Operating under the shadows of a deeply unpopular president, Vice President Kamala Harris remains an unfortunate figure politically. Alongside her, Donald Trump, another infamous figure from the former presidency, witnesses a shift in public opinion. A recent poll conducted by The New York Times and Sienna College indicates a slight edge for Harris when asked about which of these two figures represents ‘change’, securing 46% to Trump’s 44%. However, a larger question looming over their political careers is the tricky definitions of ‘change’ they both struggle with.
During a recent interview, Harris was quizzed about her take on how President Biden served his term and if she would have approached things differently. Her response illustrated an interesting mixture of loyalty and divergence. Perhaps in an attempt to appeal to those across the aisle, she declared her willingness to appoint a Republican to a Cabinet position if she obtains office. A move considered by many as an attempt to project ‘change’.
However, this supposed change disguises Harris’ motivation to maintain the status quo. Losing sight in the intricacies of her answer is a new policy proposition, aiming to extend Medicare benefits to cover home health care expenses for the rapidly aging American population. An interesting policy to propose, but one that undoubtedly raises questions about its practicality and effectiveness.
Still, Harris’ victory, should it happen, could mark a historic event as the first female president of the United States. However, this apparent contrast against the last two office-bearers, including her own former boss, is less about policy and more about image.
Harris’ take-over from Biden as the Democratic nominee brought a wave of excitement within her party, indicating a substantive shift in the race dynamics. Yet, the facade of ‘change’ began to crumble when a survey released by ABC and Ipsos revealed 74% of voters from both parties wish to see Harris divert from the Biden administration’s agenda should she ascend to the presidency.
The same study uncovered a skeptical audience with 65% of the voters believing that Harris will pursue Biden’s agenda further. This skepticism indicates whether Harris can stand on the promise of a distinctive path or if it’s just a strategy to claim the mantle of change.
For Trump, the challenge of presenting himself as the epitome of change is a fraught undertaking. His notorious tendency to utilize the justice system as a tool against opponents has been widely criticized. In a recent interview, Trump tackled questions related to his strategy to reinstate faith in the U.S. justice system.
Defiantly, he implied that his success would serve as his revenge, sparking further scepticism about his intentions. Trump’s famous slogan ‘Make America Great Again’ that nostalgically hints at an ambiguous era in U.S history, remains unchanged in his pursuit to reenter the Oval office.
His political approach seems hell-bent on replicating his first term: more significant tariffs, larger tax reductions, a heightened resistance to NATO, and an extensive deportation program. After his speech at the Republican National Convention, he claimed to have ‘learned a lot’ and assured a ‘very efficient’ future administration.
However, as per the ABC News/Ipsos poll, Trump’s narrative of change didn’t convince the public. With unfavorable polling, 53% of the respondents prefer him to change his governing style in case he wins another term.
This contradicts with merely 33% of the respondents who believe he will bring about a change. The disparity in these figures reflects the electorate’s deeply-rooted skepticism towards his proposed changes.
It appears that despite the yearning for change among the electorate, the faith in these particular candidates to bring it about is significantly dampened. The contrasting voices both vying for the identity of an ‘agent’ of change, offers nothing but token gestures piggybacking on performative sloganeering.
The public awaits a genuine political commitment to change beyond empty rhetoric or attempts to sway public opinion using nostalgia or symbolic appointments.
Ultimately, voters are left navigating this complex grid of change in an era of political paradoxes. They ponder whether the political figures racing for the highest office in the land are capable of representing the substantial and tangible change they’ve been promised, or if it has all been a charade.