Lessons from the Trump and Harris Campaigns
At AAPC’s 2024 Election Post-Mortem, the Trump and Harris campaigns pulled back the curtain on their approaches to voter engagement—and some of the lessons they’re taking into the future.
Trump’s Precision Play
The Trump campaign focused on hyper-personalized outreach to high-impact, low-propensity voters—those often missed by traditional methods. Tim Saler of Grassroots Targeting emphasized their strategy of filling “contact gaps” by prioritizing quality over quantity. The team leaned into direct mail, digital targeting, and door knocking, reshaping their electorate through intentional, data-driven efforts.
“If you don’t talk to people, they don’t vote,” said James Blair, incoming Deputy Chief of Staff and Political Director for the Trump campaign. “Collecting voters into our contact programs was simple in theory but hard to execute—and it worked.”
Harris’ Broad Push
Vice President Kamala Harris’ campaign, with a bigger war chest but only 107 days, went wider. From saturating digital and OTT advertising to maintaining an omnipresent media presence, their focus was on persuadable voters. Yet, consultant Terrance Green reflected, “We went for the shiny objects… to the detriment of our base.” Balancing persuasion with shoring up your foundation is critical, especially in tight races.
Takeaway for Consultants
Both campaigns delivered insights for consultants: precision targeting can redefine a voter base, while broad resource-heavy strategies must not overlook loyal supporters. As Harris pollster Jef Pollock put it, “In the first week (after Harris became the nominee), you saw a dramatic shift, in particular with three key groups that were key groups from July through the election, which is young people, African Americans, and Hispanic voters. And all three of those groups shifted dramatically over time, in particular away from third party and that narrowed the race. At the end of the day, we didn’t win the number that we needed to. Lots of efforts were made to do so and to communicate to those voters in a way that we thought would be persuasive in the best possible way. But they ended up voting on the economy, and that economic pedigree was just too strong.”
