Simulating a Trump victory and what it could mean for colleges and universities

How might a Donald Trump election victory impact higher education?

Last week we explored this on the Future Trends Forum through an interactive session.  With the help of colleagues I created a scenario in two parts: first, the week after the November 5th election; second, the week after Trump’s re-inauguration.  My goal was to make this story credible in order to encourage participants to think and plan ahead, should such an event come to pass.  I based this scenario on a mix of Project 2025, Agenda 47, and a sense of Trump’s ongoing statements.

Today I’d like to share notes on the scenario exercise,  including a full recording and extracts from the very active chat session.  And this week we’ll run another scenario, based on an alternative future: a Harris victory.

Here are the slides we used to anchor presentations and discussion.  And here’s the full recording:

I led the session. Tom Haymes expanded on the political science and government aspects.

For the chat, I’m going to organize it by topics and share quotes, rather than just posting the whole 2685 words.  All comments are anonymized.  I’ve edited for typos and clarity.

Part I: one week after the election

Questions and thoughts on the scenario presentation:

• “How does the US military reacting to this scenario?” At this point in the story the military remains loyal to the democratic process, and obeys the commander in chief, president Biden.   As one participant put it, “When I joined the Army, I took an oath to the Constitution, rather than to any given politician.”  Biden does not use the PATRIOT Act yet.
• There was skepticism that Trump would win the popular vote, as the scenario posits.
• Some left wing technology attacks (“ants in the servers”) on conservative sites and supporting businesses occur.
• Governors deploy their state National Guards depending on their politics – i.e., several conservatives send their Guard against anti-Trump protesters, while some Democrats do the same against MAGA manifestations.
• Other nations respond: Trump allies (Hungary, Russia) express support.  The rest of Europe is more cautious.

How academics might respond to this November:

• Dread about personal impact: “I will be one of those rounded up or shot on the spot.”
• One response was to consider immigrating to other nations.
• One related issue: is remote academic work possible if the workers move to other states or nations?  Much depends on individual institutional policies.
• An aspect of psychological stress: “just like after hurricanes– all the pivoting is so draining.”
• Campuses as sanctuaries: “So would people take refuge on the campus of higher ed institutions?”
• Town-gown relations: “what about outside protestors instigating students?”
• Different academic sectors respond differently: “It’s a little different with state (community) colleges. Not so much political activism; commuter schools have different campus culture/populations”
• One pedagogical and media-technological issue: “We focus on some media literacy in my classes, but it takes time to analyze and reflect on what we’re reading/viewing; I imagine a firehose-onslaught that would be hard to sift through.”
• Another classroom issue: “Not sure how to handle discussion in class if it gets uncivil.”
• International student problems loomed large:

I would be fearful of the continued operation of large universities that are dependent on the enrollment of international students. I would also be fearful for the safety of such students and the perceived desirability of becoming a student in U.S.

• Potential resentment aimed at the sitting president: “Students are probably stressed and acting out violently due to Biden not having forgiven student debt.”
• A campus strategic imperative: “Any response would need to be filtered/controlled by University Communications. We cannot go rogue here in a library and IT organization.”
• Another campus strategy to consider: “Our personal leanings are almost irrelevant – as significant civil unrest or wild policy swings will challenge all of us to maintain continuity and integrity of academic experience.”  Another chimed in on this point, expressing or anticipating “increased hope for the ‘quiet majority’ of non partisans who just want things to keep working.”

Part 2: late January 2025

On the scenario:

• People might move within the United States, according to their politics: “I suspect the great sorting of the left leaning to the coasts and right leaning to the south and center of the country [will continue].”
• One saw an echo of Trump’s first term: “everything would be more chaotic, contradictory, and complex. Liberals worry that 2025 will happen quickly. [Yet] Trump  [has shown] past incompetence and bureaucratic resistance will be strong.”
• One detail seems likely to transpire: “The Space Force Academy actually has bipartisan support.”
• Other nations might see this as an opportunity to take down American hegemony.  For example, “Countries see US Intelligence as weakened even more.”
• “Have any of the executive orders explicitly referenced curriculum proscriptions or prescriptions?” At several points, especially concerning climate change and DEI, but they will be contested in court.
• There were comparisons to academics exiting Hungary, or complying with governmental policies.

How academics might respond:

• One member expressed fears that their work on climate change in academic would be banned and that people with that professional background would have a harder time getting hired.
• To continue DEI work in this repressive atmosphere, language changes might occur: “DEI is now ‘social justice’ and ‘racial equity'” or “belonging.”
• One call for campus leadership:

Many of us lived & worked through 9/11; we learned that we must allow space for different responses on campus: provide flexibility for students & employees. It required emotional intelligence & empathetic leadership.

As facilitator, I had many thoughts, uppermost being that participants were excellent, taking a challenging situation very seriously.  Many spoke from their institutional positions very effectively.  I appreciated how people distinguished between different institutional types and professions.  The Future Trends Forum community is a marvel.

What did we miss?  I was surprised there wasn’t more discussion of gendered issues, including abortion and trans support.  We didn’t get far into top-level leadership reactions, from boards and state governments to presidents.  I should probably adjust the scenario presentation to encourage this and/or maybe just allow more time.  Alternatively, we could make the role playing aspect more formal, with people taking on named roles and titles, not necessarily their own.

I’ll leave the last words to one participant: “Where the mission, vision, and values of the university diverge from this Trumpian dogma is where the sparks will fly.”

Now, this week we’ll apply some of these lessons to the counterpoint scenario, where Harris wins the election.  Please do join us.