Mahoney on US Presidential Contest
Mahoney on US Presidential Contest
Timothy Mellon gave $50 million to Trump's super PAC and has donated more than $150 million in 2024 election cycle. Mike Bloomberg has given tens of millions to Democrat Super PACs.
Featured columnist Prof. Josef Gregory Mahoney joined #cgtn World Insight with Tian Wei and Democratic Communications Strategist Spencer Critchley to discuss the #dnc and the US presidential campaigns.
Hillary Clinton spoke of a glass ceiling for women being broken with Harris' rise Could this help the campaign or backfire?
It's important to trot out the old warhorses to show the party has indeed rallied around Harris despite the strange circumstances of her nomination, and Obama certainly didn't hurt her; but I don't think a lot of swing voters were happy to see Clinton, Biden or Jesse Jackson. One of the slogans for the night was "no going back," meaning no return to Trump, and this message was undermined in part by some of these figures.
On the one hand identity politics is a cornerstone of US society and politics, and both parties play this game. On the other hand, both also say it shouldn't matter and point fingers at each other for emphasizing race and gender...
We must recall that Clinton lost college-educated women voters against Trump despite his rather sordid and well-known history with women, so we can't say that gender was a compelling issue then for many women.
The key difference now is there's a new generation of voters and many are unhappy with a #trump #ussc that overturned Roe v. Wade, and many believe he's guilty of sexual assault. So while Clinton will reinforce the gender argument while also painting her own failed candidacy as a victim of patriarchy--dubious--the deeper issue is probably not Harris' gender but whether enough women believe Trump is a danger to their well-being. The numbers favour #harris presently.
Both parties are keen for labor #union support. Who's winning?
Trump's populism has made significant inroads with union workers, particularly his narratives about reshoring jobs and rectifying trade imbalances, especially with #china. Biden's record on labor is better that Trump's but hardly stellar, and trade imbalances under Biden have worsened again. It's not surprising many unions are lining up again at the DNC. The question is whether voters, including union workers, see unions as part of problem or solution. While both major parties have moved to the right since the Clinton presidency, unions have generally accommodated Democrats as the lesser of two evils. This still seems to be holding to some extent, but it's no guarantee of votes on Election Day.
What are the chances of a debate? Who'd benefit the most?
Harris definitely wants one, but will probably have to accept conditions imposed by Trump, including his preferred network, host and format.
Trump is a poor debater but can be an effective performer against a weak opponent. That said, he lost against Clinton in 2016, he lost against Biden in 2020. It's a mistake to say he defeated Biden this year; better to say Biden was past his prime. Harris can debate effectively and would bait Trump's worst instincts, which might play well with his base but not among swing voters.
Featured columnist Prof. Josef Gregory Mahoney joined #cgtn The Hub with Wang Guan to discuss the US presidential election.
How do you see campaign finance shaping this election?
First, we're seeing fast moving shifts in donations shaped by current events, the ability to monetise new developments in real time, like Trump's legal issues, Biden's debate performance and the Trump assassination attempt, Biden's withdrawal, the Democrats quickly closing ranks around Harris, sparking a surge for her...
Second, competition between billionaires. Timothy Mellon recently gave $50 million to Trump's super PAC and has donated more than $150 million in 2024 election cycle, believed to be a record, while Mike Bloomberg has given tens of millions to Democrats...
Harris appears to have an advantage among young, who are heavily influenced by online media. Butt will young voters actually show up and vote?
There's been a significant uptick in young people joining the Harris campaign as volunteers, mobilizing in part because they tend to support younger and more progressive candidates. While many KOLs have supported the Democrats, we shouldn't underestimate the power of conservative commentary, including some of the biggest influencers in the US, like Joe Rogan, Elon Musk, and others, who favor Trump.
The bottom line is young people showed up for Obama and they are more likely to show up for Harris than Biden. We'll have to see if they remain energized.
Given the increasing influence of social media and digital platforms on political campaigns, what new trends are you observing in how these platforms affect voter engagement and campaign strategies?
First, the market for political advertising this election cycle has been estimated at roughly $16 billion in the 2024 cycle, 30% increase over 2020.
Second, we've seen campaigns paying more attention to engagement rates, the role of Al, and attempts to manipulate algorithms. US billionaire Mark Cuban recently said this election being decided substantially by Al-generated algorithms, and whichever campaign was most effective at gaming them. We might recall here that Obama's victory in his second election has been attributed largely to being at the then-cutting edge of using technology to direct voter turnout, and no doubt both campaigns are mindful of such lessons in the broader
Third, last election large US companies felt pressure to support social media campaigns like #blm and #metoo, which benefited Biden. This election there's no comparable campaign underway and corporates are being less direct anyway. They need to support certain causes to be part of the conversation and not alienate customers, but more indirectly to avoid voters on the other side.
Fourth, we may see October and even November surprises fuelled by a tsunami of viral media campaigns, including disinformation and deep fakes, already present in part, but sequenced late to shape opinions at the last minute, before campaigns can adequately respond.
