Armed with a bundle of campaign leaflets from the Harris camp, George Pumphrey Jr. approached the doorstep of one North Milwaukee home. He yelled into the digital peephole, naively hoping to engage with the resident inside, who was more invested in their television show than in close encounters with political canvassers. Despite Pumphrey’s plea, the resident remained unconcerned, requesting him to leave the propaganda-laden pamphlets at the door-step. Pumphrey used to tirelessly knock doors back in 2008 for Barack Obama campaigning, but now at 75, he admits that it’s a struggle to connect with the citizens of Sherman Park, a primarily Black neighborhood he used to call home.
He believes the only effective approach is face-to-face interactions, but with the rising social tensions and the allure of misinformation, such old-school methods have become alarmingly challenging. Pumphrey’s struggle might not necessarily mark the end of door-to-door canvassing but more a reinvention of it, particularly in neighborhoods where potential voters are hard to persuade. However, it’s reliant on the notion that the same technologies that help people dodge doorstep canvassing may also be vehicles to encourage electoral participation.
A little further into Sherman Park, a campaign organizer alongside a volunteer began their evening endeavor of pitching Harris to spectators at a youth football game. Despite their best efforts, the overwhelmingly indifferent response was not quite what they were hoping for. They succeeded in engaging in a brief interaction with one Ms. McToy, who nonchalantly entertained their political sales pitch while keeping her thoughts to herself.
Away from the main crowd, Tierra Drake, a 40-year old child care director, reluctantly offered her contact details. However, she was upfront about her skepticism, expressing that she had become jaded by the repetitive, empty political promises. Surprisingly, Drake seemed more inclined towards Donald J. Trump, given his history of delivering on his pledges, despite the alarming nature of some of his propositions.
Drake’s deep-rooted skepticism is indicative of a broader societal sentiment that politicians often make promises they do not intend to fulfill. It seems the campaign strategy of individually persuading voters did not bear the anticipated fruits in Sherman Park. The belief previously held by the Democrats, that their races will be won by the narrowest of margins, might have to be revisited considering the evident voter disillusionment.
Contrarily, the opposition is employing traditional canvassing more robustly while homing in on issues directly impacting the locals, notably the economy and advocating for school-choice. It’s a stark divergence from the Democrats’ methods, perhaps exposing the latter’s disconnect from the ground realities.
Back to Pumphrey, who hadn’t managed to engage with even half the people on his list by the time his canvassing window closed. Across multiple blocks, one notable observation was the conspicuous absence of representatives from the opposing campaign. That didn’t prevent Pumphrey from chirping at the sight of other disjointed and seemingly disoriented volunteers aimlessly meandering from one house to the next.
Pumphrey’s superficial jesting couldn’t conceal his mounting frustration. He managed to engage in a bizarre conversation with a local about conspiracy theories on government control over weather. One woman boldly expressed that her faith-based decision to abstain from politics was only second to her mother’s insistence to back Harris.
However, most of his visits resulted in the same old note-taking — ‘Not home, not home, not home’, typed repetitively into the campaign’s mobile app. What is supposed to be an efficient mapping tool seemed more like an itinerary of failed endeavors, capturing an increasing number of addresses that future volunteers would futilely attempt to engage.
Overall, the Democrats’ peculiar campaign strategy seems divorced from effective political traditions. Instead of focusing on universally impactful issues and clear messaging, they’ve resorted to unproductive door-to-door canvassing, conspiracy theory debates, and mockery of campaign territories.
A more reflective approach would be to listen to the doubts and concerns of people like Ms. Drake who are exasperated by hollow political promises. It seems like this time around, siding with the outspoken opponent promises a more dependable political outcome.
The apparent inefficiency of the Democrats’ canvassing approach, coupled with their ill-considered campaign messages, provides much food for thought. It not only questions their understanding of voters but also points towards a solemn shift from traditionally active and effective campaigning.