As the 2024 elections approach, Vice President Kamala Harris is implementing a traditional but expansive ground game to mobilize voters, while former President Donald J. Trump is attempting to engage a smaller voter demographic using less experienced outside groups. This division in strategy raises questions regarding the efficacy of Trump’s approach in comparison to Harris’s well-organized operation, especially in critical battleground states where every vote is essential.
In anticipation of the pivotal 2024 elections, Vice President Kamala Harris and former President Donald J. Trump are implementing starkly contrasting strategies to secure votes. Harris’s team adopts a comprehensive and traditional field operation model, deploying a large number of paid staff focused on voter turnout. This well-organized approach is seen as a conventional success in electoral politics. In contrast, Trump’s campaign targets a limited number of infrequent voters, employing financially supported yet relatively inexperienced external groups to engage a wider audience. Insights gathered from interviews with voters, activists, and campaign aides across four critical counties—Erie County, Pennsylvania; Kenosha County, Wisconsin; Maricopa County, Arizona; and Cobb County, Georgia—reveal vulnerabilities in the Republican strategy. The operation appears mismatched against the Harris campaign’s coordinated efforts, which boast superior staffing levels and outreach. The Democratic initiative has reportedly surpassed Republican efforts regarding paid personnel and canvassing activities, effectively reaching out to voters who may otherwise disengage from politics. Dan Kanninen, who serves as the battleground states director for the Harris campaign, remarked, “The national discourse kind of falls on deaf ears if it doesn’t feel real and localized. Ultimately you’re trying to have a cohesive conversation with a voter across many modes to connect the dots.” The significance of each ballot is underscored by the observation that the number of voters likely determining the outcome of the 2024 election could fit within a college football stadium. With tight races across seven battleground states, every vote holds substantial power. The Harris campaign has mobilized an impressive contingent of 2,500 staffers across 353 offices, with an aim to convert supporters into activists while appealing to independent and moderate Republican voters. Recently, the Harris campaign reported that it had conducted over 600,000 door knocks and made three million phone calls with the help of 63,000 volunteer shifts.
The ground game in political campaigning plays a crucial role in mobilizing voters and influencing election outcomes. The contrasting strategies adopted by the Harris and Trump campaigns reflect their respective philosophies regarding voter engagement and mobilization. Harris’s reliance on a robust traditional ground game is contrasted with Trump’s less conventional approach, which depends on less experienced groups and a narrower voter base. Understanding these strategies is essential to grasp the dynamics of the impending election and their potential influence on voter turnout in key battleground states.
In conclusion, the divergent approaches of Vice President Kamala Harris and former President Donald J. Trump highlight the significant role that ground operations play in modern electoral contests. While Harris’s campaign leverages a well-established and extensive voter outreach strategy, Trump’s reliance on a smaller, less experienced network raises questions about its effectiveness. As the election approaches, the outcomes in the outlined battleground states will likely hinge on the success of these differing methodologies in mobilizing voters.
Original Source: www.nytimes.com
