Geostrategic Media Political Commentary, Analysis, Security, Defense
Pauline Margot
This upcoming election isn’t just about the clash of two ideologies; it’s a contest between two vastly different moods: hope versus fear.
Why it matters: The contrasting tones of the candidates reflect deeper calculations on how to capture the national mood in 2024. How Americans feel about the state of the nation will heavily influence the outcome.
Former President Trump is doubling down on a campaign fueled by fear—fear of immigration, crime, inflation, and America’s perceived decline. He’s betting that swing voters, worried about the nation’s direction, will embrace his dark vision and seek a protector, even if they aren’t fond of his methods.
In contrast, Vice President Harris is championing hope, betting that Americans are weary of the relentless negativity and yearning for optimism. Her strategy is to position herself as the candidate who can move the country beyond Trump-era conflicts and towards a brighter future.
The big picture: Both fear and hope have been potent forces in American elections over the past two decades. But accurately gauging the national mood is crucial. A miscalculation could spell disaster for a campaign.
Harris’ approach echoes Barack Obama’s successful “hope and change” message. With Obama’s guidance and the expertise of David Plouffe, Harris has shifted away from President Biden’s focus on threats to democracy, adopting instead a forward-looking, optimistic tone with the rallying cry: “We’re not going back.”
Trump, consistent in his messaging since 2016, continues to paint a dystopian picture of America under Democratic leadership. In a nation where only 18% are satisfied with its direction, according to Gallup, Trump sees fertile ground for his grievance-driven politics.
What they’re saying: “There’s a large segment of America that does acknowledge things are tough out there,” says veteran GOP pollster Frank Luntz. “But they’re tired of getting yelled at, and they’re tired of gloom and doom. And they want hope rather than blame.”
Luntz also notes that while Trump remains a “bad news bear” candidate, incessantly negative, Harris is capitalizing on a “joyful warrior” narrative, presenting herself as a leader who can bring back happiness and optimism.
Zoom in: Harris, with allies like Minnesota Governor Tim Walz, is leaning heavily into this optimistic message, emphasizing joy and resilience at campaign events. Walz even went so far as to declare that Republicans are trying to “steal the joy” from America, but that Harris “brings the joy.”
The other side: Trump’s running mate, Senator JD Vance, captures the GOP’s skepticism of this joyful narrative, questioning the sincerity of such optimism in light of the country’s challenges.
Between the lines: Harris benefits from being a new face, one not yet burdened by the perceived failures of the Biden administration. As Frank Luntz points out, while Americans may believe the system is broken, many don’t hold Harris responsible, which could work to her advantage.
In 2024, voters will be asked to choose not just between two candidates, but between two competing visions of America’s future—one hopeful, the other fearful. How they respond to these moods may well determine the nation’s path forward.
