Big picture trends in US Politics

Big Picture Trends in US Politics | US Politics :60 | GZERO Media

Jon Lieber, Eurasia Group's Managing Director for the US, breaks down the US political landscape on US Politics In 60 Seconds:

Today, we're going to start by discussing some of the big picture trends in US politics that are going to affect the election outlook for this year. So, bear with me if this takes a little more than a minute.

When I think of big trends in US politics, I think the number one thing is the growing rural-urban divide between the two parties. If you look back to the 1980 election, the Democrats took about 59% of the vote in the most urban districts, and they took about 56 percent of the vote in the most rural districts in the country. If you fast forward to 2018 and the midterm elections, the Democrats took about 75 percent of the vote in the most urban districts, and they took only 40 percent of the vote in the most rural districts. So, you're going from a three-point spread in the 80s to a 35-point spread today. And that's really one the defining characteristics of how the parties have realigned themselves facing the new electoral reality.

What that means is increasing partisanship as you've got increasing geographic concentration among the two parties. The Democrats are largely becoming a younger, more diverse, in some cases better educated party. The Republican Party is becoming increasingly white, increasingly rural and a little bit older than the Democratic Party. As a result, you're seeing enhanced partisanship across the US political spectrum. People are clustering in areas where they're more likely to come across people who share their partisan views. There's higher correlation between the House, the Senate and the White House, meaning it's more difficult for policymakers to differentiate themselves from their party. And you've got a fracturing media ecosystem where it's easier to hear points of view that reinforce your own. And there's less agreement not only about what the solutions to public policy problems are, but what the problems themselves are.

So, what does that mean for the 2020 election? Well, you're very likely to see a very close election that looks very similar, with a map that looks very similar to the map in 2016. Meaning you've got a number of states that are solidly blue, a number of states that are really solidly red and a small number of states in the middle that will be decided based on these questions of the rural-urban divide.

In particular, three questions that we'll be watching closely are: Do African American voters in cities show up to vote for Joe Biden? Can Trump hold on to his predominately white rural base? In many cases, they flipped over from Obama to Trump in 2016. Can he hold on to them? And three, what happens in the suburbs? Where a lot of educated, college educated Republicans moved away from the Republican Party, giving the House to the Democrats in 2018 midterms? And if that trend continues, it's very good for Joe Biden and could be trouble for President Trump.

So, it should be really interesting election year and I'm looking forward to watching with you.

More from GZERO Media

Syrian forces head to Latakia after fighters linked to Syria's ousted leader Bashar Assad mounted a deadly attack on government forces on Thursday, March 6, 2025.

REUTERS/Mahmoud Hassano

Nearly 50 people were killed on Thursday in the deadliest clashes Syria has seen since the overthrow of Bashar Assad. Pro-Assad militants attacked security checkpoints around the western coastal town of Jableh, a stronghold of the former regime.

The Liberian-flagged tanker Ice Energy, chartered by the US government, takes Iranian oil from Iranian-flagged Lana (formerly Pegas) as part of a civil forfeiture action off the shore of Karystos, on the Island of Evia, Greece, in May 2022.
REUTERS/Costas Baltas/File Photo

The Trump administration is reportedly considering a strategy to disrupt Iran’s oil exports by stopping and inspecting Iranian oil tankers at sea. The US would use the Proliferation Security Initiative, established in 2003 to prevent the trafficking of weapons of mass destruction, as a legal justification for the inspections.

Donald Trump issues a proclamation from the Oval Office
REUTERS/Kevin Lamarque

US presidents don’t typically talk to organizations the US government has labeled terrorist groups, but Donald Trump is not a typical US president.

President Donald Trump addresses a joint session of Congress at the US Capitol on March 4, 2025.

Win McNamee/Pool via REUTERS

You didn’t need to sit through all 99 minutes of Trump’s peroration to know that he gave himself an A++ on his first six weeks in office, writes GZERO Publisher Evan Solomon. But if Trump gets to grade himself, maybe it’s time for a more objective report card — one that looks at two criteria: Trump as a dealmaker and Trump as a manager.

The Energy Security Hub at the 2025 Munich Security Conference featured in-depth discussions on energy innovation, security, and market viability. Fatih Birol, IEA executive director, discussed growing global energy demand, especially the rapid rise in electricity outpacing overall growth. He noted electricity demand is projected to increase six times faster than total energy in 10 years, underscoring the need for electrification and grid expansion. As energy systems become decentralized and digitalized, the CEO of E.ON, Leonhard Birnbaum, said: “You’re either fully digitized – or you’re done.” Key takeaways: Energy security requires developing and securing electricity grids Technological openness is a unifying element for getting to net zero Bridge the “Valley of Death” to scale markets New global partnerships will help Europe stay competitive Public acceptance will strengthen democracy You can read the full Executive Summary from the BMW Foundation here.

a crowd of people outside of a white building

In a 5-4 split decision, the US Supreme Court on Wednesday ordered the Trump administration to disburse nearly $2 billion in foreign aid funds for work completed by contractors and grant recipients under the US Agency for International Development and the State Department. Does this tell us much about how the top court will handle future Trump-related cases?