New research shows Trump's 2024 support became more ethnically and racially diverse
President Donald Trump's 2024 victory over former Vice President Kamala Harris was fueled by 'a voter coalition that was more racially and ethnically diverse than in 2020 or 2016,' as well by an advantage among voters who didn't turn out for the previous election, according to a report released Thursday by the Pew Research Center.
Pew's analysis, which combines survey data from its in-house panel of poll-takers with information from voter records, contributes to a more clearly emerging picture of the 2024 electorate.
It finds that about three-quarters of eligible voters in the U.S. made the same decision in 2024 that they did in 2020, whether that was voting for the Republican or the Democrat, choosing a third-party candidate or sitting out the election altogether. But one-quarter made a different choice – enough to return Trump to the White House.
Trump held onto 85% of his 2020 voters, the report finds, while Harris retained a smaller 79% of former President Joe Biden's supporters. Compared to 2020, Trump won a higher share of the vote among Hispanic voters (48%, up from 36%), Asian voters (40%, up from 30%) and Black voters (15%, up from 8%).
'These shifts were largely the result of differences in which voters turned out in the 2020 and 2024 elections,' the authors of the Pew report conclude. 'As in the past, a relatively small share of voters switched which party's candidate they supported.'
Fifteen percent of 2020 Biden supporters and 11% of 2020 Trump supporters didn't vote four years later, their analysis finds. Trump also won about 5% of Biden's 2020 supporters, while Harris took about 3% of voters who supported Trump in the previous election.
And while most eligible voters who didn't cast a vote in 2020 stayed home again last year, those who did decide to vote in 2024 broke for Trump over Harris, 54% to 42%. Adding in people who were too young to vote in the last election, the margin is slightly narrower.
Pew's analysis is based on the results of a survey conducted just after November's presidential election. Like all surveys, its results offer an estimate of voter behavior rather than an attempt at pinpoint precision. That's why different post-election analyses may diverge in some findings about the electorate, even when they converge around a general consensus.
The new analysis, like a report last month from the Democratic-aligned data firm Catalist, incorporates fresh sources of data: information from commercial voters files that aggregate official state turnout records. Pew's analysis matches that voter file data with responses to their survey – and because its polls are conducted using a panel of respondents who answer multiple surveys over time, researchers there can often track specific individuals' voting patterns.
Catalist's report similarly found that voters who turn out irregularly played a key role in Trump's victory. Since non-presidential elections typically see lower turnout, that could also have potential implications as the parties begin gearing up for the upcoming midterms.
'There's definitely some evidence that this shift in Democrats doing better among more consistent voters may have some downstream impacts,' said Hannah Hartig, a senior researcher at Pew Research – although she noted that, with a long way still to go until the next election, it's too early to know how that may play out.
A few more takeaways from the Pew report:
Trump also improved his numbers among male voters, who split for Trump by a 12-point margin in 2024 after dividing closely between the candidates in 2020. There was especially sharp movement among male voters younger than 50 – while they were about evenly split last year, that marked a swing from a 10-point preference for Biden in 2020. Both Pew and Catalist show Democrats losing more ground among male voters than female voters, while exit polling and post-election data from Votecast found that erosion across gender lines.
Education remains a major fault line in American politics. College graduates who voted in 2024 broke for Harris by a 16-point margin in Pew's data, while those without degrees broke for Trump by 14 points – although both those findings represent an improvement for Trump from his 2020 numbers. That education gap persisted among both White and Hispanic voters, while Black voters didn't divide significantly along educational lines. Catalist's report found similar educational trends, but charted somewhat less of a divide among Latino voters, while exit polling and VoteCast had showed college graduates' preferences remaining more stable.
Naturalized citizens of the U.S. made up about 9% of last year's electorate, according to Pew. And in 2024, they were closely divided, with 51% backing Harris and 47% backing Trump. By contrast, in 2020, this group broke heavily for Biden.
The design of Pew's study also allowed them to check in with nonvoters: adults who were eligible to vote, but weren't a part of the 64% who actually turned out. In the past, this group typically leaned Democratic: asked whom they would have preferred if they had voted, 2020 nonvoters favored Biden over Trump by an 11-point margin. But in 2024, nonvoters were closely split, with 44% preferring Trump and 40% Harris.
'If somehow something magic had happened and everybody who's eligible to vote had actually showed up, not only would it not have helped the Democrats and Harris, it might have actually pushed Trump's margin up slightly,' said Scott Keeter, a senior survey advisor at Pew.
The Pew Research Center surveyed 8,942 US adults in November 2024, using the nationally representative American Trends Panel, including 7,100 voters who were able to be matched against a voter file. Results among the full sample of validated voters have a margin of error of +/- 1.5 percentage points. More details on the survey methodology are available here.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
San Francisco Chronicle
27 minutes ago
- San Francisco Chronicle
Iran's top diplomat says talks with US 'complicated' by American strike on nuclear sites
DUBAI, United Arab Emirates (AP) — Iran's top diplomat said the possibility of new negotiations with the United States on his country's nuclear program has been 'complicated' by the American attack on three of the sites, which he conceded caused 'serious damage." The U.S. was one of the parties to the 2015 nuclear deal in which Iran agreed to limits on its uranium enrichment program in exchange for sanctions relief and other benefits. That deal unraveled after U.S. President Donald Trump pulled the U.S. out unilaterally during his first term. Trump has suggested he is interested in new talks with Iran, and said that the two sides would meet next week. In an interview on Iranian state television broadcast late Thursday, Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi left open the possibility that his country would again enter talks on its nuclear program, but suggested it would not be anytime soon. 'No agreement has been made for resuming the negotiations,' he said. 'No time has been set, no promise has been made, and we haven't even talked about restarting the talks.' The American decision to intervene militarily 'made it more complicated and more difficult' for talks on Iran's nuclear program, Araghchi said. Israel attacked Iran on June 13, targeting its nuclear sites, defense systems, high-ranking military officials and atomic scientists in relentless attacks. In 12 days of strikes, Israel said it killed some 30 Iranian commanders and hit eight nuclear-related facilities and more than 720 military infrastructure sites. More than 1,000 people were killed, including at least 417 civilians, according to the Washington-based Human Rights Activists group. Iran fired more than 550 ballistic missiles at Israel, most of which were intercepted but those that got through caused damage in many areas and killed 28 people. The U.S. stepped in on Sunday to hit Iran's three most important strikes with a wave of cruise missiles and bunker-buster bombs dropped by B-2 bombers, designed to penetrate deep into the ground to damage the heavily-fortified targets. Iran, in retaliation, fired missiles at a U.S. base in Qatar on Monday but caused no known casualties. Trump said the American attacks 'completely and fully obliterated' Iran's nuclear program, though Iran's Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei on Thursday accused the U.S. president of exaggerating the damage, saying the strikes did not 'achieve anything significant.' There has been speculation that Iran moved much of its highly-enriched uranium before the strikes, something that it told the U.N. nuclear watchdog, the International Atomic Energy Agency, that it planned to do. Even if that turns out to be true, IAEA Director Rafael Grossi told Radio France International that the damage done to the Fordo site, which was built into a mountain, 'is very, very, very considerable.' Among other things, he said, centrifuges are 'quite precise machines' and it's 'not possible' that the concussion from multiple 30,000-pound bombs would not have caused 'important physical damage.' 'These centrifuges are no longer operational,' he said. Araghchi himself acknowledged that 'the level of damage is high, and it's serious damage.'
CNN
29 minutes ago
- CNN
Trump may name a ‘shadow' Fed chair, an unprecedented development in American history
President Donald Trump said last week that he will announce his pick to succeed Federal Reserve Chair Jerome Powell 'very soon.' The problem is that Powell still has 11 months left until the end of his term. Trump remains frustrated as ever with the Fed because it has not yet lowered interest rates. He has relentlessly attacked Powell for months. But announcing a Fed chair nominee this far in advance — if he makes good on that plan — would be an unprecedented development in the central bank's 111-year history. This person would effectively be acting as America's 'shadow' Fed chair — a proposal Scott Bessent first floated last year before he became Trump's Treasury secretary. Such an extraordinary move could undermine the current Fed chief and intensify the uncertainty that has bedeviled the US economy since Trump took office, former Fed officials and academics tell CNN. 'It's an absolutely horrible idea,' Alan Blinder, who served as the No. 2 official at the Fed during the mid-1990s, told CNN in a phone interview. Blinder said a shadow Fed chair would mean markets would have to make sense of two influential voices speaking about monetary policy at the same time, but offering potentially very different visions. 'If they're not singing from the same playbook, which seems likely, this is just going to cause confusion in markets,' said Blinder, a former Clinton economic adviser who is now a professor at Princeton University. Greg Valliere, chief US policy strategist at AGF Investments, expressed a similar sentiment in a note to investors on Thursday: 'This is a terrible idea, sure to annoy and confuse financial markets if there are two Fed Chairs.' 'It all depends on just how loyal this person is expected to be to Trump,' said Kathryn Judge, a professor at Columbia Law School who researches financial markets and central banking. 'But we don't we know what the ramifications would be or what they'd be willing to do, because this is unprecedented.' US presidents have historically waited until the final months of the incumbent Fed chair's term before naming a successor. RSM chief economist Joe Brusuelas cautioned that naming an early Fed chair could backfire, causing a jump in the very interest rates Trump is seeking to drive lower. 'Undermining Powell is in no one's best interest as it will almost certainly translate to a weaker dollar and rising rates,' Brusuelas said. On Wednesday, the Wall Street Journal reported that Trump, frustrated by Powell's reluctance to slash interest rates, could announce his nominee as early as this summer. The US dollar index, which measures the dollar's strength against six major foreign currencies, subsequently illustrated investors' discomfort with the idea of a shadow Fed chair. After the Journal's report, the US dollar was down 0.3% Thursday morning and hovered around its lowest level since February 2022. The stock market, in contrast, appeared largely unfazed by the idea of Trump naming a shadow Fed chair. US stocks moved solidly higher on Thursday, flirting with record highs. Valliere worries the plan for naming an early Fed chair 'would politicize the Fed for a few months before stability is restored next May.' 'The damage to the Fed's independence would be considerable if Trump becomes a monetary back-seat driver, second-guessing Fed policies this fall,' Valliere said. There are at least three contenders for the top job at the Fed, CNN has previously reported: Bessent; Kevin Warsh, a former Fed governor; and Christopher Waller, a current Fed governor. The Journal reported that Kevin Hassett, the director of the White House's National Economic Council, is also being considered; as well as David Malpass, who Trump in his first term nominated to helm the World Bank. Narayana Kocherlakota, a former president of the Federal Reserve Bank of Minneapolis who is now a professor at the University of Rochester, told CNN that a shadow Fed chair is 'not great policy' because the person could step on Powell's current messaging. 'However, it might be better than having the president tweet about monetary policy,' Kocherlakota said, alluding to Trump's intensifying attacks on Powell via social media. Austan Goolsbee, president of the Federal Reserve Bank of Chicago, told CNBC on Thursday that the naming of a new Fed chair this far in advance would have 'no effect' on Fed policymakers. One former Fed official who sat on the rate-setting committee alongside Powell also stressed that naming a shadow Fed chair would not sway policymakers. 'I can tell you with absolute certainty it will have no impact on Jay Powell and the existing FOMC,' this former official told CNN on the condition of anonymity, referencing the Fed's 12-member voting committee. The former Fed official said some candidates Trump is considering may have second thoughts about getting announced this early in the process. 'I wouldn't want to be named at this juncture because you'd be saying I am Trump's lackey. That would hurt my credibility on the Street and in Corporate America,' the former official said. As Goolsbee alluded to, a shadow Fed chair won't have any real power before assuming the role. Trump's pick would also need to be confirmed by the Senate, though that likely won't be much of an obstacle with Republicans controlling both chambers of Congress through 2026. Even then, it won't be easy for this person to bend the Fed to their will. All monetary policy decisions are voted on by the FOMC, also known as the Federal Open Market Committee. The chair cannot unilaterally veto what the members vote for and, in theory, could even be outvoted. Blinder, the former Fed vice chair, said the risk is that a shadow Fed chair provokes their future colleagues by speaking out before taking power. 'If he or she contradicts what Powell is saying, that will aggravate the FOMC, almost all of whose members will still be there when the new chair takes over,' Blinder said. 'It opens the door to an open or silent revolt against the chair, which is a rare thing in Fed history.' CNN's John Towfighi contributed to this report.
Yahoo
34 minutes ago
- Yahoo
US Department of Defense expands militarised zone along Texas border
The US Department of Defense is significantly expanding a militarised zone along the southern border in Texas, granting troops the authority to detain individuals for potential federal prosecution on charges of trespassing within a national defence area. The Air Force announced on Monday the annexation of a winding 250-mile (400-kilometre) stretch of the border. This expansion comes amid a broader buildup of military forces initiated under President Trump's declaration of a national emergency at the border. This newly designated national defence area, running along the Rio Grande, spans two Texas counties and borders cities including Brownsville and McAllen. It will be treated as an extension of Joint Base San Antonio. The Air Force has stated its readiness to immediately install warning signs prohibiting entry into the zone. The military strategy was pioneered in April along a 170-mile (275-kilometer) stretch of the border in New Mexico and expanded to a swath of western Texas in May. Hunters, hikers and humanitarian aid groups fear that they will no longer have access. In the newest national defense area, military responsibilities include 'enhanced detection and monitoring' and "temporarily detaining trespassers until they are transferred to the appropriate law enforcement authorities,' the Air Force said in a news release. At least three people have been directly detained by troops in New Mexico for processing by Border Patrol. More than 1,400 immigrants have been charged with incursions into the national defense areas, a criminal misdemeanor punishable by up to 18 months in prison. Court challenges to the charges have met with mixed results. The militarized border zone is a counterpoint to the deployment of roughly 4,000 National Guard troops and 700 Marines to Los Angeles following protests over Trump's stepped-up enforcement of immigration laws. The troop deployments are testing the limits of the Posse Comitatus Act, which prohibits the military from conducting civilian law enforcement on U.S. soil. Arrests at the border for illegal entry have decreased dramatically this year.
