St. John’s University’s government and politics department held a lecture-based discussion on the 2024 presidential election from 5 p.m. to 7 p.m. on Nov. 18 at the D’Angelo Center (DAC). The discussion was held in the wake of the responses and speculations occurring about the outcome of the election.

The discussion was held by Diane J. Heith, professor of government and politics, with about 20 people in attendance. 

Heith spent most of the lecture discussing political trends and statistics leading to the victory of Republican nominee Donald Trump. She explained the narrative, stories told by the media and candidates, during campaigning and just after the election is not always true, but set in stone. 

She used the discussion as an opportunity to separate fact from fiction. Heith mentioned how the most important policy to voters was the economy. 

“Up until about three months ago, consumers have been optimistic,” Heith said. 

They have reasons for it, according to statistics, the economy was improving. The narrative from the Trump campaign, however, cited housing costs and inflation as evidence of a poor economy.

“People who felt the economy wasn’t well, even if they were fine financially, voted for Trump,” she said.

Heith then posed the question that political scientists are currently working on: Did Kamala Harris lose or did Donald Trump win?

Heith believed Vice President Kamala Harris lost the election due to non-voters, budget spending and lack of a full campaign. It was also expected that gender would play a huge role in the election, but to the Harris campaign’s disappointment, it was not the women who decided the election. 

“The gender gap widened because of men, which was not the narrative, but should have been because Trump is always focused on white men without a college education,” Heith said.

Latino and Black men were also more right-leaning during this election, which added up to a Trump victory. 

Heith cited the slight conservatism to Trump’s intelligent use of political misogyny. She discussed the media, particularly concerning this. It is too soon to tell, but she is open to the fact that gender and race may have mattered a lot.

With about 30 minutes left of the lecture, she gave the floor to the class for questions. 

There were questions about where the Democrats go forward and how Latina women may have influenced the election. She devoted about five minutes to go into detail on each question.

Martin Clarke, a first-year graduate student studying government and politics, actively contributed his thoughts both during and after the lecture.

“I’m interested in this topic because I worked in Pennsylvania during the election and expected incumbent  Senator Bob Casey to win based on policy and polling,” Clarke said.  “He lost and I want to find out what happened in the election across the board.” 

Heith teaches one of his classes and heard of the event through her. 

The event concluded at 7 p.m. with students waiting in line to ask Heith follow-up questions.