
class vote has been shifting to
the right for several years now as
globalization impacts that group
more than any other.
“We’ve seen increasingly over
the last few cycles additional
challenges for the Democrats in
holding union members,” he said.
“Blue collar industries in general
are areas that are getting hit
more with globalization. On some
level, the election ends up being
a referendum on globalization in
general and whether we should
be having trade deals or be more
isolationist.”
VOTE
From Page 1A
LSA senior, asked all individuals
in the crowd to hold others
accountable for discriminatory
actions.
He
said
minority
students have had to be the
ones responsible for calling out
hate speech in the past, citing
an incident last semester when
Muslim students were the ones
to wash off anti-Islamophobic
chalk drawings on the Diag.
“To
all
that
have
been
targeted or marginalized: You
have a place on this campus,”
he said. “The University of
Michigan is yours just as much
as anybody else’s. Don’t stop
challenging each other. So I
am challenging everyone here
tonight who professes to be
an ally — whenever you hear a
microaggression, whenever you
hear an act of discrimination and
bigotry or injustice perpetrated
by one of your friends or anyone
of your acquaintances, step up
and challenge them. Because
if you don’t, you are part of the
problem.”
LSA senior Tina Al-khersan
told the crowd at the vigil
several stories about her younger
brother being asked if he had
bombs underneath his coat in
a response to Trump’s anti-
Muslim rhetoric, which has
included
statements
about
deporting Muslims due to their
possibly being terrorists.
Speaking before Al-khersan,
University alum Harleen Kaur
said she felt afraid for her life
the day after Trump’s win.
“I simply ask for you to not
be comfortable as we have after
violence and tragedy countless
times before,” Kaur said. “Do
not let yourself be destroyed by
fear but do not let yourself be
wooed into calm. There’s work
to be done.”
Multiple speakers at both the
vigil and rally told the crowd
they had the right to feel sadness
about
the
election
result,
calling it a confirmation that
the country does not support
minorities.
At the vigil, Khamis said
her family has not traveled to
the United States only to be
deported.
“We need to organize, we
need to mobilize,” she said.
“Remember this is not a new
fight for my family, this is not a
new fight for women, this is not
a new fight for Latina/Latino,
this is not a new fight for the
LGBT+ community. This has
been happening forever. But
now we know that it has been
institutionalized to the point it
is in the White House.”
Earlier in the night at the
rally, Public Policy graduate
student
Sundar
Sharma
expressed similar sentiments.
“(We must) grieve and rebuild
… especially because of the
forces trying to stop us,” Sharma
said. “Trump and Trumpism
isn’t going to be around forever.”
LSA
senior
Adedolapo
Adeniji, whose parents are both
immigrants to the United States,
told the vigil crowd she was not
going to stop fighting — and
asked fellow students to do the
same.
“I don’t care what the election
said today,” she said. “I don’t
care what it says in the next four
years.
VIGIL
From Page 1A
alarming seeing as they had
all been perfectly fine with
me
supporting
him
before
and during the election while
Hillary Clinton was still in the
race,” Kuchta said.
University
administrators,
including
President
Mark
Schlissel
and
LSA
Dean
Andrew Martin, sent out emails
Wednesday calling for unity,
diversity
and
inclusiveness
within
the
University
community in the wake of the
results.
“Our responsibility is to
remain committed to education,
discovery
and
intellectual
honesty — and to diversity,
equity and inclusion,” Schlissel
wrote. “We are at our best
when we come together to
engage
respectfully
across
our
ideological
differences;
to
support
ALL
who
feel
marginalized,
threatened
or
unwelcome;
and
to
pursue
knowledge and understanding,
as we always have, as the
students, faculty and staff of the
University of Michigan.”
LSA junior James Margard,
a Clinton supporter, said he was
disappointed with the outcome
but wanted to see how and
whether Trump will work to
unify not only the country, but
also the Republican Party.
“I’m disappointed in the
result, but I will be interested to
see how Trump works with the
rest of the Republican Party, and
to see how each party changes
over the course of the next
two years, especially fractures
within the Republican Party,”
Margard said.
UNITY
From Page 1A
“It probably will, for
most college students,
mean that they will
vote less often.”
“Please never stop
believing that
fighting for what’s
right is worth it.”
Read more at
MichiganDaily.com
The Michigan Daily — michigandaily.com
News
Thursday, November 10, 2016 — 3A