Startling parallels between 2016 and 2024 campaign mistakes

It is amazing how much the democratic campaign strategists ignored the lessons from Hillary Clinton’s loss against Trump in 2016. In my view the parallels are startling. And I am not talking politics here, I am just sticking to my theme of how communications strategy and narratives often define the outcome of election campaigns.

One American friend texted me this week, “You were right, Americans are stupid.” Now, I would never actually say that, nor do I believe it. All I pointed out, simply, was that Trump seemed to be winning — a neutral observation, yet enough to provoke my dear friend’s response. There are a lot of divides to overcome following the past months of campaigns, and it will be interesting to see if the new president can trump it.

In my first comment I warned that branding your opponent a fascist is a dangerous strategy, since that label not only defines the candidate but also alienates his supporters — an eerie echo of the infamous “deplorables” moment in 2016. I rest my case.  In my second comment I argued that Biden and Harris failed to connect emotionally with the voters, a feat that Trump has perfected, almost as if he’s reading from a playbook.

In election campaigns candidates are backed by large teams of communication strategists. I am not surprised that many political commentators are calling for accountability by the democrat campaign leadership. There is widespread anger towards how they spent one billion dollars on losing to Trump.

Here are five factors related to communications strategy and narrative execution that in my view determined the outcome of the 2024 US election campaign:

1. Feelings

Winning voters’ hearts requires more than just policy talk; it requires emotional resonance. Harris, it seems, missed the memo, while Trump’s camp doubled down on it. Campaigns, particularly in this polarized age, thrive on the feeling that candidates ‘get’ their voters, and Trump managed this in spades.

2. Story

It’s an old campaign truth that bashing your competitor won’t carry you to the finish line.  Harris struggled to present a clear, compelling vision, while Trump presented not just a campaign but a ‘movement,’ wrapped in a MAGA vision and tethered to core issues—economy, safety, and security—that struck a chord with his base.

3. Channels

In today’s communication reality you need to be where your voters are.  Trump’s team, operating with fewer resources, executed a clever ‘omnichannel’ approach, reaching supporters directly, often via smartphone, instead of relying on traditional media.  They took advantage of new channels, Joe Rogan’s nearly three-hour interview on YouTube has nearly 50 million views, Harris turned down the opportunity to be on the show!

4. Brand

Trump is a brand; Biden will go into history as the only man to have beaten him. Biden also has a brand, and I am sure many democrats this week will have asked themselves “what if”. But what about Harris? Coming in with lower name recognition, she faced an uphill battle, one that needed risks and boldness to humanize her. Unfortunately, the campaign played it too safe, leaving her brand underdeveloped.

5. Strategy

I have lived all my life trying to ignore people’s colour, origin and views in my dealings with them.  Yet I do agree it would have been a great moment for mankind to have the first female president. But you cannot win over prejudice by projecting it.  Obama got this, the Harris team missed the beat in my view.  Numbers show Latinos voted for Trump, and many African Americans did too.  Martin Luther King famously said “I have a dream that my four little children will one day live in a nation where they will not be judged by the color of their skin, but by the content of their character.”  I think people fundamentally want inclusiveness and those that have suffered injustice, poverty or discrimination want to be heard, but more importantly, they want hope.  The Harris team overplayed dystopia and Opera for sure took it to another level the night before the election day.

Now consider these five factors and the 2016 election vs the 2024 election. I do think the parallels are startling, and yes, we can learn from history.  This concludes my third article on how communication strategy and narrative shape election outcomes.  

We always welcome a good discussion, so do not hesitate to get in touch should you wish to discuss the intricacies of campaign strategy.