In this new wave of The Presidential Election, candidates, slogans, diction, and voter excitement are facing major shifts. Will this renewal of the Democratic Party be enough?
“We Are Not Going Back”, Vice President Harris’ slogan shares the idea of marking a new future, strikingly different from President Biden’s “Let’s Finish the Job” mantra, an overly humdrum and dull message. This sharp contrast is evidently shown in their diction, especially in their respective debates against former President Trump. During the June 27th Debate, Biden focused on stability and his incumbency, highlighting his past successes. According to CNN, he said, “We’ve made significant progress from the debacle that was left by President Trump in his – in his last term,” reflecting cautious rhetoric and emphasizing past achievements while not directly addressing the bold future initiatives necessary to appeal to voters seeking significant change. Contrastingly, Harris adopted a different strategy, opting for rhetoric reflecting a progressive, action-oriented vision. During the September 10th Debate, according to ABC, Harris said, “So I think you’ve heard tonight two very different visions for our country. One that is focused on the future and the other that is focused on the past. And an attempt to take us backward. But we’re not going back”, emphasizing that the future of the Democratic Party is one of bold, evolutionary change.
Another interesting difference between their debate performances was their engagement with the audience. Biden spoke in a more conversational tone, often addressing Trump instead of speaking to the viewers. On the other hand, Harris made it a point to hold direct eye contact with the camera, making the American people feel like she was talking directly to them, especially during the sensitive topic of abortion. This choice conveyed a sense of connection and intentional communication with the audience. A striking contrast can also be seen in the material discussed during their respective debates. Biden danced around many of the basic questions asked, and often veered off track, even entertaining a conversation about his golf skills against Trump, which is very unprofessional for a Presidential Debate. While he lost focus at times, he was still able to establish some of his key policy goals, including the American Rescue Plan, continuing job creation, and expanding healthcare coverage through the Affordable Care Act. Harris, however, took a much more progressive stance, emphasizing the need for immediate action on climate change, racial justice, and working towards eliminating student debt. She also promised to focus on climate action, according to ABC, declaring, “Well, the former president had said that climate change is a hoax. And what we know is that it is very real… We know that we can actually deal with this issue. The young people of America care deeply about this issue”. While Harris attempted to stay on topic and answer all questions with her big policy goals, she spared the details about many of her plans, including issues on the economy, foreign policy, and how she will invest in climate solutions with her pro-fracking pledge. This leads voters to wonder if her words have any weight behind them.
While the extent to which this change in strategy was successful in increasing excitement within the Democratic voter base is still up in the air, the fact that it was a necessary and beneficial change is without a doubt. After the June debate, according to CBS polling, Biden’s favorability among voters aged 18-34 fell by 9 points, largely because of his cautious rhetoric and the same policy proposals as his current term. Many young voters expressed frustration with Biden’s unwillingness to embrace more radical changes on issues like climate action and student debt. In contrast, Harris’s performance during the September debate reinvigorated the Democratic base, with polling showing a 12-point increase in her favorability among younger voters. Additionally, 63% of voters aged 18-34 expressed enthusiasm about her candidacy, directly showing the effectiveness of this renewal. Furthermore, Harris’s polling in key battleground states like Pennsylvania, Michigan, and Arizona improved significantly after the September debate, likely due to her strong performance addressing concerns about healthcare, climate change, and economic recovery, which resonated with undecided voters in these states.
While this renewal seems to have worked, according to the New York Times, “she did very little to distinguish her plans from Biden’s in an election in which the electorate seems hungry for change.” Voters, especially Generation Z, are eager for bold policies and a fresh approach to leadership. Attempting to renew the party so close to the election date takes fierce action and drastic changes. Harris scratched the surface, but time will only tell if that is enough to have success in the 2024 election and counter the Republican platform, particularly in key battleground states.
Kyra Meyer ‘27 studies in the College of Arts & Sciences. She can be reached at k.l.meyer@wustl.edu.