In October, the advertising strategies of both Trump and Harris campaigns underwent significant shifts.
Trump’s team increased focus on transgender health care, while Harris’s team prioritised tax policy.
In early October, Republican advertisers inundated battleground states with attack ads targeting Harris for her past support of taxpayer-funded gender transition surgeries for detained immigrants and federal prisoners. Ads highlighting transgender health care made up 33% of Republican ad spending in this period, totalling over $21 million. This marked a stark increase from previous months, shifting the focus from other issues like the economy.
During the same period, Harris and her allies focused primarily on tax policy in their advertising. Ads discussing taxation accounted for nearly half of their TV ad spending, amounting to roughly $47 million. This focus reflects a consistent strategy, promoting Harris’s tax policies for working and middle-class families while criticising Trump’s approach. The emphasis on abortion rights, however, significantly decreased, comprising only 12% of the spending.
Republican ads on transgender policies represented a shift from their prior focus on the economy. Ads on economic issues dropped from 40% in September to 18% in October. Conversely, Democratic ads maintained a stable focus on taxation, while those on immigration and crime decreased to under 3% of their spending. Harris’s campaign strategically redirected its focus to taxation and character, areas where they can effectively contrast against Trump.
The tone of campaign ads varied significantly between parties. The Trump campaign’s strategy was predominantly negative, with 80% of spending on negative ads. In contrast, Harris’s campaign maintained a more balanced tone, with a mix of 23% negative, 58% contrast, and 19% positive ads. This varied tone influences public perception, potentially affecting voter attitudes towards each candidate.
Harris’s advertising saw a decline in emphasis on immigration and crime, with both areas falling below 3% of ad spending. Meanwhile, the Democratic campaign’s spotlight on health care, addressing prescription costs and Medicare, complemented the overall strategy to appeal to voters based on economic and quality of life issues.
In the first two weeks of October, spending by pro-Trump advertisers totalled $66 million, predominantly on negative ads. In contrast, pro-Harris advertisers spent about $95 million, balancing between contrast and less negative messaging. The financial outlays reveal strategic prioritisation by each campaign, reflecting their distinct priorities and voter outreach methods.
The advertising trends observed in October reflect the strategic adjustments political campaigns make in response to public sentiment and pressing issues. Transgender health care has become a focal point for Republican ads, likely aiming to mobilise specific voter bases, while Democrats focus on taxation and health care, key areas where they hold a policy advantage.
The campaign strategies reveal a focused approach to addressing key voter concerns.
Both campaigns reallocated funds to capitalise on emerging issues, reflecting tactical responsiveness.
