How The Election Validated Key Branding Principles

Trump’s election victory was a surprise (and a big disappointment) to many voters. The results were clear and there have been tons of post-election assessments to explain what went wrong for Harris.  But the underlying reason surpassing all other “mistakes” involved voter emotions, in particular, their deep feelings of frustration and discontent over the economy, and whether they could afford the same lifestyle again.

For the past four years, the average consumer has witnessed big price increases and other financial obstacles, from grocery prices to gas to finding a reasonably priced home to higher interest rates and mortgages.  The news that inflation had declined significantly was acknowledged by many voters, but most voters still struggled and felt the misery and perception that everything seemed less affordable.

The Power of Emotional Branding

The key to successful branding starts with in-depth, objective research to identify and fully understand the target customer.  This involves extensive assessments of both their rational and emotional mindset, and especially finding hidden insights on their problems, anxieties, wishes, dissatisfaction and even their joy.  These are powerful emotions the customer may or may not be aware of.  Detecting these crucial feelings is essential for developing a brand with promises that address these core misgivings, needs and desires.  Ultimately the response to these pivotal feelings will determine how well a brand can cultivate a trustful connection with a consumer (or voter).

Trump’s Victory Driven by Frustration

Despite all the lies and vulgar flaws of Donald Trump, voters overlooked these distasteful characteristics and voted with their heart, especially the memory of a more affordable lifestyle in Trump’s first term.  During the Biden administration, world-wide inflation rose due mainly to Covid, supply chain bottlenecks, and the Ukraine war.  Even though inflation has dropped significantly and the U.S. economy is robust and actually the envy of the free world, most voters still feel the pain from higher prices and the paucity of affordable homes.

In this context, Kamala Harris was perceived to be part of the problem and she never convincingly separated herself from the Biden economy. This became a huge challenge for her.  Instead, voters saw Trump as a change agent who could shake up many of the institutions allegedly behind the higher cost of living – e.g. the media, FBI, the judicial system, and other bureaucratic Government agencies.  Many voters simply did not yet feel positive or hopeful, given the past four years of despair.  For example:

• In an interview with a Democrat from PA on 60 Minutes last week who voted for Trump, Scott Pelley prefaced his question by noting that inflation has been cut in half, wages are up, and interest and mortgage rates are down, then asking “did you feel that”. Her answer was no.
• Another Trump voter said “Look, I didn’t like January 6, and I don’t want that to happen again, but it didn’t affect my life nearly as much as the price of eggs, milk and gas”.

Through the Eyes of Brand Positioning

Using the basic elements of the traditional positioning strategy, one can more clearly understand the challenges and opportunities for each candidate’s brand.

• Target Voters – Harris did not show enough empathy for these discouraged voters, and instead emphasized the current state of the economy, which did not resonate or restore public trust.
• Brand Identity – Harris could not adequately separate herself from the unpopularity of the Biden years and the higher cost of living, while Trump promoted himself as a strongman and savior.
• Brand Benefit – Harris promised joy. Trump promised upheaval.  In particular Harris outlined many proposals for a variety of issues, but never credibly focused on how to relieve the core emotional anguish of voters (fighting price gouging didn’t fly…).  Trump didn’t promise anything specific (e.g. “I have a concept for new healthcare”) except to repeatedly say he would fix everything, although he did emphasize voters struggling from the economy more than Harris.
• Reasons To Believe Promises – The main perception by voters was that Harris was intimately associated with the rising prices during the Biden years and simply did not offer anything compelling to relieve their frustration and fear. Trump blustered throughout the campaign with overt lies and narcissistic driven self-praise, but voters ignored this and voted with their feelings.

The Democrats can never form a bond with the electorate until they genuinely understand and act on their economic struggles and emotional frustrations.  Trump does have a solid relationship with his core MAGA followers, although this could suffer in the next four years if he does not deliver.  Yes, “it’s the economy, stupid.”