From age to garbage trap

How Biden’s Campaign Lost the Age Narrative to Trump’s Playbook

“Your article was prescient”, a US colleague pointed out to me as the theme of of “deplorables” and “garbage” dominated this final week of the US election campaign. Joe Biden’s slip, calling Trump supporters “garbage”, reminded us of the moment that cost him momentum. Trump, true to form, quickly turned insult into opportunity, showing yet again his knack for using opposition to rally his base.

It was like a game of political ping pong. A comedian speaking for Trump in Madison Garden gets unwanted attention for referring to Puerto Rico as an “island of garbage” and a PR disaster was in the making. As Democrats leapt on the chance to go on the offensive, Biden unwittingly threw the advantage back, calling Trump supporters “garbage”. Trump’s response? Rolling up in a garbage truck with a sign declaring, “They call us garbage”. It was his “deplorables” moment all over again, gifted by the Democrats’ poor narrative control.What we are seeing again and again this campaign is what we can consider as “head and heart” inflections. Democrats play to common sense, Trump plays on emotion.  “They call me a facist, so YOU all are facists”, (not to mention garbage).  Any neuroscientist can tell you, emotion drives action. Clinton and Obama were naturals at connecting with people emotionally, but Biden and Harris have struggled. Trump, meanwhile, is a simply genius in playing on emotions.

Few battles highlight this better than the one waged over Joe Biden’s age. Biden’s 2024 campaign found itself grappling with a potent question: “Aren’t you too old to run for President?” It wasn’t just a “gotcha question”—it was the kind of rhetorical grenade that can derail even the most seasoned politicians. And Biden’s team, instead of diffusing it, accidentally set it off. The result? A campaign narrative that focused more on his gait than his governance, more on stumbles than strategy.

It wasn’t just a “gotcha question”—it was the kind of rhetorical grenade that can derail even the most seasoned politicians.

The problem wasn’t Biden himself. His decades in public service could—and should—have positioned him as the wise elder statesman, calm and unflappable amidst the political storms. But his campaign let the conversation get hijacked. As Biden became meme fodder for his occasional stumbles, Trump, only three years younger, sidestepped the age question with ease. What makes this dynamic so fascinating isn’t the ages themselves—it’s the way the two candidates handled the narrative around them.

Age in leadership is like gravity—inescapable, but manageable. It can either weigh you down or ground you with gravitas, depending on how you wield it. For Biden, the campaign should have framed his 81 years as a testament to endurance and experience. A man who’s seen it all and knows how to steer the ship through turbulent waters has undeniable appeal in uncertain times. Yet the Biden campaign’s response was the equivalent of playing hide-and-seek with the issue. Instead of embracing his age and turning it into an asset, they attempted to downplay it—and, ironically, made it the star of the show.

Trump, on the other hand, handled the age question with the finesse of a seasoned showman. His strategy? Avoid it altogether. For Trump, the trick wasn’t convincing people that he wasn’t old but making sure they were too distracted to care. While Biden’s team scrambled to address concerns about physical gaffes, Trump drowned out those conversations with a firehose of bravado. It’s not that he’s immune to aging—no one is—but he refused to engage with the topic. And he very cleverly referred to “sleepy Joe” all the time.

And this is where Biden’s campaign faltered. They allowed the conversation to be defined by others. Instead of owning the narrative, they reacted to it, putting Biden on the defensive. Public relations rule number one? Never let your opponent write the story. And yet, that’s precisely what happened. Trump’s team made sure Biden’s age wasn’t just a subplot—it was the headline. Meanwhile, Trump’s own age quietly receded into the background, a non-issue even when juxtaposed against the much younger Kamala Harris.

Biden, by contrast, had an entirely different—and arguably more compelling—story to tell. With all his experience, Biden could have been positioned as the reliable, steady hand that the country needed—someone with the wisdom to tackle complex issues, from climate change to geopolitical instability, with nuance and care.

Instead, the campaign’s defensive posture did him no favors. In trying to dodge the age issue, they missed an opportunity to redefine it. Every stumble became a headline, and every gaffe became an indictment of his ability to govern. Rather than selling Biden’s experience as a strength, his team allowed his opponents to spin it as a weakness. It’s a classic PR blunder—if you don’t tell your own story, someone else will tell it for you.

It’s a classic PR blunder—if you don’t tell your own story, someone else will tell it for you.

The 2024 election isn’t just a political race; it’s a masterclass in narrative management. The lesson? In politics, as in life, narratives are inevitable. And when they come at you—whether they’re about age, ability, or experience—you have two choices: Own them or be owned by them. Biden’s campaign may not have chosen the latter on purpose, but by fumbling the response, that’s exactly what happened.

——

This is the second of three short articles looking at how communications strategy and narratives define the outcome of election campaigns.  Next week, we know the outcome and we will reflect on why from a communication point of view.