Skip to main content

Trump's battle against "Washington elites" is neverending

Corina Lacatus’ study Populism and the 2016 American Election: Evidence from Official Press Releases and Twitter defines populism as “a type of political rhetoric predicated on the moral vilification of elites, who are perceived as self-serving and undemocratic.” Lacatus identifies Trump as the populist candidate of 2016, with him labeling Democrats as the elites, saying they aren’t helping the white middle class of America. From what I can gather, Trump would actually be considered one of the true “elites,” seeing as he’s a “self-serving and undemocratic” billionaire. Lacatis said no matter the ideological leaning of the candidate, populists promise to upset the status quo with one that centralizes the people, not the elites. Trump’s wide appeal to the white middle class definitely took a populist approach in 2016 and may have secured him the election. 

In my opinion, the two most interesting findings in Lacatus’ study are the differences in the three candidates’ uses of official press releases versus Twitter posts and the frequency of themes repeated in Trump’s tweets. In terms of the candidate’s Twitter page, Lacatus found that his three most tweeted-about topics were critiques of Democrats, mentions of Washington elites, and critiques of Republicans. The last one surprised me at first, but then I remembered that a main draw to Trump’s campaign was his lack of government experience. A lot of conservatives were also frustrated with “Washington elites” on both sides of the aisle, so a candidate with no political experience was refreshing for them. The frequency that Trump posted about these themes certainly reaffirmed Lacatus’ claim that Trump was the populist candidate in 2016. 

Hilary Clinton’s campaign relied on official press releases and Twitter posts to disseminate her policies to her supporters, with most of the information coming from official releases and being repeated on her Twitter. With Bernie Sanders, his campaign mainly communicated with supporters via press releases, not focusing on Twitter as much. His releases were noticeably longer and denser than both Clinton and Trump’s, but whether that was because he was trying to inform the public about himself or trying to appeal to highly educated voters is debatable. Unsurprisingly, Donald Trump’s campaign relied the least on official releases and the most on Twitter posts. His press releases were often one paragraph and used very simple language, which makes sense, as many of his supporters are the least educated in our country. 

From what I’ve observed this year, the prevailing agenda pushed by both candidates during the 2024 election was either immigration, the economy, or abortion access. Both Trump and Harris focused heavily on these three issues, with Harris focusing more on abortion and Trump on immigration issues. Trump’s campaign ads called Harris a failed “border czar” who allowed illegal immigration to rise exponentially, and Harris’ campaign targeted women and promised to protect their right to choice and abortion access. Both candidates vowed to improve the economy and protect the middle class, with Harris offering tax cuts for lower-income Americans and taxing the rich, and Trump wanting tariffs on imports to attempt and bring production back to America. Election exit polls from across the country identified these three topics as the most important to voters. 

Trump's TikTok never really posted about policies or campaign promises. Harris', on the other hand, posted every day about policies she wished to enact, issues important to her campaign, and endorsements from voters and notable figures alike. Trump took the same "populist" take he's pushed for nearly a decade, attacking "Washington elites" and "the left" for ruining America, while Harris took the populist stance that billionaires and conservatives like Trump and his supporters are actually what is harming American democracy. It's interesting to see how candidates take the populist idea and flip it to fit their campaign and morals.

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Revisiting "Harvest of Shame": How social media would transform the narrative

CBS and Murrow’s “Harvest of Shame” is one of the best examples of advocacy journalism in history. From a journalistic standpoint, the documentary is well-filmed, contains several hard-hitting and valuable interviews, and a good balance of emotions and facts to educate and influence the audience. People from different sides of the issues were given chances to speak. The documentary opened up with harrowing accounts and heartbreaking interviews with some of the migrant workers and ended with a succinct call to action from Murrow, urging Americans to fight for the migrant workers because they don’t have the political power to advocate for themselves.      “Harvest of Shame” is a perfect work of advocacy journalism that served to educate Americans on the plight of migrant workers and uplift the group. Airing the documentary right after Thanksgiving was also a genius decision, because as Murrow said, the food on America’s tables would not be there if not for the overlooked la...

Strategic communication on TikTok

Strategic communication is the method by which people in power, at least their public relations teams, control media narratives to spin stories in favor of their employer. This can apply to businesses, celebrities, and politicians alike.There are four components of strategic communication: message shaping, message salience, message credibility, and message framing. How do we see these strategies utilized in the modern day, especially on social media platforms like TikTok? Shaping is when public relations representatives generate simple messages and themes to show the audience, which the audience then absorbs and recalls when the specific issues are brought up. On TikTok, this can be seen by brands and politicians using hashtags and short campaign slogans to succinctly share their message to the audience. Message salience refers to the importance of repetition in getting one's message across. Communication channels need to be inundated with the simple messages to ensure they reach t...

How are candidates capitalizing on the prevailing narratives of this year's election?

In the 2024 General Election, a prevailing narrative that has taken hold is the fight for women’s reproductive rights and immigration. Kamala Harris’ campaign has highlighted her intentions to reinstate Roe v. Wade and statewide access to abortions and reproductive healthcare, while Donald Trump’s campaign is sticking with the recently-adopted “leave it up to the states” motto. While Harris’ platform focuses on women’s issues, Trump’s campaign is still focusing on illegal immigration and the “border crisis.” Many of Trump’s ads attack migrants and Harris’ policies as vice president, calling her the “border czar” and using foreboding music to make viewers associate immigration with feelings of unease and distrust. That can be seen in this advertisement , as well as many of the other ads from his team. Meanwhile, the Harris/Walz campaign has taken the platform that women have the right to choose and Roe v. Wade protections must be reinstated. Her ads take a gentle, empathetic approach to...