In an article published by The Nation on October 18, 2024, Zephyr Teachout provides an analysis of the challenges faced by Democrats, particularly focusing on Vice President Kamala Harris’s campaign strategy in the context of the upcoming elections. The article highlights the party’s struggle to articulate a clear narrative on economic issues, often failing to identify specific culprits responsible for the continuing economic hardships of American workers. This omission may be affecting voter confidence.
Teachout draws an analogy from her past experience as a criminal defense attorney, emphasizing the importance of identifying an alternative perpetrator in making a convincing case. She suggests that a similar approach in politics could help Harris connect better with voters by providing a clear explanation of who is responsible for current economic difficulties.
Harris has performed well on issues such as abortion, where she clearly attributes blame to the Supreme Court and Donald Trump for the loss of healthcare access for women. However, when it comes to the economy, Harris’s narrative lacks clarity. Despite proposing various progressive policies in speeches, she often misses articulating who is responsible for the problems these policies aim to address. Attempts to blame Trump for economic distress do not resonate with voters’ experiences, as many do not associate the onset of their financial troubles with recent events like the 2016 election or the Covid-19 pandemic.
Teachout examines the recent Harris-Walz rural policy rollout, noting the absence of a clear antagonist in their presentation. While the proposed policies include valuable elements like support for local pharmacies and protection against land consolidation, they fail to address the grievances rural voters have against monopolistic practices in agriculture and pharmacy chains that have undermined local enterprises.
The article argues that ignoring the historical injustices perpetrated by Trump and others is not a strategic move. Voters prefer a narrative that identifies culprits and explains why their economic situations are dire, rather than a vague promise of future improvements. The current lack of a clear economic villain is cited as a potential reason why some voters still prefer Trump over Harris when considering economic issues.
Teachout suggests that Harris still has time to adjust her strategy. By focusing on issues such as trade policies, corporate monopolies, and the influence of dark money in politics, she could construct a more resonant narrative linking economic difficulties to specific actions by powerful entities. This could enhance voter confidence and provide a source of hope by demonstrating an understanding of the root causes of their struggles.
The article concludes by stressing the importance of storytelling in political discourse, particularly in identifying those responsible for economic issues to gain voter trust. It critiques the tendency of Democratic strategists to focus solely on future plans without addressing past failures, which can undermine the potential for a decisive electoral victory.
