Stereotypes of race and gender didn’t seem to stick to Kamala Harris. But another kind did. Sanne van Oosten argues that in the run-up to the US election, the Trump campaign stereotyped Harris as an extreme leftist – a policy stereotype exacerbated by her race and gender
Why did Kamala Harris lose the 2024 presidential election? It's a question we will spend years trying to answer. The reasons, of course, are manifold. But I want to focus on how attempts to make the election about Harris's gender and race didn’t seem to stick. Policy stereotypes, meanwhile, got churned out repeatedly. The Trump campaign succeeded in convincing voters that Harris was an extreme leftist, even when she wasn’t. I argue they did so because of her gender and race.
My book Minority Voting and Representation researched how voters discriminate based on race, gender and religion. With Liza Mügge and Daphne van der Pas, I also researched experimental studies and discovered that, in line with existing research, voters prefer women candidates. We also found that voters tend to favour Asian politicians. Between Black and white politicians, they generally make no significant distinction.
In light of Harris's loss, these findings are surprising. They suggest a somewhat positive or neutral voter stance on race and gender, which marks a shift from older assumptions of entrenched bias.
The Trump campaign's attempts to make the election about Kamala Harris's gender and race didn't seem to stick
Sadly, these findings don’t mean that sexism and racism have disappeared from electoral decision-making. First, the averages mask the reality that small groups of voters with negative views on women and people of colour can still wield great influence. Second, latent stereotypes can surface during the course of a campaign, offsetting the initial positive response to women politicians and politicians of colour. Trump's attempts to use race and gender stereotypes against Harris failed. Yet he mobilised policy stereotypes with greater success.
What kind of latent stereotypes can campaigners activate? Liza Mügge, Daphne van der Pas and I analysed all theoretical frameworks of academic publications on how race and gender affect voting behaviour, distinguishing between 'unjust' and 'useful' stereotypes. Unjust stereotypes include the belief that women cannot be strong leaders, or that women in politics should be meek and family-focused. Historically, these stereotypes have made it difficult for women to appear credible leaders without compromising other facets of their identity.
Trump campaigners branded Harris a 'childless cat lady', 'lying Kamala', and 'laughing Kamala'. Their attempts to reinforce such unjust stereotypes backfired
Trump campaigners attempted to reinforce such unjust stereotypes, branding Harris a 'childless cat lady', 'lying Kamala', and 'laughing Kamala'. Their attempts seem to have backfired. In response, Taylor Swift announced that she was proud to call herself a childless cat lady. Harris fans took Trump's derogatory 'lying Kamala' and transformed it into 'lion Kamala' – a celebration of Harris's fierce power. Attempts to disparage Harris's laughter led to viral TikTok videos celebrating her joy. This seems to have helped humanise Harris in some voters' eyes.
A second school of thought argues that politicians' race and gender offer 'useful' stereotypes that voters use as mental shortcuts to help them make quick decisions. For instance, voters tend to assume that female or non-white candidates lean further left than their white male counterparts. This can be a helpful assumption in low-information elections, where voters may not know candidates' specific policy positions.
Yet these same stereotypes can also be aimed against candidates unfairly, as Trump did. Throughout the election cycle, the Trump campaign branded Harris an 'extreme leftist', even nicknaming her 'Comrade Kamala'.
Despite Harris’s efforts to reach moderate voters, these stereotypes of left-wing extremism persisted. This might have even influenced Harris to lean more to the right than she otherwise would have. Future research could shed light on whether hard-left stereotyping may have alienated her further from left-leaning voters.
The repeated portrayal of Kamala Harris as a far-left figure tapped into preconceptions that Black and woman politicians support progressive causes
In the Trump campaign, 'useful' stereotypes didn’t serve their intended purpose of informing voters. Instead, they became a weaponised form of bias. This pandered to voters’ policy-stereotyped views, pushing them towards preconceived notions about the candidate. The repeated portrayal of Harris as a far-left figure tapped into deep-seated preconceptions that Black and woman politicians support progressive causes.
Research shows consistently that policy is voters' main concern, above and beyond identity. This makes policy stereotypes extra fruitful to exploit. Candidates and parties' specific policy positions are difficult to learn about. This makes it tempting for voters who might not have the time, energy, or cognitive capacity to study policy positions closely to simply believe existing policy stereotypes. In the absence of knowledge about a candidate's policies, many voters still estimate that candidate’s likely positions based on their race and gender. This bias is easy to exploit.
For Harris, besides her race and gender, her image could also be shaped in part by assumptions about her California roots and her partisanship. These associations align with the stereotype of minority women candidates being more left-leaning, even if they do not reflect Harris’s policy platform. Opponents have capitalised on this perceived association, working to maintain Harris’s image as a representative of the 'extreme left'. This shows how policy stereotypes can create a self-perpetuating narrative that is difficult for a candidate to break, regardless of her actual policy positions.
To counter this narrative, candidates should remain true to themselves. They must guard against being swayed by the (policy) stereotypes that their political opponents weaponise. Indeed, the Harris’ campaign succeeded in debunking stereotypes of gender and race that were mobilised to put potential Harris voters off. A broader understanding that policy stereotypes are also based on race and gender might, in the future, embolden women politicians, and politicians of colour, to stick more closely to the policy agenda they believe is best for the country they are vying to lead.
