Why Trump’s theatrics won’t necessarily cost him votes

Phoebe Netto from Pure Public Relations breaks down the Harris v Trump debate.

BY PHOEBE NETTO

September 12, 2024 8:34

Why Trump’s theatrics won’t necessarily cost him votes

In a country that does not have compulsory voting, there are two types of voters.

The first group votes based on issues; they may not resonate with, respect, or even like the party leader, but they align with the party’s stance on key issues. The second group gravitates towards leaders they believe understand their needs and frustrations, with the leader’s personal brand reflecting the voters’ own aspirations and how they wish to see themselves.

While Mr. Trump’s comments and theatrics might seem ludicrous to some, it’s important to recognise that this doesn’t necessarily cost him votes. In fact, as we’ve seen countless times over the past eight years, this can strengthen his supporter base or simply be overlooked by Republican voters who are more focused on key issues.

With the latest polls showing that Mr Trump and Vice President Harris are neck-in-neck, this debate needed to move away from speaking to their existing supporters and focus instead on persuading independent and undecided voters.

Vice President Harris has had a remarkable turnaround in her communication style and content since becoming the Democratic presidential nominee. For example, she’s now the subject of fewer memes and is coming across more coherently. However, polls indicate that many Americans feel they don’t know her well, particularly when it comes to her policy positions. The translation here is that Americans are uncertain about how her presidency would personally benefit their lives.

This means she needs to start speaking to the heart of what is important for American voters. Every time she discusses her plans as President, she should clearly articulate how it will positively and tangibly impact their daily lives.

While her most passionate remarks have focused on criticising Mr Trump’s character and undermining confidence in him, this is only a small part of winning over new voters. As the lesser-known candidate, her strongest statements should have centred on key issues and their direct impact on voters to truly make a difference. And in particular, she needed to better counteract Mr Trump’s criticism of her shift in policy positions and his claim that she hasn’t achieved her proposed changes already since she in the White House.

For both Mr Trump and Vice President Harris, this debate lacked the substance of clear policy positions – an area where Harris needed to win. Neither candidate presented as many cogent arguments on key issues as they should have. Harris made mostly innocuous remarks, and while she succeeded in putting Trump on the defensive, neither of them truly took the lead on the critical issues in the way they should have.

Vice President Harris knew that her strength in this debate would be her articulation and that Mr Trump’s weakness would be his pugnacity, his tendency to bloviate and go on tangents, and his fondness for exaggeration and mendacious claims. By baiting him into the behaviour we have all come to expect from him, she could appear composed and steady, while he would appear turbulent.

This positioning started before either candidate took to the podium. Many outlets were speculating whether Mr Trump and Vice President Harris would shake hands before their debate – something that has not occurred since Donald Trump and Hillary Clinton debated for the first time in 2016. Harris undoubtedly understood the optics of this moment – it’s her job to know – and instantly ingratiated herself as the bigger person by purposefully crossing to Trump’s side of the room to initiate the handshake.

For his part, Mr Trump habitually referred to President Biden as simply ‘Biden’, while almost exclusively referring to Vice President Harris as ‘her’ or ‘she’. While this doesn’t reflect well on the former President, likeability holds less influence at this stage of the election campaign. Perhaps even more importantly, voters have grown accustomed to Mr Trump’s casual disrespect toward his opponents, particularly when they are women. This behaviour is nothing new and, as a result, it merely becomes a talking point rather than a voting determinant for Americans.

It is always better to show, and not tell, when it comes to portraying how well or how poorly something is done. Vice President Harris employed this principle well by provoking reactions from Mr Trump. She didn’t have to spend time describing him as volatile, because he demonstrated himself as such. It was disappointing that Harris didn’t use this principle when calling out Mr Trump’s lies. It would have been more impactful to correct the facts rather than to simply call him a liar, as this would have further distanced her articulate, level-headed approach from his.

Ultimately, this debate served up what was expected of each of the leaders’ personal brands. But was it enough to sway undecided voters? Marginally. Mr Trump tapped into the bubbling anger that many Americans are feeling, while Vice President Harris provided a more resolute image that many are looking for.

People will say Vice President Harris won the debate because of her articulate and composed performance, but this only matters to voters who pick a leader instead of a party that aligns with their values. For those who are unsure of the issues and what each candidate’s policies will mean for their daily lives, there was not enough substance in this debate to help make an easy voting decision.

Phoebe Netto is managing director of Pure Public Relations