
On November 8th of 2016, Donald Trump won the United States’ Presidential Election in shocking fashion. He was victorious in the Electoral College by a score of 306-232. Hillary Clinton, who won the popular vote by over 2 million, would not be the first female President as most had predicted. The days following Trump’s victory were tough for many. Kids who went to school with my sister (high school) and brother (elementary school) came into class the next day crying. Many protests and marches broke out across the country and world against Donald Trump. “Not My President” and “Love Trumps Hate” were rallying calls for the masses. Trump’s voters were excited but still as shocked as the other side. Citizens continue to ask how he won almost 5 months later. Trump had no experience in politics and had constantly made comments seen as racist or sexist by many, and he was to become the most powerful man in the world. It did not add up. Donald Trump was able to win the 2016 Presidential Election by opposing the ‘establishment.’

On June 16th of 2015, Donald Trump officially entered the United States Presidential Election. Many laughed at this move because, frankly, he has no history in politics. He was a rich American businessman who knew how to entertain. He had been on shows like The Apprentice and WrestleMania but never held any sort of political office. His political affiliations have flip-flopped between the Republican and Democratic party five times (Chasmar). Trump started slow but quickly gained momentum. In Derek Sivers’ TED Talk from 2010 titled “How to Start a Movement” he explains how it just takes one follower, “the first follower is what transforms a lone nut into a leader.” Within a month, Trump was leading the polls of the Republican Primaries (RealClearPolitics). His very unconventional, and non-political, style became very popular among groups of voters who had grown tired of the same. He was given the label of “anti-establishment.” Suddenly, Trump’s cheap hats with the slogan “Make America Great Again,” were popping up everywhere. Despite the sudden rise nobody expected his popularity to last. Many analysts were certain Trump would flame out prior to the primaries. Robert Schlesinger of US News and World Report stated, “one way or another he’ll disappear from the race,” (Schlesinger). In May of 2016, Donald Trump was officially nominated as the Republican candidate for President. Hillary Clinton was nominated as the Democratic candidate. Hillary Clinton has been in politics most of her life (Biography.com). Her husband, Bill Clinton, was a former President. In many ways, she was viewed as the opposite of Donald Trump. She was the “establishment.” From the beginning, Clinton lead in the polls by a couple points (RealClearPolitics). While Trump focused on doing lots of rallies, Clinton did fewer rallies but employed more political allies to help (Hoft). The press also gave Clinton the victory in all of the debates (CNN). Trump remained relentless but going into Election Day, it appeared that Clinton would easily win. She was given a 99.7% chance to win (The Huffington Post). In the three hours after the polls closed, the emotions of both sides changed dramatically. Trump was winning states that were thought to be safe for Clinton. Late on Election Night, Hillary conceded and Trump won. The impossible happened. My essay will attempt to describe how Trump won, mainly why his popularity rose as an anti-establishment candidate.

In Deborah Gardner’s piece, “The 2016 Presidential Election: Reality Vs. Myths” from Nursing Economic, Gardner exclaimed:

Can you imagine going to work and not negotiating or compromising with anyone - patients, colleagues, and so forth - while still aiming to achieve quality health outcomes? Can you imagine sharing the goal of patient-centered care, but believing your way is the best way and if patient care is not done your way, then you will simply not provide care? We cannot imagine behaving in this manner or tolerating it from other health care professionals. Then why do we tolerate such behavior from our elected officials? (Gardner)

Gardner perfectly states the feelings of many voters on both sides of the 2016 Presidential Election. Her and other’s anger against the politicians of our country has been brewing for a long time. It really started to pour over before the 2016 election. In the 2014 elections, US citizens were voting for congressional positions, not for a president. Obama still had 2 years of his second term left. In those congressional elections, the Republicans assumed control of both the Senate and House of Representatives. The victory meant a gridlock in the American government with a Republican Congress and Democratic President. The results were not pretty. The newly elected Republicans had made promises of bills to voters but were unable to pass anything through President Obama or get the necessary amount of votes for an override (Mann). Obama was also fairly powerless. Congress would not pass anything that he wanted (Mann). The Senate also never gave his Supreme Court replacement nominee, Merrick Garland, a chance. He was seen as fairly moderate, voting liberal on many social issues but slightly conservative on policies including gun control, but did not get a hearing (Mann). There were also multiple government shut downs because Congress did not approve a budget in time. The US government appeared to be so dysfunctional. Many voters could see how people on both sides were valuing their egos more than the lives of the people. In US News and World Report, Alexander Salter wrote, “Voters in both parties are fed up with the abuses of a government which behaves as an irresponsible and self-indulgent oligarchy perpetuated by Washington insiders,” (Salter). The US was continuing to go into debt and jobs were leaving with the national government doing nothing to stop it except bickering at each other. Approaching the primaries, the Congressional approval rating was approximately 17 percent and that was up from single digits a couple months before 2015. In his analyzation of Trump’s victory, Selwyn Duke pointed out that this movement is happening all over the world has for some time. Selwyn wrote: 

Not only has this anti-establishment movement been percolating for decades, but it’s now a roiling-boil, Europe-wide phenomenon, manifesting itself also in Italy’s Five Star Movement, Marine Le Pen’s National Front in France, Geert Wilders’ Party for Freedom in the Netherlands, Poland’s ruling Law and Justice Party, and Hungary’s Prime Minister Viktor Orban. (Duke)

 The movement has been affecting Europe for some time and finally spilt over to the United States. In the cases of the US and Brexit, both were seen as close but should sway to the other side. The underdog emerged in both and shocked everyone (Recknagel).

The “establishment” is the group of people that are regularly involved in their party politics including elected officials and interest group leaders (NPR). Michael Kazin described them as, “‘the Establishment’— ‘the special interests’ and ‘the Washington insiders’…officials who betray the interests and values of their constituents,” (The Nation).  The Washington Post released their own polls just prior to the primaries that revealed the sway in who the voters wanted on both sides. Both primaries swung heavily to the “anti-establishment” candidates. They were seen as the candidates that were not involved with politics before running or had a history of caring more about their ideology than the health of their party. At the top of the polls for the Republican primary was Donald Trump and Ted Cruz. Trump was the eventual winner with Cruz right behind. Cruz was seen as anti-establishment but had experience unlike Trump. In the Democratic primaries it was Hillary Clinton vs Bernie Sanders. Bernie Sanders was seen as an anti-establishment candidate for the democrats. He had consistently authored/sponsored bills, like his “College for All Act” that would have made colleges tuition-free, that much of his party did not support (Schramm). He eventually lost to Clinton in the primary. He lost mainly due to Super-Delegates, people who were given powerful votes. Without the Super-Delegates going to Clinton, the primary would have been much closer and, in my opinion, Bernie Sanders would have been the Democratic nominee for President. The Super-Delegates pointed to more political involvement and angered some liberal voters. 

The race then became Hillary Clinton versus Donald Trump. Hillary Clinton is the wife of former President Bill Clinton. Bill served two terms from 1993-2001 and had been impeached but not charged during his presidency for relations with Monica Lewinsky. After serving as First Lady, Hillary stayed involved in politics. She became a senator for the state of New York. When Obama became President, Hillary was selected as Secretary of State. During her tenure she got caught up in multiple scandals. Many thought she had wrong doings in the Benghazi attack on the US Ambassador building. She also had a private email server with 30,000 e-mails that was discovered and investigated by the FBI. During her run, WikiLeaks released documents showing that the Clinton Foundation had accepted money from other countries while she was Secretary of State that appeared to have gone towards benefitting those countries in US foreign policy. Clinton perfectly met the definition of “establishment” and politician. Voters, especially on the right, did not want the average sleazy politician as President. Hillary’s opponent, Donald Trump, never had any experience in an elected office. He had no experience. He was a candidate who spoke the mind of the voters. He connected with the feelings of many. He was frustrated with Washington over no progress. Likely motivated by an economy hurting his businesses around the country, he wanted change just as many voters did. The election for the highest office became a race between Clinton and Trump. They were opposites in all ways except age. It was Democrat versus Republican, experienced versus unexperienced, establishment versus anti-establishment. 

There were many angry voters but nobody had anywhere to put their anger. Bernie Sanders said, “Donald Trump tapped into the anger of a declining middle class that is sick and tired of establishment economics, establishment politics and the establishment media,” (The Guardian). As Sanders stated, Trump rose to the occasion. His rallies were filled with rants and angry speeches against the establishment. During Obama’s presidency he was already on his twitter criticizing his moves. His criticisms resonated with many voters. They felt the same emotions he did. Another way of connecting for Trump was by addressing more than dodging, particularly in the primaries. Many of his candidates would explain elaborate plans they had for the country or address another aspect of their ideas. Voters did not like when candidates dodged and could sense the politician in them. Voters saw the robotic answers that had been rehearsed for hours. Trump answered on the spot quickly. Trump’s strategy in debates was also to attack the other candidates. He would call out or interrupt when others were talking. It was unconventional, but he spoke his mind. He spoke the mind of the voters who were mad at the other candidates. Trump’s style was also quite simple. He did not go into much detail and instead staying broad. He answered in sentences instead of paragraphs like others. He gave voters a direct answer that they wanted to hear. He said he would bomb ISIS. He said he would build a wall on the border. He had simple but direct answers to the questions. This helped him with the angry voters in November but it could hurt him during his presidency when the voters want results. 

Trump did not win the election because he had good policies though. He won because he was bold. People liked seeing who he really was, even if it was not pretty. Kayleigh McEnany of CNN wrote, “But rather than backing down, Trump pushed forward and the media was incensed. His audacious, unflinching boldness in the face of an onslaught of criticism is a virtue that I would not just come to accept, but also to appreciate and admire,” (McEnany). McEnany, like many others, liked Trump’s unique personality and did not focus on his policies. Some voters did not necessarily agree with his politics. Andreas Ninios said, “I am not sure a Trump presidency delivers the right type of change, but I am hoping that the politicians who have failed time and time again to deliver on the aforementioned promises got the message,” (Ninios). She wanted to send a message to the politicians she felt had failed her. If voters voted solely on politics and policy, there were many other Republican alternates to Trump. Trump won because he was ‘anti-establishment,’ not because of his political stance

Trump also played some of the fear card. In the primaries he made voters fear his opponents would make no change in office. He made claims that if Hillary becomes President we will continue in debt or be attacked by ISIS. David Rothkopf addressed fear in one of his TED Talks. Fear during the Cold War made the US create new technology. Rothkopf said, “So sometimes fear can produce a constructive response. But sometimes it can produce an un-constructive response.” Trump’s use of fear would fall in Rothkopf’s un-constructive side because he was using it for political gain and not to necessarily advance the country or world. Trump’s final way to win over voters was possibly his best. He held lots of rallies while he was running his campaign, almost a stop every day. He met and talked to more people than Hillary Clinton did. He made the impact as a human versus just a politician. Hillary held very few rallies, only going out a couple of days a week. Voters were curious as to why and like a politician, there was no clear answer. She had many others campaign for her including President Obama, Bernie Sanders and even Beyonce. It made voters feel insignificant according to later exit polls (CNN). Trump won over the voters who were tired of the establishment and channeled their anger through him. He turned their anger into votes for him.

The American voters were tired of the government working for themselves instead of the country. They noticed how all politicians had done the same actions. In their primaries they voted for Sanders, Cruz, and Trump with trump ultimately getting the final votes against the establishment. Donald Trump won the 2016 Presidential Election by focusing the anger of many American voters on the “Establishment” of the US government. He had no experience in any sort of political position. People laughed when he joined the race. Even after he won the primary, the New York Times only gave him a three percent chance. Many people in the US are still as shocked as everyone was on election night. But Trump won. He did not win because he had good political ideas. Trump won the election because he did not act like a politician and was against the ‘establishment.’ Trump achieved one of the most unlikely upsets and has now begun a Presidency that is surrounded by uncertainty and controversy. We, the voters and citizens of this country must hold him accountable. He is our President, we put him there, and we can vote him out of there. Time will tell if he was the right choice or not. If he does his job poorly we will resort back to the politicians that people were tired of. 
