The former U.S. President, Donald Trump, has long been adept at leveraging racial tension to further his political ambitions. His recent comments, implying that Vice President Kamala Harris manipulated her racial identity to gain political traction, have stoked outrage among Democrats. Although some Republicans have distanced themselves from these remarks, the persistence of racially charged language in Trump’s political interactions suggests that racial divisiveness may become a central Republican argument as Election Day approaches.
An anonymous informant within Trump’s team expressed the view that focusing on ‘identity politics’ isn’t necessary in their campaign against Harris. They highlighted the perceived extensive liberalism of Harris as a threat, citing her record on issues regarding the U.S.-Mexico border, crime, economics, and international relations. This strategic viewpoint seems to be at odds with Trump’s continued public comments regarding Harris’ heritage.
Despite this internal view, Trump continued to challenge Harris’ racial identity publicly, sharing an image of her dressed in traditional Indian clothing, suggesting a dissonance between his own messaging and his campaign’s collective strategy. His racially-charged comments have not found approval universally within his party. Senator Cynthia Lummis from Wyoming, who supports Trump, expressed that focusing on race and identity is ‘unhelpful to anyone’ in this electoral period.
In the aftermath of President Joe Biden stepping down from the race and endorsing Harris, Trump has had to reorient his campaign from one targeting an older, declining white male, to one against an energetic, Black female contender who is generating more donor support and excitement. His response has been to fall back on a familiar tactic: attacking Harris based on her race.
During a recent convention of Black Journalists, Trump stirred controversy by suggesting that Harris had manipulated voters by changing her racial self-presentation. He publicly questioned whether she identifies as Indian or Black, effectively launching another racially-charged indictment against her. Drumming up further controversy, his campaign team showcased old news yearlines at a Pennsylvania rally, labeling Harris as the ‘first Indian-American senator.’
The racial rhetoric of Trump and his vice presidential pick, Ohio Senator JD Vance, has extended to claiming that Harris was a ‘chameleon,’ changing her identity as it suited her. Harris, who attended the historically Black Howard University and was a member of the Alpha Kappa Alpha sorority, has consistently identified as both Black and Indian American throughout her career.
Trump’s campaign teams argue that his race-focused messages might draw some Black voters. However, they haven’t shown much defense for his specific racially-charged language. They prioritize the comparison of Trump’s and Harris’ records, particularly regarding the cost of living, border security, immigration policies, and other salient topics.
The sentiment among swing voters, as revealed through a focus group study by Republican pollster Frank Luntz, suggests that while Harris could be criticized based on her gender, racial attacks may ultimately drive away critical voters. In contrast, fallout could take place in favor of those with racially divisive strategies, as the political climate has significantly changed since Trump’s birther movement that questioned Barack Obama’s citizenship.
Eugene Craig, the ex-vice chair of the Maryland Republican Party, posits that while Trump could have exploited the NABJ convention to his advantage, his arguments may backfire as offensive rather than appealing. Craig stressed that the Black community, inclusive of Republicans, strongly disapproves any perceived disrespect towards their racial identity.
Trump’s history of employing racial attacks predates his presidential career. He has notoriously questioned Obama’s birthplace, stereotyped Mexican immigrants negatively, and defended white supremacist activities. These actions, intermingled with his moot suggestions about Harris’ eligibility to be vice president and association with known white supremacists, continue to be clear demonstrations of his racially charged political strategy.
Regardless of Trump’s previous electoral successes, his racially focused tactics have raised concerns among his critics. They worry that his strategies might influence crucial segments of the electorate, potentially swaying the decision to elect a Black woman as president for the first time in American history.
A strategist from the Harris campaign sees Trump’s attacks as an opportunity to remind voters of Trump’s propensity to create chaos and division. However, the advisor, granted anonymity to disclose internal strategies, warned against ceding to Trump’s racial attacks at the expense of broader policy-focused campaigning. The advisor believes engaging with such attacks might feed into Trump’s narratives.
Vice President Harris, responding during a gathering of a historically Black sorority, characterized Trump’s attack as a repetition of ‘divisiveness and disrespect.’ That Trump’s racially-targeted approach might be finding traction among his white male supporters is evident in states like Arizona. However, significant Republican voices, such as Ben Shapiro, have expressed their disagreement with focusing on questions of racial identity.
Illustrating this divergence, Shapiro shared a hypothetical crossroads sign. One direction pointed toward ‘attacking Kamala’s records, lies, and radicalism,’ while the other asked, ‘Is she really Black?’ Shapiro emphasized the importance of the 2024 elections, criticizing superfluous racial accusations as a distraction from crucial matters.