During the recent election, it was evident that Donald J. Trump was the dominator in terms of the sheer volume of words spoken. Newly revealed statistics amplify the extent of this domination, especially when stacked against Kamala Harris. Despite Harris having a higher frequency of speaking engagements, it was Trump whose speech duration conclusively outshone her. His extraordinary propensity for verbose communication was showcased in full swing, regardless of its ultimate impact on his electoral fortunes.
The data, aligning with various reports, also shed light on the dynamics between the candidates’ time allocation for events and interviews. Starting from July 23 leading up to the election, Trump dedicated close to 172 hours for his public and media utterances. This stands in stark contrast to Harris’s 69 hours, almost trumped by Trump’s energetic approach to public speaking, thereby exposing that Harris was playing catch-up.
While Harris had the challenging task of maneuvering around the Biden campaign structure, she still manged to prioritize her personal appearances. She made an admirable effort to connect to common people by making appearances at everyday locales such as barbershops, eateries, funeral services, and church gatherings. Yet, most of these appearances were brief and fleeting in nature when compared to Mr. Trump’s considerably lengthier ones.
No stranger to coloring outside the lines, Trump continued this trend by bellwethering in both traditional and emerging media landscapes. His extensive and long speeches became something to anticipate. It is this defiance of conventional norms that set him apart from Harris and allowed him to comfortably surpass her in terms of interview frequency.
The data collected only accounts for recorded events on video and audio platforms and includes instances when the candidates were silent, such as question-asking segments during interviews. Some gatherings, such as press huddles and the famous Harris-Trump debate, were excluded from this calculation due to the absence of these events.
Both candidates exhibited the charismatic ability to draw large crowds to arenas across the nation. While Harris stayed within a safe limit, generally limiting her speeches to thirty minutes or less, Trump typically outshone her with his undeniable stage presence. His speeches often extended to between ninety minutes to two hours, highlighting his passion and his power in keeping audiences captive.
Trump also demonstrated his robust persona through multiple interviews on Newsmax, a popular cable news channel. Despite the channel having spread unsubstantiated news about election fraud in 2020, Trump’s participation didn’t seem to waver. His dedication to connect with his audience included several local radio and TV stations as well.
Interestingly, not all of Trump’s interviews aimed at the most contested states. In an unexpected move, he had a radio interview with WABC in New York a mere fortnight before the election. Remarkably sticking to his style, Trump did not let conventional campaign strategies deter his unique approach.
Kamala Harris, on the other hand, ensured her presence in swing states was publicized. She focused on making her appeal local, making stops at television and radio broadcasters to reach out to potential voters. Yet her ambition of outflanking Trump in the communication game remained unfulfilled.
In an attempt to connect with Hispanic voters, Harris took to Spanish-language broadcasters. Cognizant of the issues faced by Black Americans, she also appeared on Charlamagne tha God’s radio show. Yet, her appearances on Fox News were unable to overshadow Trump’s habitual long speeches.
Trump’s knack for embracing new communication platforms was apparent in his engagement with the podcast genre and streaming interviews. However, this only constituted a minute portion of his total speaking time, yet still demonstrating his versatility.
Comparing the communication strategies of both candidates, it was clear that Trump was more omnipresent, especially in terms of time spent speaking. His unorthodox style of speaking and tendency towards longer speeches continued to set him apart from other politicians, including Harris.
In the tale of Trump’s verbosity versus Harris’s brevity, Trump emerges as the undeniable victor. His speeches brimming with enthusiasm were significantly ubiquitous throughout the course of the election. His speeches emphasized a departure from the traditional, enticing audiences nationwide and setting a precedent for politicos to emulate.