Donald Trump, JD Vance and the Dead Cat Strategy
After a bad week, Trump and Vance are doubling down on a false story about immigrants in Springfield, OH as a way to turn the narrative back to friendlier topics.
Anyone who follows British politics might be familiar with the term “deadcatting” or the “dead cat strategy.” In a nutshell, “deadcatting” is a communications strategy of diverting public attention away from an area of failure by making outrageous and shocking comments on another topic. Former British Prime Minister Boris Johnson once described the “dead cat strategy” this way:
“There is one thing that is absolutely certain about throwing a dead cat on the dining room table – and I don’t mean that people will be outraged, alarmed, disgusted. That is true, but irrelevant. The key point, says my Australian friend, is that everyone will shout, ‘Jeez, mate, there’s a dead cat on the table!’ In other words, they will be talking about the dead cat – the thing you want them to talk about – and they will not be talking about the issue that has been causing you so much grief.”
Which brings us to last week, an objectively bad week for the Trump campaign. Trump’s debate performance on Tuesday night was terrible and he spent the remainder of the week fighting off questions about his cozy relationship with far-right conspiracy theorist and 9/11 denier Laura Loomer. He finished off the weekend by pronouncing his hate for the most popular celebrity in the world who has hundreds of millions of devoted and adoring fans and followers. JD Vance, for his part, spent the week using valuable campaign time to double down on a debunked conspiracy theory about Haitian migrants and angrily lashing out at the media. The Trump campaign's bad week was compounded by poll after poll showing Harris did, in fact, get a bounce after the debate, which many people including myself didn’t expect.
Given how unhinged Trump and Vance were in the second half of last week it’s fair to wonder if these guys have lost it. But this is classic Trump. While the rhetoric is dangerous and extremely racist it should be viewed less as the random ramblings of a crazy man and more as the “dead cat on the dining room table.”
Trump’s perpetuation of a false story about immigrants and his attack on Swift is likely more a coordinated effort to change the national conversation to…well, anything else. Continuing to push the Springfield conspiracy and attempting to pick a fight with Taylor Swift is Trump’s attempt to control the national conversation, put the focus back on immigration (and therefore himself) and hopefully slow Harris’s building momentum. Before I receive a torrent of hate mail I want to be clear that I do not think it’s a good strategy. But I do think that Democrats should be careful about being sucked into Trump’s cyclone of distraction and disinformation.
Trump Wants to Control the Narrative
One thing that is consistent across every poll that’s come out over the last two months is that both immigration and abortion are among the top three most important issues for voters. Voters have consistently given Trump higher marks when it comes to who they believe will better handle the border while Harris has a huge lead on abortion. Donald Trump believes, as do his advisors, that talking about anything that keeps the focus on immigration and not abortion, even a debunked, racist story about Haitians, is good for him. According to reporting by The Bulwark’s Marc Caputo, who has excellent sourcing in the MAGA world, Trump advisors are willing to “take the hit” on the Springfield story to avoid tougher topics like abortion. “We talk about abortion, we lose. We talk about immigration, we win,” one Trump adviser told Caputo. They want to fight Harris on their terms, not hers.
Another consistent fact is that Trump has never been punished by voters for lying. Poll after poll shows that voters do not think he’s honest. Yet he’s still in a statistical tie with Harris in most polls. Trump is once again betting that the upside of turning the national conversation to immigration 50 days before an election far outweighs any blow back he’ll receive from voters for pushing outright lies.
Will it work?
There isn’t much in the polling to suggest that more than a week spent peddling this story about Haitians eating pets is having any effect on the race, though it’s possible this particular “dead cat” might backfire. When asked if they felt like the Haitians eating dogs claims were “weird or normal” 80% of voters polled in a Data for Progress poll said they were “weird.”
So then why would the Trump campaign continue to push the issue? If I had to point to something that might explain the Trump campaign strategy I’d point to a question in a recent YouGov/Yahoo poll that asked voters how each candidate performed on the top issues during the debate. Voters said that Harris gave “better answers” on every topic asked about expect immigration (but even that was close).
As for the out-of-the-blue broadside on Taylor Swift, I don’t believe that attacking a world famous celebrity with a particularly devoted following of young women is a campaign strategy I would endorse but, again, Trump felt the need to draw attention away from Harris’s debate performance and put it back on himself. And for a few hours on Sunday, at least, it worked. Until the news broke of an apparent second assassination attempt on Donald Trump social media was consumed by Trump’s comments about Taylor Swift. It’s not exactly how most strategists would draw it up, but if Trump was done hearing about the debate then his “deadcatting” seemed to work.
How Should Harris and Democrats Respond?
Harris has run one of the most disciplined campaigns I’ve ever seen. Unlike Democratic campaigns of the past, she has largely ignored Trump which has put Trump on his heels and denied him any real traction against Harris. But among the biggest disadvantages that Harris has faced since she entered the race is that by election day she will only have been in the race for about 100 days. Many voters didn’t know Harris and she’s running against someone who has near universal name ID. However, polls are showing that what voters are hearing from Harris they like– particularly voters who watched the debate, which is likely a big reason why he wants to change the conversation. Everyday that the focus is on her and not, say, Donald Trump’s hurt feelings about Taylor Swift is a great day for Harris.
Harris and Democrats would be wise to ignore the Trump/Vance side shows. Despite what Donald Trump says on social media, his campaign’s aggressive attempts to change the narrative is not the sign of a campaign that believes it’s winning. Harris has him on the ropes and she should stay focused on her campaign plan– freedom, costs of everyday good and abortion. As totally offensive and nonsensical as Trump and Vance’s recent ramblings and comments are, Harris didn’t ascend the polls by chasing down every piece of bait Trump threw out. This campaign will be won or lost on the economy, inflation, abortion and immigration, not on Taylor Swift’s endorsement or Donald Trump’s repeated lies about immigrants stealing pets.