President-elect Donald Trump won one in five voters in Philadelphia in one of the strongest performances by a Republican presidential candidate in the deep blue city in years, doing so by increasing his support in working-class communities of all racial groups.

Despite winning Philadelphia easily, Vice Pres Kamala Harris failed to capture enough votes in the city — where registered Democrats outnumber Republicans 6-1 — to offset Republican gains elsewhere in the state, a key factor in Trump’s landslide victory at the national level.

With some ballots still to be counted, Harris led the city with about 78 percent of the vote, compared to Trump’s 20 percent. As of Thursday night, she had a 412,000-vote lead over Trump — if that holds, it would be the narrowest margin for a Democratic presidential candidate in two decades. The trend to the right was reflected throughout the country, including in other large cities, and Trump improved on his 2020 performance in each state that had counted the majority of its votes.

In total, Philadelphia was on track to move about 2 percentage points to the right. But voter turnout was roughly flat compared to 2020 — lower than Democrats had hoped. Harris was on track to receive in the city at least 50,000 fewer votes than the president Joe Biden won in 2020.

Around noon Tuesday, top Democrats in the city were predicting a record turnout. Primary Cherelle L. Parker he thought the city could provide 650,000 or more votes for Harris. In the end, Philadelphia didn’t come close. While some ballots were still being counted, Harris had received 554,000 votes as of Thursday evening.

“I don’t know what happened,” City Councilman Jim Harrity, who works with the state and city Democratic Party, said Wednesday. “I’m dazed and confused, to say the least. I don’t know what happened. I don’t know what happened. We had so many extra people here doing all this work, and to be honest, it didn’t seem to affect anyone.”

But Republicans said they know what happened: The city’s voters were more frustrated with the status quo than Democrats thought, and Harris didn’t separate himself enough from Biden to convince the electorate that he could change course.

“They did a good job of convincing everybody that this race was closer than it was,” said Josh Novotney, a Republican precinct leader and political consultant. “What we saw were minority and working-class people taking the bus from all over the city to come to the office to pick up Trump signs.”

” READ MORE: In deep blue Philly, working-class voters are swinging Republican

Trump’s biggest base of support in the city is white working-class voters. As of Thursday, he was winning outright in five of the city’s 66 political wards — all of which are majority-white — and had about 30 percent of the vote citywide in majority-white wards. And as was the case in 2020, Trump’s strongest performance in Philadelphia was in the city’s northeast.

The Republican’s most significant growth, however, has been with Latino voters, who have drifted away from the Philadelphia Democratic Party over the past two election cycles. Trump won 21% of the vote in the majority Latino constituency, an increase of 15 percentage points from 2016.

Trump only marginally improved his margins in Philadelphia’s black precincts — just 6 percent in those precincts, compared to 2.6 percent eight years ago — despite a significant amount of Democratic jitters about potential losses with black men.

In the city, Trump’s support grew the most in the lowest-income wards. That reality could reinforce Republicans’ analysis that city voters were primarily concerned with inflation and rising prices, which disproportionately impact the working class and are largely associated with the incumbent.

“I can see the difference in my refrigerator,” said Brittany Bennett, a 33-year-old mother who lives in Bridesburg. She voted for Trump.

Trump improved on where Harris was targeting

Harris’ smaller-than-expected margins in Philadelphia are a serious blow to her campaign, which has poured resources into the city and made a concerted effort to reach black voters. The campaign had seven offices here, six of which were in majority black and Latino neighborhoods.

And of Harris’ 37 visits to Pennsylvania, 15 were in Philadelphia, where he ended his campaign with a star-studded concert on the steps Philadelphia Museum of Art.

Her campaign it was also supported by an independent and large and organized field operation formed by trade unions and progressive political organizations. Many of these door-knocking and voter-persuading efforts were concentrated in working-class neighborhoods in Philadelphia.

Trump’s field game in the city was relatively small and more disjointed, and Harris campaign advisers often said they thought the Democratic operation was superior. In the end, it didn’t seem to sway the city’s working-class voters, who slowly drifted away from the Democratic Party.

“These are areas of the city that have been trending more Republican for years,” Novotney said.

” READ MORE: Democratic turnout in Philly was poor. Will the Harris campaign’s stepped-up ground game reverse the trend?

Larry Ceisler, a city public affairs director who has worked with Democrats, said it will always be a challenge for Harris to overcome inflation and the perception that the economy is in bad shape. In terms of voter turnout, he said, “people have lost faith in the government.”

“I hope Mayor Parker can turn it around, and I think she could,” Ceisler said. “But people have lost faith that government can improve their lives.”

Some pointed the finger at the local Democratic Party for failing to boost voter turnout in the city. Democratic Town Committee it has been criticized for years as ineffective. Progressives were especially blunt Wednesday when they highlighted the party’s growing problems reaching working-class voters.

“People are crying out every day to be heard, and the Democratic Party has turned a deaf ear,” said Diana Robinson, co-deputy director of Make the Road Action of Pennsylvania, which advocates for Latinos across the state. “Last night years of neglect of working class people came to an ugly head.”

But former U.S. Rep. Bob Brady, chairman of the Philadelphia Democratic Party, said the failure belongs to Harris — a a charge totally denied by her campaign.

“We did the best we could with the limited resources we had,” Brady said, “and the people rejected it and voted it out.”

Trump grew up in Latino neighborhoods, as he did elsewhere

Part of Philadelphia’s rightward shift on Tuesday came in Latino neighborhoods, a once-reliable Democratic base. Trump’s support has grown significantly in Latino communities across the state and nationreflecting a widespread shift among those voters who were telegraphed in the polls.

Harris won easily in the Puerto Rican and Dominican strongholds of North Philadelphia, but the change was clear.

” READ MORE: Donald Trump’s growing support among Latino voters helped him win Pennsylvania battleground

Trump’s share of the vote in the city’s 114 Latino-majority precincts rose to about 22 percent, up from 6 percent in 2016. Trump won nearly 23 percent of the vote in North Philadelphia’s 7th District, his vote total rising by about 1,000 votes compared to 2016, while Democrats lost nearly 2,000 votes in the same time frame.

Similarly, the Juniata Park neighborhood saw an increase of more than 9 percentage points in Trump votes between the two elections, while Fairhill, one of the poorest neighborhoods in the city, saw an increase of almost 6 percentage points.

And in Kensington, a diverse working-class neighborhood plagued by one of the nation’s most notorious open-air drug markets, Trump posted a nearly three-point increase.

State Rep. Danilo Burgos, a Democrat who leads the predominantly Latino and black 43rd Ward in North Philadelphia, said the drift is palpable. Voter turnout in his precinct is down 18% from 2020, and Trump has increased his share of the vote from 8% to 14%.

“My community came out as well as we could,” said Burgos, whose family is from the Dominican Republic. “Obviously there’s room for improvement.”

Burgos acknowledged that Democrats have failed to deliver a convincing message about the economy and inflation. Whatever reservations Latino voters may have had about the incoming Trump administration carrying out mass deportations, he argued, they were more concerned about rising food and housing costs.

The community, he said, is not a monolithic voting block.

“We’ve always painted the Latino community with the same brush as other groups,” he said, “and in this case, unfortunately, many of them felt they had to vote for President Trump.”

Many simply chose not to vote. Aida Zeno, who lives in Norris Square, is a native of Puerto Rico who moved to Philadelphia in the early 2000s. Zeno hoped Harris would win, but she refused to vote as a way of protest.

“I don’t think it’s fair to give them my vote every time when things never change,” the 54-year-old said in Spanish.

Maria Quiñones-Sánchez, a former City Council member who represented areas of North Philadelphia and Kensington, said Trump was able to capture votes through a mix of economic messages and his particular brand of machismo, which appeals to men in particular.

She also said Harris’ short campaign window didn’t allow for extensive community engagement — while Republican operatives targeted Latino votes with an unwavering message.

“They knew they could investigate people who were unhappy,” she said. “We as Democrats don’t do a good job of explaining that we have a good economy compared to the rest of the world.”

Writers Michelle Myers, Beatrice Forman, John Duchneskie, Chris Williams and Lizzie Mulvey contributed to this article.