The Desire for Disruption: Understanding the American Public's Shift

In the 2024 election, the American public’s choice seems to reflect a deep-seated frustration with the status quo. At its core, this election appears less about party lines and more about a desire to see the system shaken up. Many voters were looking for a leader willing to disrupt an establishment they saw as overly globalist, outdated, and out of touch with their realities.

Why the Public Yearned for a "Disruptor"

There’s a growing sentiment that traditional politics is no longer serving the people’s needs. For many, the Biden-Harris administration represented a continuation of the existing system, one rooted in global alliances, longstanding bureaucratic frameworks, and cautious diplomacy. While these aspects have their place, they can also come across as resistant to change or, worse, as symbols of a system unwilling or unable to tackle the pressing issues people face today.

A Disconnect Between the Establishment and Public Sentiment

Many Americans feel that their leaders are too removed from their daily struggles and concerns. Politicians perceived as maintaining a globalist or institutionalist approach can seem distant from the average citizen’s experience. These voters likely felt that such leaders were unwilling to confront the issues that most affect their lives—job instability, inflation, a sense of national identity, and the feeling that foreign interests too often take precedence over their own.

The globalist approach, while built on diplomacy and international cooperation, can be perceived by some as sacrificing American interests. This perception creates a gap between what politicians believe is best and what voters feel is necessary. As a result, many looked for a leader who promised to “break stuff,” disrupt the cycle, and prioritize America’s interests above all else.

Biden and Harris as Symbols of Continuity

In this context, Biden and Harris may have represented stability but not innovation. They came across as steady and measured, rooted in institutional values that have been in place for decades. But for those angry with a system they feel has failed them, this approach seems not only outdated but unwilling to take the risks needed to make real, impactful changes. People wanted bold moves and strong stances on issues they feel have been ignored, even if that meant sacrificing established norms and ruffling feathers.

The Call for a New Kind of Leadership

The appeal of a disruptor speaks to an undercurrent in American politics: a desire for a leader who won’t shy away from conflict or controversial decisions if they believe it will serve the public’s interests. For many, this leader doesn’t hesitate to challenge global interests, scrutinize outdated systems, or make sweeping changes to bureaucratic frameworks that seem entrenched in maintaining a global status quo rather than addressing pressing domestic issues.

What this election reflects is not just a vote for a particular person or party, but a demand for a complete overhaul of priorities. Many Americans are looking for a leader who is willing to do what they feel previous administrations have not—take a strong stance for American interests, challenge the status quo, and bring a sense of urgency and agency back into politics.

A Mandate to "Break Stuff" and Forge a New Path

This election serves as a reminder of a powerful sentiment in the American public: a desire for leaders who reflect their anger, frustrations, and willingness to see the system restructured. Voters’ choice signals a mandate not only for action but for a kind of political leadership willing to “break stuff”—to disrupt, dismantle, and rebuild a system they see as obsolete. This call for action is about more than short-term policy changes; it’s about shaping a new path forward that people believe in and feel is for them, rather than for a distant globalist agenda or entrenched political system.

-Michael Kelman Portney