Trending Now
We have updated our Privacy Policy and Terms of Use for Eurasia Group and its affiliates, including GZERO Media, to clarify the types of data we collect, how we collect it, how we use data and with whom we share data. By using our website you consent to our Terms and Conditions and Privacy Policy, including the transfer of your personal data to the United States from your country of residence, and our use of cookies described in our Cookie Policy.
{{ subpage.title }}
Putin visits US voters
Turnout in this US election fell. The world's leading expert on American democracy saw, first hand, why that was. #PUPPETREGIME
Donald Trump
How Trump won – and what it means for the world
America has spoken. Donald Trump will become president of the United States again. And I can’t say that I’m surprised.
This election comes at a time when people all over the world are unhappy with where their countries are going, and they don’t trust their political institutions to right the ship. Some of that is a product of the deepening geopolitical recession, which is in part driven by a backlash against globalization and the globalist elites who promoted their own economic and political interests at the expense of their populations. Some of it has to do with the economic and social disruption caused by post-pandemic surges in inflation and immigration.
As a result, what was historically an electoral advantage in democracies has become a liability in the current cycle: incumbency. Over the past year, most incumbents around the globe have either been forced out of office or seriously underperformed at the ballot box (e.g., in the United Kingdom, Japan, France, Germany, Austria, India, South Africa, etc.). Those who haven’t faced voters yet are deeply unpopular and expected to lose power soon (e.g., Canada, Germany, Norway, etc.).
The fact that Kamala Harris couldn’t escape this fate after four years as vice president to an unpopular administration was therefore hardly unexpected. No party has ever retained the White House when incumbent approval is as low as it is. Over 70% believe the country is on the wrong track, and Americans have little confidence in their government’s handling of the top issues they care about: inflation and immigration.
Sure, inflation – the average rate at which prices in the economy increase over time – has come way down from its pandemic-induced highs and is now near the Fed’s target. But prices themselves are still high owing to years of above-target inflation, and those prices aren’t coming down absent a recession (not to mention the fact that Trump’s plans promise to increase inflation). Fair or not, the party in power gets blamed for that. Similarly, illegal immigration has also been coming down, but crossings are still at elevated levels, and most illegal immigrants find ways to stay in the country. Many illegal immigrants also moved (or were moved) from red states to blue states, making the issue more important to more of the country than before.
Democrats had hoped to counter these headwinds with messages about access to abortion, the economy, and Trump’s threat to democracy and general unfitness for office. But a problem got in their way: a hyperpolarized information environment that makes it difficult for either side to reach across the aisle to the other half of the country. There are two radically different information spaces in the US, and the gap between these algorithmically boosted, media-driven bubbles is only growing. It’s increasingly difficult to have a single conversation on any policy issue, let alone to find compromise on solutions, when we don’t even agree on basic facts about what the problems are. That’s a very dysfunctional place to be for our civic democracy.
Ultimately, though, the American people looked at the two candidates and found Trump’s message more compelling, and they handed him as resounding a national victory as either candidate could’ve hoped for in today’s polarized environment. Trump shattered his previous ceiling of national support and made gains across the board relative to 2020. He is on track to sweep every swing state and become the first Republican to win the popular vote in 20 years on the back of a broad-based shift to the right in almost every geography – from rural areas to my very own New York City – and with nearly every demographic group, including young, female, Black, and Hispanic voters.
The Republican Party also took control of the Senate, with at least 52 and as many as 56 seats in the 100-seat chamber – enough to confirm Trump’s appointees, but not enough to get away with repealing the legislative filibuster or confirming obviously unqualified nominees. Republicans are favored to win a narrow House majority, too, though the exact margin may not be known for several weeks due to slow counting in states like California and close races elsewhere. A unified government – along with an already friendly judiciary – will make it significantly easier for Trump to enact his domestic policy priorities, from tax cuts and defense spending increases to immigration overhauls.
And if you think Trump’s return will have a profound impact on the United States (fact-check: true), it will matter even more for the rest of the world.
The biggest loser is Ukraine. Trump has repeatedly said he will end the war there in 24 hours. Of course, what he really means is that he wants to freeze the conflict along the current territorial lines, with Russia de facto getting to keep the land it has conquered. The war is already going badly for the Ukrainians, with Western military and economic support past its peak. Trump will try to unilaterally cut a cease-fire deal with Zelensky and President Vladimir Putin even before the lame-duck period ends, using military aid to Kyiv as leverage over both sides without coordinating with America’s European allies. If Trump calls Zelensky first and demands a cease-fire (and the de facto cession of territory), and Zelensky refuses, the ball will then shift to Putin’s court.
Regardless of the election outcome, Ukraine would have been forced to negotiate sooner or later. The difference is that Harris would have coordinated that negotiating position with Ukraine and the EU. Trump doesn’t want to be responsible for “losing” Ukraine, nor does he take issue with Ukrainian self-defense. But he thinks Ukraine’s defense should be paid for primarily by the countries that have the biggest stake in it: the Europeans. Trump’s bargaining approach may succeed at ending the war … or it may not.
Either way, Europe will have a big problem on its hands. Trump’s Ukraine policy will put a lot of strain on the trans-Atlantic relationship. The Europeans, many of whom are already struggling economically, will also be facing higher tariffs from the Trump administration. Will they take a stronger, more consolidated position on Ukraine, or will they fragment? Will they continue to align closely with the US on trade with China, or will they start to hedge more? Will the European Union crack under the pressure, or will it be galvanized by Trump to finally build a stronger, more strategically autonomous union? Those are all huge question marks.
Then there’s the Middle East. Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu was already riding high politically on the back of a string of military wins. He was a big winner yesterday as well, as he can expect greater support from Trump than he could have from Harris. The vice president was not going to end the special relationship with Israel, but Trump is going to make even more of a push to support the Israelis and the Gulf States – another group of winners. Trump and Netanyahu are also aligned in their enmity toward Iran. Will Trump’s blank check embolden Bibi to take even more aggressive actions in the region, potentially against Iranian nuclear facilities? That’s a very dangerous situation that bears close watching.
And let’s not forget China. The world’s second-largest economy is already underperforming, and Beijing is feeling increasingly defensive about the tariff threats coming from hawks like former Trump trade czar Robert Lighthizer. The Chinese are going to be frantically trying to establish back-channels to China-friendly Trump allies like Elon Musk, hoping they can facilitate a less confrontational relationship. Will Trump support that, or will his hawks get the upper hand and push for an even more confrontational approach? Beijing will move cautiously and slowly in this environment.
To be sure, just as he did in his first term, Trump will be able to get some foreign policy wins just by virtue of being the president of the most powerful country in the world. But the potential for things to go sideways is much greater in this environment. Geopolitics are in for a volatile and unpredictable ride, and the United States is about to become the epicenter of it.
So take a deep breath and strap in, folks. It’s going to get bumpy.
US Election 2024: Map the Vote, post-election
The results are in, with a big win for Donald Trump and the Republican party. We've filled in the US map with the states and electoral votes won as of November 6th at 11 AM, according to AP News.
Yesterday, we offered you all a downloadable map to track the 2024 presidential election race and count the number of electoral votes earned by each candidate. You can still download the blank map below to fill it in as the final state races are officially called.
Print it or just download it to your mobile device to keep your own tally of the US electoral count per state as the results are called. Each state's number of electoral votes is shown below. Maine and Nebraska have a split system of electoral votes, so we've listed the two split votes for each to the right of the main map. The swing states are indicated with a patterned background. A presidential candidate needs at least 270 electoral votes to win the election.
Download the 2024 Election Map the Vote PDF
For more background, check our our explanation about the 15 key counties that could determine the outcome, and everything you need to know about the 7 swing states that could decide the election.
Make sure to check GZERO's ongoing election coverage to find out the latest, and join us on Wednesday at 11 am ET for our X Space day-after debrief to discuss the results.
US Election 2024: Map the Vote!
Republican presidential nominee in West Palm Beach, Florida, U.S., November 6, 2024.
Donald Trump wins 2024 presidential race
Donald Trump won the presidential election in an apparent landslide on Tuesday night, with a realigned GOP coalition that, according to early exit polls, successfully drew young, male, and minority voters.
“We’ve achieved the most incredible political thing," Trump said in an address at his campaign headquarters early Wednesday, proclaiming a “political victory that our country has never seen before."
As of this writing, Trump had surpassed the 270 electoral college votes needed to secure the presidency, winning in the key swing states of Pennsylvania, North Carolina, and Georgia, and defying Democratic hopes that Kamala Harris would carry Pennsylvania and Georgia as Joe Biden did in 2020. Trump also looked set to win the popular vote, becoming the first Republican presidential candidate to do so in 20 years.
Trump clinched the White House by winning Pennsylvania by over two percentage points and cracking the so-called Democratic “blue wall,” of Pennsylvania, Michigan, and Wisconsin. He won the Badger State by one percentage point, and while the count continues in the Wolverine State and it's close, he maintains a lead there as well.
Threats of violence. Polling places in several states were targeted with bomb threats. In DeKalb and Fulton, Georgia, two counties that would have been key to a Democratic win of the swing state, threats caused five polling places to be closed in the final hours of voting, and the FBI uncovered that they appeared to be sent from Russian email domains.
Where did Harris go wrong? She may have bet too big on one issue: democracy, which came in third – after the economy and immigration – on the list of voter’s concerns heading into the election. Harris’ closing campaign message focused on Trump’s anti-democratic rhetoric – and perhaps not enough on pocketbook issues.
Harris also struggled with young Democratic voters, who may have wanted a platform that promised greater policy change – especially on issues like the war in Gaza and climate change – which led to her underperforming in some cities and swing-state college towns. Meanwhile, Trump’s efforts to appeal to young men – who typically vote at the lowest rates – were highly successful. Another surprise of the night was early exit polling that showed Trump gaining substantially among Latino and Black voters, particularly men.
Trump has a strong mandate and will face few constraints. "America has given us an unprecedented and powerful mandate," Trump told supporters overnight. Indeed, Republicans won the White House and the Senate -- and could also win the House in the coming days. Taken together with a conservative majority on the Supreme Court, Trump will come into office in an immensely powerful position to implement his vision for America.
Aubrey and Taylor Endicott cast their votes while their children, from left, Sterling, 5, Adelaide, 3, and Lincoln, 7, wait patiently under the voting tables at Shawnee Heights Middle School on Tuesday, Nov. 5, 2024.
What to expect when the US is expecting
In making her final pitch to American voters before 75,000 attendees on the National Mall, Vice President Kamala Harris closed by declaring: “The United States of America is the greatest idea humanity ever devised.” While undoubtedly hyperbolic, Harris’ remarks point to the heart of what is at stake in the US election: For the US and other countries with elected leaders, Tuesday’s election represents a referendum on the future of democracy. Will it come away battered, or will it remain intact?
Harris hopes American voters place system over self – rights over kitchen table issues. Only with hindsight will her campaign find out whether this was a winning strategy.
Still, one of Europe’s most frequently repeated questions about the US election is whether we will see a repeat of Jan. 6, 2021. Watching Americans climb their Capitol building shocked the international audience. While observers abroad may not fully agree with Harris’ declaration, seeing the fissures in the US democratic system laid bare that Wednesday in January shifted perceptions of what was possible in America. If the US could come under attack from within, where next? If the US could not uphold its democratic promise, who could?
Although many Americans have hoped to tuck aside the storming of the US Capitol as a 2020 election “one-off,” the sentiment of that day has lingered. Former President Donald Trump and his running mate, Sen. JD Vance, routinely claim that the 2020 election was stolen and that Trump never lost. At a Pennsylvania rally over the weekend, Trump lamented that he “shouldn’t have left” office in 2020. Three years after the Jan. 6 riot, polling found that roughly two-thirds of Republicans still did not believe President Joe Biden was legitimately elected, a proportion that has grown since 2021.
According to the Brennan Center for Justice, “extensive research reveals that fraud is very rare, voter impersonation is virtually nonexistent, and many instances of alleged fraud are, in fact, mistakes by voters or administrators.”
Yet, at his final major rally at Madison Square Garden, Trump warned his supporters, “We must defeat Kamala Harris and stop her radical left agenda with a landslide that is too big to rig.”
This leaving open the door to the risk of fraud, a stolen election, and “a rig” – whether valid or not – makes clear that should Trump lose when all the votes are counted, he will not go quietly. Nor will his supporters.
Trump is right to point out that the margin of victory this week will be pivotal for what happens next. Democracy is a system in which groups lose elections and accept the election results. Losers consent to being losers in any given election because they believe they will have the opportunity to participate in the next cycle. Losers withdraw this consent, however, when they come to believe that the institutional framework will not allow them to become winners – the system is rigged against them.
With the 2020 election still so salient, Trump and his supporters are primed to interpret any small loss in today’s election as evidence of the big rig. A narrow margin of victory that delivers Harris 270 electoral college votes likely represents the most volatile outcome of today’s election. For those forces unleashed in 2020 and still itching for a fight, a small Harris victory – perceived by them as improbable – is an easy mark. A wide margin of victory for Harris presents its own potential for criticism, especially as both aggregate national and swing state polling have consistently been so close. But should Harris pull off a meaningful polling surprise, it may suck the air out of the fraud argument and deflate the Trump world.
Given that Trump is not currently president and does not hold the reins of office, a replay of Jan. 6 is remote, but a flood of legal cases and calls for recounts is certain. Disturbances at courthouses and state government buildings should also be expected. Challenges within Congress around vote certification, especially should Republicans retain the House and regain the Senate, will be set in motion. And where there is disaffection, as there is in this post-pandemic, hyper-polarized political moment in the US, political violence cannot be ruled out.
We are in for a wild finish. What happens between today and the full results, and between the full results and Inauguration Day, Jan. 20, 2025, will be fluid. Many ideas are at stake, not the least of which is the foundational idea of democracy itself. As the US votes, the world holds its breath.
Lindsay Newman is a geopolitical risk expert and columnist for GZERO.
editsharetrending_upHow AI could still impact the US election
Americans in 50 states and Washington, DC, are headed to the polls today to vote for the next president of the United States. While neither Vice President Kamala Harris nor former President Donald Trump has given much attention to artificial intelligence on the campaign trail — and AI hasn’t completely disrupted the election process as some experts feared — there are still important questions surrounding AI and the election.
For one, could AI-generated disinformation or deepfakes sow chaos that affects the results of the election? The hours and days ahead — both as Americans vote and as local officials count the vote — are crucial.
Earlier this year, election security experts and officials warned that AI-generated information could flood the campaign trial. While some has surfaced — including a fake Joe Bidenrobocall during New Hampshire’s primary and when Elon Musk shared an AI-generated video mocking Harris on his platform, X — its impact hasn’t been widespread.
Meanwhile, the US intelligence community has been proactive in identifying when foreign actors used AI to carry out influence operations. The Office of the Director of National Intelligence issued a statement in September noting that foreign countries such as China, Iran, and Russia have used AI to target voters about the election and political issues, such as immigration and the US-Gaza conflict.
But the most sensitive time for disinformation may still be ahead. “If it's extremely close, that gives more license for disinformation to run around because it’s easier to believe,” said Scott Bade, a senior geo-technology analyst with Eurasia Group. While fake information might not be AI-generated, he said, there could be something that tricks people and goes viral, such as an AI-generated video or image purporting to show fraud at a polling station.
Further, voting rights groups have issued warnings that Spanish-language voters are seeing more AI-generated misinformation about the election than are English speakers. This language gap could cause additional confusion at a time when the Latino vote has become a central point of intrigue in the election, especially after a comedian at a recent Trump rally made racist comments about Puerto Rico.
The election results will also impact how AI policy is shaped for the next four years — a critical time for this emerging technology. Trump’s approach has emphasized deregulation. Trump has criticized the CHIPS Act, under which the US has given subsidies to foreign companies like TSMC and Samsung to build in the US and cement America’s chip advantage over China. Trump wants to be seen as tough on China but prefers tariffs rather than subsidies.
“Under Trump, funding for AI research would likely prioritize military applications and national security, reflecting his America First agenda,” said Esteban Ponce de León, a resident fellow at the Atlantic Council’s Digital Forensic Research Lab, “whereas, Harris aims to direct funding toward societal challenges like health care disparities and climate change.”
Harris would likely continue Biden’s legacy on artificial intelligence, continuing to roll out incremental rules to rein in the tech industry if she becomes president, but her ability to push through a more serious AI agenda depends on the makeup of Congress — and, if polling is to be believed, Democrats are longshots to take the Senate even if the House and presidency are within reach.
Even if artificial intelligence hasn’t been front and center thus far this election cycle, there’s no guarantee it won’t still be. And the dam has broken, which means AI will be an unavoidable consideration of election security officials for years to come.
Ian Bremmer & Van Jones on instability & the US election
In a live conversation on Substack on Friday, Nov 1, Ian Bremmer and Van Jones talked all things US election and what could happen if either Harris or Trump get elected, including how the election results will impact the ongoing conflicts in Ukraine and the Middle East.
The United States is the most polarized advanced democracy in the world. Political radicalization is public enemy number one for America's democratic institutions. Learning about this new normal will not only help us understand each other at home, but America’s evolving place in a G-Zero world.
Subscribe to both GZERO Media and Van Jones on Substack for more coverage of the US election. Subscribers get access to be the first to watch and comment on Substack livestream discussions, plus other exclusive community features. The conversation was part of the Substack Election Dialogues, a series bringing together influential political figures, writers, and commentators for live video conversations on some the most consequential questions of the political moment.
- US election campaigns head into the homestretch ›
- Ian Explains: Will foreign policy decide the 2024 US election? ›
- The US election: Freedom on the ballot ›
- Foreign policy tests lurk within the US election ›
- Ian Bremmer on the US election & crisis of democracy ›
- Ian Bremmer's State of the World 2024 ›
- Ian Bremmer on the 2024 US election ahead - GZERO Media ›
- US Election 2024: Map the Vote! - GZERO Media ›
- 2024 US election: What to look out for - GZERO Media ›
Graphic Truth: The rising cost of US elections
The 2024 federal election cycle is on course to be the costliest in US history, surpassing record levels of spending in 2020, according to OpenSecrets, a nonprofit that tracks money in politics. Federal election cycles have been flooded by huge amounts of money for decades, but spending skyrocketed after the Supreme Court’s controversial Citizens United decision in 2010, which held that political spending is a form of protected speech.
Citizens United opened the door for corporations, unions, and other groups to spend unlimited funds on elections – as long as they don’t formally coordinate with candidates or political parties – and paved the way for the creation of super PACs.
Super PACs differ from traditional PACs, or Political Action Committees, which can directly contribute to candidates and political parties (with limits on total contributions).
Elections have not only become more expensive since Citizens United, but they’ve also become less transparent in terms of the sources of spending. This is thanks to what are known as dark money groups, which are generally nonprofits that aren’t required to publicly disclose their donors. Even though super PACs are required to disclose their donors, the funding they receive from dark money groups keeps the original sources hidden.
Does money have too much influence on US politics? Should there be more limits on how much can be spent? We would love to hear your thoughts.