The replacement of Joe Biden with Vice President Kamala Harris as the Democratic candidate has upended the US presidential race in a way few predicted. Harris now has a mild edge in national polling over Republican candidate Donald Trump (Biden was several points behind) and has injected new enthusiasm into a party that had been demoralised by Biden’s age and disastrous debate performance.
Undoubtedly, Harris has benefited hugely from being a fresh and relatively youthful face in a rematch that the majority of Americans abhorred, which pit two unpopular and polarising candidates of 78 and 81 against each other.
But to steer this towards marketing – Harris has also managed to pull off a remarkable rebrand, going from unsuccessful 2020 contender and second fiddle in an unpopular administration to something resembling an insurgent candidate. The vice presidency, often described as one of the worst jobs in American politics, offers little in the way of formal power and limited opportunity to build a distinctive profile (as parodied in the US comedy series Veep). Harris has struggled to define herself in the role, and until recently she did worse in both approval ratings and in head-to-head match-ups with Trump than Biden did.
So how has Harris turned it around? In a word – authenticity. She appears to have thrived by leaning into her personality, seeming at ease with herself in a way many politicians struggle to achieve. What has stood out most about Harris’s presidential campaign has been its embracing of a sense of positivity, irreverence and humour. Clips of her joking about “falling out of a coconut tree”, dancing with children and her famous (or infamous) laugh have already gone viral on social media. Social media has generally been a channel where Trump had the advantage, but with Harris in place of Biden this seems to have flipped.
The refreshed Harris persona has connected with popular culture in a way that the octogenarian Biden was unable to. Celebrity endorsements have rolled in, from Ariana Grande to Barbra Streisand. English musician Charli XCX, who released the hit album “Brat” in June, posted “kamala IS brat” on Twitter after she became the candidate, ascribing to Harris the hedonistic, youthful attitude to life depicted in the album. Notably, her campaign embraced the label, stylising its Twitter page background in the same colour and font as the album cover.
The choice of Minnesota governor Tim Walz as her vice presidential candidate this week is another example of the campaign’s brand consistency. Walz rose in the selection process above far higher profile candidates such as Pennsylvania governor Josh Shapiro after going viral for calling Trump and his running mate JD Vance “weird” – an attack line that the Harris campaign has now embraced. He embodies the tone of the campaign, which is positive and humorous, and is cutting through in a political contest which many think will be decided by “vibes” rather than issues.
The success of this rebranding effort is evident in the fact that the usually cunning Trump has struggled to define his new opponent. While Trump’s “Crooked Hillary” attack on Hillary Clinton in 2016 connected with decades of distrust and resentment of Clinton on the right of American politics, he has yet to find an attack on Harris that has really stuck or cut through with the wider public. Attempts to mock her laugh and to recycle the “crooked” line have given way to trying to define her (and Walz) as extreme California left-wingers.
All of this may still not be enough – many polls continue to give Trump an edge in swing states that will decide the election. Harris is associated with an administration which has been broadly unpopular and blamed for failing to tackle inflation and immigration. Warning signs that the US economy may be headed into recession may give Trump, who is more trusted on the economy than the Democrats, the ammunition to attack Harris on substance rather than style. Trump himself has been written off before but has repeatedly managed to turn perceived weaknesses into strengths and bounce back.
And the perennial danger of all “brands” applies – can she deliver on it? How long can an image be sustained once concrete stances have to be taken? If she does win, how long can it last once she is in office and has to make genuinely difficult and polarising decisions?
Nonetheless, in terms of the speed and magnitude of the turnaround, it has already been one of the most effective rebrands in modern political history.
If there is a lesson here for marketers it is that the most effective brands are rooted in consistency and authenticity. Republicans have long played up Harris’s trademark laugh as a weakness or as signifying a lack of seriousness – but Harris has embraced fun as a proxy for a broader sense of positivity and hope.
Photo credit: DoD photo by U.S. Air Force Senior Airman Kevin Tanenbaum
