wo events have riveted Americans’ attention over the past week or so. The first is the frantic manhunt for Luigi Mangione, who shot and killed the CEO of one of the country’s largest healthcare providers, United Healthcare, in New York. The second is the acquittal of Daniel Penny who choked to death an African-American man on a New York subway in 2023 who was threatening to kill passengers. The two events have nothing to do with Donald Trump, but everything to do with his rise to power and explain his return to the White House.

“It is completely out of touch and an insult to the intelligence of the American people,” Mangione yelled as he was being taken by law enforcement personnel to his hearing following a media frenzy around his escape and arrest in Pennsylvania. The bullets he fired had “delayed,” “denied,” and “defend” inscribed on them referring to the high number of healthcare claims refused by insurance companies despite billions in annual profits. What frustrated authorities was the immense online support for Mangione whose actions have tapped into anger over healthcare system or a general dissatisfaction with America’s capitalist ambitions.

The flood of public support for a cold-blooded murderer is evident of Americans’ dissatisfaction with the system. Even Democrats on the Left like Elizabeth Warren conceded, “you can only push people so far,” echoing the willingness of Americans to discount personal flaws for a shake up. Pundits have compared this public outcry to mass migration of traditional democratic voters to a self-proclaimed vigilante, billionaire-turned-politician, Donald Trump. Brian Thompson, the executed CEO, represented the elite callously removed from the concerns of the common man. Support for Daniel Penny’s attack on a dangerous individual reflects similar sentiments: extreme times call for extreme measures.

Donald Trump’s victory, secured through a combination of populist fervour and a Republican base galvanised by a strong sense of loyalty, marks a defining moment not just for the Republican Party but also for the Democratic Party and has broader implications for global governance. Trump’s 2024 campaign was characterised by a blend of nostalgia for his first term and a resonant critique of the current administration. Capitalising on economic frustrations, immigration concerns and a desire for a more assertive American global presence, Trump positioned himself as the antidote to perceived governmental malaise. His ability to tap into a fundamentally disenchanted voter base, particularly among rural communities and working-class individuals who felt overlooked by the political elite, echoed his 2016 campaign.

The election results bore out his strategy, showcasing Trump’s ability to consolidate his support across key battleground states. His messaging on issues like inflation, crime and national security struck a chord with many Americans, leading to a turnout that exceeded expectations. His victory is also tied to the Democrats’ challenges: internal divisions and the perception that mainstream Democratic policies are out of touch with Middle America made the party vulnerable.

One of the most immediate impacts of Trump’s victory has been his cabinet picks. Many are from his previous administration. Figures like Pete Hegseth, Pat Bondy and Linda McMahon in his cabinet signal Trump’s intent to not only recreate his former administration but also harness the loyalty of those who stood by him through tumultuous times. For those on the Left, these names mean reversal of years of progress on public education, minority rights and an inclusive America.

Donald Trump’s victory, secured through a combination of populist fervour and a Republican base galvanised by a strong sense of loyalty, marks a defining moment not just for the Republican Party but also for the Democratic Party and has broader implications for global governance.

These appointments are not merely a nod to nostalgia; they are strategic. By surrounding himself with familiar faces, Trump aims to create a stable environment that reassures both his supporters and Republican lawmakers. His picks also have a lot in common with him, apart from caustic remarks on the Leftist-Liberal policies which, they feel, have sidelined most Americans. His picks share his confrontational style suggesting that this administration will not shy away from controversy or aggressive policymaking. This could lead to a return to bold initiatives in areas such as foreign policy, economic regulation and immigration reform.

Like Mangione, Trump’s post-election rhetoric has been characterised by his traditional blend of bravado mixed with a sense of vindication. He has framed his victory as not just a personal triumph but as a monumental shift in the political landscape, portraying himself as a figure of “the people’s will.” This rhetoric plays a crucial role in energising his base, reinforcing their belief in a ‘Trump resurrection’ from the supposed injustices of the 2020 elections.

Trump’s communication style also raises questions about the future political discourse in America. His tendency to engage in divisive rhetoric and to reject compromise poses a significant challenge for bipartisan efforts going forward. The continued use of terms like “fake news” and attacks on institutions traditionally deemed neutral suggests a further entrenchment of political polarisation that can fracture public trust in governance. This could result in a stagnation of progress on pivotal issues, from climate action to healthcare reform.

During his first term, he adopted an America First policy that often disregarded global alliances and multilateral agreements like heavy tariffs on China and Canada and dissatisfaction with the Paris Accord. His return could indicate a re-commitment to such an approach, potentially leading to heightened tensions with traditional allies and adversaries alike. A Trump administration is likely to revert to aggressive trade policies, especially with China, further entrenching economic divides and prompting unpredictable shifts in global markets. Additionally, a pivot towards isolationism could exacerbate issues like climate change and global security, as international cooperation often falls by the wayside in favor of unilateralism.

The mixed reactions over Brian Thompson’s death is close to the demise of fervour and moral superiority long enjoyed by the Democrats. The party is now faced with a daunting introspection: the need for a recalibration of its strategies and messaging. The current leadership will need to win back key demographics, particularly white working-class voters who, in many cases, feel alienated by the party’s focus on urban-centric policies, identity politics and cultural issues. The election upset has made it clear that a balance between progressive ideals and the realities of governance is critical. Reconciling internal rifts between the progressive wing of the party and more moderate members, Democrats must decide whether to mobilise around a broader populist agenda or to double down on the identity politics that have characterised much of its recent discourse.

Trump’s rise signifies a demand for change risking further divisions within the American electorate. If the Democratic Party fails to address the concerns of those disenchanted with the status quo, they risk becoming increasingly marginalised. For Republicans, while Trump’s victory affirms the potency of populist narratives, it also presents an opportunity for self-reflection. Trump’s style has alienated moderate Republicans and independents. The trick is to navigate cautiously between Trump’s base and the broader electorate’s concerns, ensuring that their platform resonates beyond their current demographic.

The author is a freelance writer based in the US. She can be reached at sikandar.sarah@gmail.com