With roughly three weeks remaining before Election Day, and early voting already underway across much of the country, there’s nothing subtle about Kamala Harris’ closing message — or its intended audience. Politico reported, for example, on the Democratic vice president’s newest television ad:
Kamala Harris’ campaign is out with a new ad targeting Republican voters in the battleground state of Arizona that features the GOP mayor of Mesa saying that he is a “lifelong Republican” but he has “always put country over party.”
In the spot, Mayor John Giles, who helps lead Arizona Republicans for Harris, tells viewers, “I know Donald Trump’s second term would be all about himself. That’s why, like so many other Republicans, I cannot support Donald Trump. Kamala Harris and I may not agree on everything, but I do know that she will always put country first.”
The message was part of a larger and unsubtle push. Late last week, for example, the Democratic nominee held an event in Arizona — speaking in front of a backdrop featuring the phrase “Country Over Party” — where Harris vowed to convene a bipartisan council of policy advisers if she wins the White House.
A few days earlier, during an appearance on ABC’s “The View,” Harris also said, “You asked me what is the difference between Joe Biden and me — that will be one of the differences. I’m going to have a Republican in my Cabinet.”
The week before that, the incumbent vice president held a campaign event in Wisconsin alongside former House Republican Conference Chair Liz Cheney. (There were, of course, “Country Over Party” signs behind them, too.)
There’s no great mystery here. Harris and her team, mindful of the fact that the presidential race is incredibly close and competitive, is taking deliberate steps to reach out beyond her party’s base. The goal, obviously, is to appeal to independents and disaffected Republicans, with an emphasis on bipartisanship and patriotism.
Of course, Trump is pitching a closing message of his own, and the qualitative differences tell us a great deal, not only about the candidates, but also about their electoral strategy.
As Harris tries to expand her reach and appeal, the former Republican president isn’t making any meaningful attempt to motivate anyone outside his far-right base. The Washington Post, for example, reported in the wake of his ugly campaign rally in Aurora, Colorado:
Donald Trump is leaning into a nativist, anti-immigrant message in the final stage of his third presidential campaign, advancing a closing argument centered on fearmongering, falsehoods and stereotypes about migrants as polls show his edge on economic issues fading.
The conventional wisdom has long held that national candidates make appeals to their respective bases during the presidential primaries, before ultimately targeting the center as Election Day draws closer. The GOP nominee clearly has no use for that model.
By and large, Trump appears to have come to the conclusion that the surest way back to the White House is through an anti-immigrant message. With this in mind, the former president has already raised the prospect of militarized deportations and mass detention camps. He’s also echoed Adolph Hitler’s “Mein Kampf,” complaining about those whom he believes are “poisoning the blood of our country.”
But that was the start, not the end, of a radical pitch. In recent days, the Republican candidate has done everything from accusing immigrants of spreading “highly contagious” diseases to talking up eugenics to raising the prospect of executions. He’s begun speaking with greater frequency about deporting people who entered the United States legally.
On Friday night in Nevada, Trump said immigrants were blocking Americans from enrolling children in public schools or finding a bed in local hospitals. Hours earlier, in Colorado, the Republican vowed to send “elite squads” into areas nationwide to conduct deportation raids — a promise he echoed over the weekend.
A Politico analysis of 20 recent Trump speeches found that the Republican’s rhetoric has become more overtly “racist” — and his messaging “is getting darker.”
I won’t pretend to know which of these competing approaches — Harris’ broader appeals vs. Trump’s narrow appeals — will prove effective, but those suggesting there are no real differences between the major party nominees have no idea what they’re talking about.
