We are now one week from knowing who will be the new U.S. president for four years. Looking at the polls, the score plans to be tight. With 48%, Harris gets a very close lead next to her opponent Trump, who stands at 47%. Knowing the fluctuation of these polls, the swing states’ voting power balance, and how electoral colleges can lead to the elections of the second-most voted candidate, such as in 2016 with the Clinton-Trump election, no one knows for certain what will be the outcome of these elections. While some stay convinced of Trump's future presidency, many still dream and believe in Harris' victory.
Pending the outcome of these elections, we wanted to look more closely at the perspectives of America’s youth. What about them? What are their perspectives on U.S. politics? Looking at the Maastricht scale, we know the number of U.S. citizens who come and study here in the Netherlands holds significance and even seems to increase.
However, as Europeans, we see the differences between the U.S. and European politics. Across the Atlantic, we see and examine the absurdity of Trump’s speeches, the overwhelming public meetings of both candidates, and the unseriousness of the debates such as the presidential debate on the 10th of September. We think “U.S. politics don’t make any sense, it’s too much, it’s all for the show”. We often presume European politics are more serious and less ‘showy’. What if they were not? What if our bias toward our home politics blinded us from the reality of U.S. elections and politics? What is the hidden complexity behind these politics?
Norma and Hannah are both U.S. citizens living and studying in the Netherlands. Norma comes from a deep red state (republican), whereas Hannah comes from a deep-blue state (democrat). After living and studying in Europe for two years, has their perspective on U.S. elections and politics changed?
We decided to ask them…
How closely do you follow U.S. elections?
Hannah:
I try to stay generally informed about what’s happening in the U.S., but I wouldn’t say I follow it all that closely. I like being in the loop, so I pay attention to the big stories and headlines, but I’m not glued to the news. I’ve met people who are much more invested in it, but for me, it's hard to feel truly represented by the options we have. I’m not a big fan of either, and sometimes it feels like there’s just one major event after another—it’s exhausting to keep up. Harris isn’t terrible, but she hasn’t inspired the kind of energy many of us were hoping for. All that said, I definitely don’t want to see a Trump comeback.
Norma:
Since moving to Europe, I definitely feel more detached from U.S. politics compared to when I was living there. Back home, political conversations were part of everyday life, but here, it's not as much a constant topic of conversation, and my engagement and connection to the discourse have shifted. I've already emailed in my ballot and knew from the start that Trump wasn’t an option for me.
Looking back to the 2020 elections, there was this intense drive to participate, with so many diverse perspectives and motivations drawing people in. This time around, it’s different. I’ve noticed a shift among people from home, especially among white moderates who I think are now firm in their anti-Trump stance. Campaigns like ‘Republicans for Harris’ show that many white moderates are separating more from party lines, and that this election seems more like an election for democracy rather than following your party stance. I believe that on Harris' side, having Tim Walz running for VP was a smart move: it could positively contribute to white moderates feeling comfortable voting for Harris while seeing a white familiar figure on the ticket.
Conversations now are far more nuanced, less about direct support and more about the broader implications, and there’s a sense that people want change without a clear consensus on the best path forward.
Looking at the 2024 presidential elections, what do you think is most at stake here?
Hannah:
I think one of the biggest things at stake in the 2024 presidential election is the deepening polarization in American politics. Over the last 30 years, the political landscape has consistently become more divided with each election cycle, but this trend took a sharp turn for the worse in 2016. Since then, it feels like each election is more intense and negative than the last. The fact that we’re seeing the same candidates go head-to-head again is concerning. Whichever candidate wins, there’s going to be a significant portion of the population that’s left dissatisfied, which only fuels more division.
The polarization we’re experiencing now seems to be reshaping how the government functions, and it feels like it’s not working effectively to bring people together. Instead, it’s pushing people further apart, and I think this will impact elections far beyond just this one. This divide also feeds into political apathy; people feel disconnected from the process or don’t feel passionate about the candidates.
Living in Maryland, a blue state, I know there will likely be policy continuity here, but not everyone is motivated by the bigger political landscape. Issues like abortion, immigration, and the cost of living are some of those single-issue topics that seem to determine a lot of people’s votes. For some, it’s just these core issues that drive them to the polls. In a way, these are huge stakes in this election because they touch on fundamental aspects of life that resonate with people’s values and everyday realities.
Norma:
Reproductive rights are a huge point of contention in this election. I’m seeing a lot of Republicans, including women, rallying with slogans like ‘vote for your daughters’ because they don’t want the next generation to have fewer rights than they did. Immigration is another major issue, emphasized by Republicans, although Democrats are being called out for not addressing it openly either. The lack of transparency from both parties leaves a lot of voters feeling lost.
Personally, I’m deeply concerned about reproductive rights. Where I come from, it’s essentially non-existent anymore. The fact that doctors have to consult lawyers before making medical decisions is alarming. Immigration is another pressing issue—I come from a community with a high level of migration, so it hits close to home.
Single-issue voters will be pivotal in this election. Many people are zeroed in on abortion rights alone. I know lifelong Republicans who oppose abortion but also don’t want to support Trump; that says a lot about how this election is polarizing people on specific issues. The Israel-Palestine conflict also plays into the election dynamic. Some people are wary of backing Vice President Harris, which could impact Democratic support. Voters are deeply divided, and each one is weighing what matters most to them, whether it’s a single issue or a broader set of concerns.
What do you think the American public awaits from these elections?
Hannah:
Honestly, I think the American public is genuinely fed up. It’s been a continuous cycle of bad news, and it’s easy to feel disillusioned. Personally, I sometimes wonder how much my vote counts, especially because of the impact of swing states, where the results feel unpredictable and heavily contested. I’m still going to vote because I believe in the process, but I have to admit that I’m pretty pessimistic. This election feels different for me—I truly don’t know what I’m waiting for, maybe because I'm no longer living in the U.S. Although I plan to move back, the physical distance has made it harder to follow everything as closely, and I feel a bit detached.
Norma:
I think many Americans feel a bit disillusioned, wondering if their vote will really make any difference. In some places, it feels like no matter how you vote, the area is bound to go red, so people are often left voting more on principle than with any hope of changing the outcome. For those of us in solidly red or blue states, it feels like our voices don’t carry as much weight as those in swing states, where campaigns and attention seem focused. That whole dynamic, especially the role of the Electoral College, can seem like a bit of nonsense—most people have stronger connections with their local representatives, where their votes actually feel impactful.
On the other hand, there’s a new kind of excitement around figures like Vice President Harris, particularly for Democrats who feel that for the first time in a while, there’s a fresh perspective and a response to the strong Trumpist influence of recent years. Having a woman and person of color as VP adds a different feeling to the ticket, almost like it signifies a shift that people want to see in the country. It's not perfect, but it’s different enough to get people talking.
As an American student in Europe, do you think living in the Netherlands for two years and seeing the difference between EU and U.S. politics has changed or impacted the way you see U.S. politics?
Hannah:
As someone who grew up with a Dutch father and attended German school for ten years, I was somewhat aware of European politics before moving here, mainly through German news. However, I never formally learned about the EU’s political landscape until I actually lived in Europe. The differences between EU and US politics were always at the back of my mind, but being here has really made those differences more obvious. Recently, I've been struck by just how ‘toxic’ US politics have become in comparison. It feels like the style and tone of political engagement in the US have changed a lot, and this election in particular has really reshaped my perspective on what is 'normal' in US politics. There's so much disrespect flying around, and having seen how elections are run here in Europe, it’s hard not to notice the contrast. I wasn’t old enough to vote in previous elections, but I learned about how they used to be, and it’s shocking to think that someone like Trump is still on the ballot. The way debates are conducted in the US just doesn’t seem to match the level of professionalism I see in European politics, and that's definitely shifted how I view both sides.
Norma:
One primary shift I've experienced is the realization that the EU isn’t as neat and orderly as many Americans might perceive. There’s a growing sentiment among US teenagers that obtaining an EU passport could offer significant advantages, like better healthcare and a lower cost of living, which speaks to the broader desire for change. Attending events like the Maastricht Debate is a primary example that while we often point the US debates out, many aspects of life in Europe are not as spotless as they seem. Both the US and Europe face similar challenges, albeit manifested differently.
Additionally, I've observed that many systems are built on a foundation of exclusion, where support structures are often available only to certain groups. Living in Europe has also prompted a more pessimistic view of the world; I see that issues exist everywhere. For instance, the brutal conditions at borders—like the Moroccan border in Spain—reveal a harsh reality that we may not be fully aware of back home. It forces us to look inward at our own challenges, such as those concerning the US southern border.
On the other hand, it also tells a lot about the hypocrisy of Europeans in the American system. Europeans are not necessarily aware of the problems in their home countries and still criticize the U.S. for having them. Just because you have some issues figured out doesn’t mean everything is perfect. Our political system is not that different from Europeans’, they may be quieter or approach it differently, but the policy belongs the same, such as the European migration problem.
Looking at the main differences such as the voting process of Electoral Colleges in the U.S., what do you think of it now? Especially looking at voting processes here in Europe that are more direct?
Hannah:
When I was in the U.S., I never questioned the Electoral College; it was just seen as a part of how the system works. Growing up in a very left-leaning area, I noticed that if people weren't actively criticizing it, I probably wouldn't have given it much thought. However, I genuinely wonder how the Electoral College contributes to democracy in the U.S. It seems to me that the popular vote should carry more weight in determining the outcome of elections. Fortunately, people today are more educated and informed about these issues than they were in the past, which encourages deeper discussions about the effectiveness of the Electoral College.
Norma:
The Electoral College has significant implications for how candidates campaign and how voters feel about their votes. Many candidates focus their efforts on swing states, leading to the sentiment that “nobody cares about my vote if I’m not in a swing state.” For example, voters in Pennsylvania often feel their voices are diminished because their state's electoral votes are seen as more critical in the broader political strategy.
Historically, this system was established when counting votes required people to physically ride on horseback to deliver results. However, with modern technology, this archaic method is no longer necessary. The Republican Party has not won the popular vote in quite some time, highlighting a growing disconnect between the Electoral College results and the actual votes cast by the public.
Any change to this system would be hugely controversial. Advocating for a direct popular vote could potentially engage more people in the electoral process. However, given the current polarization in American politics, any move toward reform would likely require significant bipartisan support in Congress—a daunting task given the increasing division among political parties. Unfortunately, this suggests that major change may not be imminent; it would likely require substantial public unrest or extreme circumstances, including heartbreak, violence, and anger, to prompt a shift in the system.
How do you feel about the outcome of these elections?
Hannah:
Overall, the outcome of these elections doesn’t feel particularly significant to me, largely due to the political landscape where I grew up. There’s a sense of apathy surrounding the issues at stake. For example, while topics like immigration are important, I don’t feel knowledgeable enough about how candidates like Trump or Harris would alter policies in that area.
My perspective is also shaped by my studies, particularly regarding the role of China in US foreign policy. It seems that both Trump and Harris would likely pursue similar approaches to China. While the outcome of the elections does matter, I would genuinely be surprised if Harris were elected and significantly changed US policy towards China. Diplomatically, I believe Harris would be a better choice, but I’m concerned about the current state of US interactions with other countries, which I find quite troubling.
Norma:
The results from this election feel particularly significant for many of us, especially in the traditionally red areas where blue pockets have made notable advances. Growing up surrounded by conservative values, it’s empowering to see a woman taking on leadership roles, particularly in a context dominated by men. I recall receiving my ballot alongside a heartfelt letter from a volunteer nearing 80 years old, whose pride in her grandson's participation in voting this year reminded me of the generational shifts in engagement.
In deep blue areas, the reactions might not seem as overwhelming, but for those of us who have felt the weight of gender hierarchy, this moment is monumental. However, I’m also aware that a substantial portion of the country may react aggressively to these changes, and I sincerely hope we won't witness another incident like the Capitol riots.
On a policy level, I have high hopes for Kamala Harris, especially regarding the labor movement, which has been gaining momentum over the years. Many voters have chosen blue primarily as a rejection of Trump, which adds another layer to the outcome. I am concerned about immigration issues, as I fear Harris may not implement the most beneficial policies for our borders. Still, I appreciate that she isn't advocating for the mass deportation of individuals who contribute positively to American society.
Living in Europe for two years now, what do you think Europeans think about U.S. politics and elections?
Norma:
European students often express strong opinions about U.S. politics, especially when they learn I come from a red state. Many seem to find American political behavior ridiculous, describing Americans as “crazy” and “dumb” for voting in a particular way. The sentiment is that voters are “wild,” consistently supporting candidates from the Republican Party, which they see as a reflection of a different lifestyle and priorities.
For instance, some voters might feel compelled to support someone like Trump due to pressing issues like the cost of living and climate change policies that threaten their livelihoods, such as farming. This context sometimes leads to a perception that their voting choices are purely about survival rather than political ideology.
Overall, European students recognize that the U.S. is a significant global power that impacts many, including themselves. However, they also express concern about the lack of nuance in American political discussions. They feel that opinions on the U.S. are often overly simplistic, failing to capture the real and complex issues many Americans face.
Hannah:
I agree with everything Norma said. Sometimes, EU students may overlook the sheer size of the United States and the significant differences in people's lives across the country. The U.S. is incredibly diverse, with various lifestyles and issues that people face, even within the same state. Recognizing the nuances of real policy issues is crucial, as governing such a vast country presents many complexities.
Comments