Mark Yonkman is the founder of the newly created Super PAC Reclaim the Rural Vote and a rural vote messaging expert. Mark’s background straddles not only the rural and urban worlds but the black/white, gay/straight, and farm/professional worlds as well. Read more of his Rural Whisperer columns here.
Kamala Harris’ Ellipse speech was sold as her opportunity to reach persuadable voters. I know many people in that camp.
I thought the Ellipse was a brilliant location because without saying a word, voters would hear how a speech should sound in front of the White House, in stark contrast with the chaos of Trump’s speech at the same location.
Voters are smart enough to connect those dots without being told.
Boy, was I wrong! Kamala spent almost half of her time talking about Trump.
Kamala should be talking about herself and her vision
Kamala started out by talking about Trump and bashing him. I advise all of my Democratic friends who are canvassing or otherwise reaching out to voters on the fence to never say a negative word about Trump.
If you’re trying to persuade a persuadable voter, don’t bash their current team. Especially Trump – everyone knows exactly who he is. And how bad he is. Yet they still most likely voted for him twice before.
She started with a rehash of the Jan. 6 events. At this point, everyone’s view on this matter is settled. We all fall into one of three camps:
- The first is that everyone who went to the capitol is an extremist.
- That there were a few extremists who started the chaos, but that many of the people who went into the capitol just naïvely got caught up in the mischief.
- That everyone who went into the capitol is a patriot.
Persuadables fall in the second group.
Harris said they were all extremists. Kamala is not on the same page as a persuadable – why point that out? This is a popular vote topic.
Persuadables are looking to find out who Kamala is and what her policies are. So, tell them.
A $4,000 tax or 20% national sales tax reminds rural voters how over-dependent we have become on China
I wrote before that in the rural Upper Midwest, the $4,000 Harris ads are serving to point out to voters how extreme our dependence on China has become.
If you’re going to raise this issue, you need to also address how you are going to wean us off Chinese goods. Is there an alternative to tariffs?
It is not lost on voters that the Biden administration itself has imposed tariffs on Chinese EVs. If you were going to buy a $25,000 Chinese EV, wouldn’t the new tariff be a $25,000 tax?
The numbers Kamala is using are mind-boggling to the rural voter – adding fuel to the fire that someone needs to do something to wean ourselves off China. Harris ends up pointing out that at least Trump is trying to do something about Chinese goods. She needs to talk about what her solution is.
Kamala is overplaying the abortion card for the rural voter in the upper Midwest.
Michigan, Pennsylvania, and Wisconsin all have legal abortion. Many persuadable voters are unhappy about this but resigned to it. They don’t want to be reminded of it.
If you do remind them of it, you run the risk of receiving a revenge vote.
In a state like Michigan, which has a constitutional right to abortion, the federal government cannot ban it. There are things they could do, but a ban would not work.
To the persuadable voter, this was grossly overstating the case, especially as Trump has repeatedly said that he will leave this to the states and will never pass a national abortion ban. Why litigate this with the persuadable voter?
Harris is responding to high food prices with more regulation
Rural voters’ number one issue is always overregulation. Responding to high food prices with even more regulation falls flat with rural voters and, in particular, farmers. Especially when most states already have price-gouging legislation. This is simply a second layer of regulation on top of state laws.
And farmers firmly believe that if the big processors are prosecuted for price gouging, those costs will be, at some point, extracted from their suppliers, meaning the farmer.
Kamala needs to talk about what she is going to do
Everyone I talk to agrees that Kamala is a nicer and better person than Trump. But they don’t know what her policies are or how strong she will be with China. Talk about your policies.
What is the red tape that you’re going to cut that you talk about in your Policy Book?
How are you going to reduce concentration in the agricultural sector?
What are the resources that you are going to give to existing small business owners and farmers that you discuss in your Policy Book?
How do you plan to help small farmers compete in the vegetable markets, and how will you help them hire migrant workers at an affordable rate?
Pivot to Kamala until Election Day
The Ellipse speech was a moving speech for the party faithful. It might also help get out the vote in some states. But at the end of the day, that will only serve to make people more unhappy and more bitter if you still lose the Electoral College vote but win the popular vote by an even larger margin.
In this last week, this is not the speech to use in Michigan, Pennsylvania, or Wisconsin. I have read your policy book and there are things in there that you could talk about. It serves no purpose to reopen old wounds with persuadable voters. These are not the party faithful. Forget about Trump. Focus on Kamala.
