There’s an adage about campaigns: tour reveals strategy.
If you pay close attention to where candidates show up, you’ll uncover the places they value most, where — precisely — they believe the path to victory lies.
“Believe” being the key word.
In 2016, Hillary Clinton’s team believed the “blue wall” would hold. Accordingly, she neglected key Midwestern states for other battlegrounds. The result of this miscalculation? Defeat.
With the 2024 election in the home stretch, let’s look at four major campaign tactics and what they reveal not only about where the Donald Trump and Kamala Harris campaigns respectively believe the election will be won/lost, but also how the evolving media landscape is reshaping political strategy altogether.
Home games (friendly media):
In today’s landscape, tour isn’t just about physical travel — it’s about candidates’ strategic media presence. And the platforms with which they choose to engage offer crucial insights into their strategy and target audiences.
Trump has been making the rounds on popular comedians’ podcasts; appearances light on substance — heavy on machismo. By contrast, Harris has opted for stops on mainstream shows like “The Late Show,” “The View,” and “Howard Stern.” The proceedings similarly fawning.
Yet, these choices expose two fundamental elements of each campaign’s media strategy.
First, given that most mainstream media outlets are hard on Trump, he is forced to rely on “grey” or non-traditional platforms to play his media “home games.” Meanwhile, Harris hasn’t confined herself exclusively to traditional outlets either. She has branched out into unorthodox spaces, appearing on the “Call Her Daddy” podcast.
The takeaway is that both campaigns recognize the limits of relying solely on legacy media. The conventional — even cable — broadcast networks no longer cast widely enough to engage modern voters effectively.
Second, both Trump and Harris are leveraging this fragmented media landscape to connect with specific demographic groups they view as key to victory.
The podcasts Trump frequents cater primarily to younger men, while Harris has gravitated toward platforms that resonate with young women. This precision targeting represents more than tactical innovation — it demonstrates both campaigns’ acute understanding of the pivotal role these audiences will play in determining the outcome of the election.
Away games (unfriendly media):
After initial hesitation, Harris has now demonstrated a growing willingness to engage with unfriendly media.
She recently took part in a nearly 30-minute interview on Fox News — reaching more than seven million viewers. Compare that to Trump’s showing on a Fox town hall hours earlier that garnered only 3.1 million viewers. Harris’s campaign has even begun running ads on the same network. This strategy signals that her team believes some right-leaning voters are still persuadable and worth pursuing.
By contrast, Trump’s campaign seems more comfortable sticking to home turf. While Trump has sometimes participated in tough interviews in the past, his approach this cycle has focused on targeted efforts, like participating in a Univision town hall to connect with Spanish-speaking voters. This calculated strategy reflects his team’s understanding that engagement with mainstream media offers little reward and high risk.
But both campaigns recognize the risk/reward dynamic at play. Harris’s team is betting that the potential payoff of swaying Fox’s audience outweighs the risks of bombing and right-wing criticism. Meanwhile, Trump’s team has concluded that mainstream platforms won’t move the needle. Meaning: no hope of reward, no need to risk a thing.
Surrogate strategy
Surrogates are essential for amplifying a campaign’s brand and message.
It’s not just about who they are — it’s about what they’re saying. And both campaigns have employed surrogates not merely as cheerleaders but as problem-solvers to address their candidate’s most glaring vulnerabilities.
Earlier this week, Barack Obama, addressing his community, directly challenged Black men who might reject the idea of a woman president. Meanwhile, Trump’s ostensible interpreter with rust-belt credentials JD Vance has taken the lead in running defence for Trump’s most outrageous views, however ineffectually.
These surrogates are far from ceremonial. Their roles are strategic and calculated, aimed at tackling the most persistent narratives their candidates need to confront head-on.
One last thing
This is the political era of simplicity.
Both campaigns recognize that election day largely comes down to the power of one key message as voters’ head into the polling booth.
For Trump: “Life was better — and more affordable — under me.”
For Harris: “Trump is a threat to democracy and all we care for including a woman’s right to choose.”
One vote is for the pocketbook. The other is for the soul of the country.
