With about three weeks to go before Election Day and early voting already underway in much of the country, there’s nothing subtle about Kamala Harris’ closing message — or its intended audience. For example, Politico reported on the Democratic vice president’s latest television commercial:
Kamala Harris’ campaign is out with a new ad aimed at Republican voters in the battleground state of Arizona, in which the Republican mayor of Mesa says he is a “lifelong Republican” but has “always put country before party.”
Mayor John Giles, who is helping lead Arizona Republicans for Harris, tells viewers on the spot: “I know Donald Trump’s second term would be all about himself. That’s why I, like so many other Republicans, cannot support Donald Trump. Kamala Harris and I may not agree on everything, but I do know she will always put country first.”
The message was part of a larger and unsubtle impulse. Late last week, for example, the Democratic nominee held an event in Arizona — speaking in front of a backdrop that included the phrase “Country Over Party” — where Harris promised to convene a bipartisan council of policy advisers if she wins the White House.
A few days earlier, during an appearance on ABC’s “The View,” Harris also said, “You asked me what the difference is between Joe Biden and me — that’s going to be one of the differences.” I will have a Republican in my cabinet.”
The week before, the sitting vice president held a campaign event in Wisconsin with former House Republican Conference Chair Liz Cheney. (Of course, there were also “Country Over Party” signs behind them.)
There is no great mystery here. Harris and her team, aware that the presidential race is incredibly tight and competitive, are taking deliberate steps to reach beyond her party’s base. The goal, of course, is to appeal to independents and disaffected Republicans, with an emphasis on bipartisanship and patriotism.
Of course, Trump himself is pitching a closing message, and the qualitative differences tell us a lot, not only about the candidates, but also about their electoral strategy.
As Harris seeks to expand her reach and appeal, the former Republican president is making no meaningful attempt to motivate anyone outside his far-right base. For example, the Washington Post reported in the aftermath of his ugly campaign rally in Aurora, Colorado:
Donald Trump is leaning toward a nativist, anti-immigrant message in the final stages of his third presidential campaign, delivering a closing argument centered on fear-mongering, untruths and stereotypes about migrants, as polls show his lead on economic issues fading .
Conventional wisdom has long maintained that national candidates appeal to their respective bases during presidential primaries before ultimately targeting the center as Election Day approaches. The GOP nominee clearly has no use for that model.
Overall, Trump appears to have concluded that the surest path back to the White House is through an anti-immigrant message. With this in mind, the former president has already raised the prospect of militarized deportations and mass detention camps. He also reiterated Adolf Hitler’s Mein Kampf, in which he lamented those he believes are “poisoning the blood of our country.”
But that was the beginning, not the end, of a radical pitch. The Republican candidate has done everything from blaming immigrants in recent days spread of ‘highly contagious’ diseases from discussing eugenics to raising the prospect of executions. He is starting to speak more often about deporting people who have entered the United States legally.
On Friday evening in Nevada, Trump said immigrants prevented Americans from enrolling children in public schools or finding a bed in local hospitals. Hours earlier, in Colorado, the Republican promised that send “elite squads” to areas across the country to carry out deportation raids – a promise he reiterated this weekend.
A Politico analysis of 20 of Trump’s recent speeches found that the Republican’s rhetoric has become more overtly “racist” — and his messages are “getting darker.”
I won’t pretend to know which of these competing approaches — Harris’ broader appeals versus Trump’s narrow appeals — will prove effective, but those who suggest there are no real differences between the major party nominees have no idea what they are talking about.
This article was originally published on MSNBC.com
