A common critique of the Democratic Party is its use of “identity politics,” a term typically used in conservative commentary. This buzzword is rarely unpacked. If a solid definition of identity politics was given with these critiques, it would become blatantly obvious that this strategy is relied upon by both parties and in 2016, it was successful for the Republicans.
Identity politics is “a tendency for people of a particular religion, race, social background, etc., to form exclusive political alliances, moving away from traditional broad-based party politics.” In the hopes of gaining power in the House of Representatives, Senate and Supreme Court, the Republicans abandoned many of their core principles and every norm of political decorum in favor of a campaign based on identity politics.
Donald Trump tailored his campaign to the Protestant Christian, white and non-urban voters. He basically alienated everyone else by showing blatant apathy for any other demographic. If that is not identity politics, then what is? It was genius because it won him the Electoral College. For the Democrats to be a viable political party, they had no choice but to appeal to the crowds that he alienated. It is a domino effect style of political strategy — if one party is employing identity politics then the other one has to as well.
Political commentator Ben Shapiro famously said “facts don’t care about your feelings.” Every single exit poll indicates that Trump won the demographic he pandered to. He got 58 percent of the white vote, 58 percent of the Christian vote, 81 percent of the Evangelical vote, 62 percent of the small city or rural vote and 50 percent of the suburb vote. This is statistical evidence that an identity-based strategy worked. There are no alternative facts in exit polls. Just ask pollster Kellyanne Conway.
Republicans have been complacent about identity politics taking root in their party. It’s a powerful strategy that creates a staunchly supportive base, fueled by collective effervescence. Just look at the Tea Party in 2010. Pandering to the white, rural, Christian voter created a Republican majority in Congress. Clearly, the Democrats do this as well and the Democratic Party has moved farther left than some moderates can stomach. However, it is careless to believe that this is not a phenomenon in both parties. I argue that it began as a Republican strategy and it is making bipartisanship less and less possible.
I am in a precarious position. Ideologically, I fall somewhere in the middle, like most Americans. I have no party affiliation, but I tend to vote Democrat because I feel alienated by the Republican Party. It’s unfortunate that, in reality, the Democrats aren’t much better. I never supported Bernie Sanders and because of that, I was an outsider. On our predominantly liberal campus, admitting that I love Ivanka Trump’s shoe line feels just as risky as wearing a “Make America Great Again” hat. Regardless of my moderate political beliefs, the Democratic Party sends a core message that does not personally offend me. The Republican Party, on the other hand, has personally offended me as a voter by condoning the offensive rhetoric that Trump unapologetically spewed. They have also alienated me by taking such a nonsensically hardline stance on women’s health issues.
I believe in a strong national defense, increasing economic growth, low taxes and a small but highly effective government. I also believe in equal educational opportunity for all, environmental preservation and universal health care access. I firmly believe in supporting groups of people who have been historically discriminated against such as people of color, LGBT individuals and women. I’ve developed my views through research and my views don’t necessarily indicate my race, religion or gender.
However, I am the descendant of people Trump made out to be villains: immigrants, public servants and reporters. The elements that make up my personal identity such as my family history, socioeconomic status, race and gender are completely out of my control. I am a white, urban, college-educated woman. I know just by looking at statistical evidence surrounding my demographic that I am not part of the group Republicans are pandering to. They can win a national election without making an attempt to appeal to someone like me.
To me, all politics and voting patterns boil down to issues of identity. If they didn’t, why would exit polls exist? Theoretically, a winning campaign should try to make as many people as possible identify with their candidate and subsequently vote for them. Trump, however, employed a divide and conquer method. He made as many counties as possible identify with his message and ignored anyone who could not help him win the Electoral College. Trump is the best identity politics operative in the game, and this was a winning strategy for him, but at what cost?
