Competing narratives

The messaging battle during and after the U.S. elections

Frank O’Brien

After four decades helping progressive causes raise billions of dollars through compelling messaging, Frank O'Brien now publishes the OBrien on Message weekly memo on persuasive nonprofit communications.

Share this article:

Ultimately, the US presidential campaign came down to competing narratives around two key concerns: the state of the economy and the threat to democracy posed by Donald Trump.

The narrative competition played out across the Democratic base (younger, college-educated and economically comfortable) and two distinct groups of Trump voters:

MAGA true believers who eagerly wanted to vote for Trump
economically vulnerable, working-class voters who ended up willing to vote for Trump because they felt unheard/unseen by Democrats

Competing narratives – Trump vs. Biden

Trump’s opening narrative used inflation and extreme, often racist, rhetoric about immigration to paint the US as an out-of-control country led by a President in cognitive decline. Arguing that the economy had been stronger when he was president, Trump’s narrative passed a key test among working-class voters (which Biden’s economic argument failed) – it resonated with their personal experience.

In a defensive crouch, Biden tried to convince people he had laid the groundwork for a strong economy and asked them to help him “finish the job.” Implying the economy only needed minor adjustments rang false with people whose daily lives were mired in inflation and economic hardship.

Biden’s effort to frame the election as one of resistance to an “existential threat” faced a similar problem. While his fear-based narrative inspired support among the economically comfortable, it failed to connect with voters already struggling with personal economic anxieties, for whom it seemed remote and secondary.

Meanwhile, Biden’s stumbling, incoherent debate performance acted as a powerful confirmation of Trump’s narrative of cognitive decline.

Competing narratives – Trump vs. Harris

When Harris took over, she replaced Biden’s fear-based message with the joy of standing up for American freedoms. She described Trump as an “unserious person who represents a serious threat” and taunted him about crowd size. Whereas Biden’s existential threat case made Trump bigger, Harris tried to make him smaller. Her campaign also incorporated a second narrative, abandoning a backward-looking defense of the administration’s record on the economy and setting forth new economic proposals.

The strongest campaigns tend to settle on a single coherent narrative. Whereas Harris and her advisers found themselves trying to advance two narratives simultaneously, Trump’s team (despite their candidate’s erratic behavior) maintained their focus on immigration and inflation, and worked to tie Harris to Biden’s poorly regarded record on both issues.

Harris and Trump both succeeded in motivating their core supporters. When people cast their votes, however, it became clear that Trump had won the battle of narratives directed at working-class voters.

Data from exit polls shows that Trump had a 50% advantage over Harris among voters who said inflation had caused them severe hardship in the last year. Harris had a 51% advantage over those who said inflation was “no hardship at all.” And Trump won by 6 points among voters who described inflation as a moderate hardship for their family.

This data demonstrates the perhaps insurmountable barrier Kamala Harris faced in overcoming – in just 111 days – Democratic weaknesses among working class voters going back more than a decade.

Moving forward: a new contest of competing narratives

Where are we now and where are we headed? What are the strengths and weaknesses of potential 2025 narratives?

The Trump narrative

Trump’s 2025 framing comes straight from the autocrat’s playbook: “I won. The country has big problems and only I can fix them. My opponents are losers and a danger to America. I have all the power. Resistance is futile.”

The question now is whether Trump can sustain this narrative or whether it will fall apart in the face of fast-moving events – and an effective counter-narrative.

The progressive narrative for shaken and alarmed supporters

Trump’s 2016 victory produced a dramatic surge of support for progressive groups, enabling them to mount a robust, sustained resistance. Eight years later, many donors and activists will be asking themselves if they have the heart to keep going. Convincing them to stay in the fight will take smart and well-executed messaging – not a simple call to rush back to the ramparts for four more years!

The smartest groups will recognize how devastated people are feeling and attempt to provide confident leadership and a sense of direction, perhaps via shorter-term efforts aimed at achieving early wins. Another key tactic will be urging people to stand with those who feel the first and deepest impact of Trump’s vicious agenda. The strongest progressive narratives will ask people WHO they’re going to be in this moment, not just what they’re going to do.

The Democratic Party itself faces two overlapping narrative priorities. One is to find the right framing as the opposition party to Trump’s MAGA agenda. The other is to locate policies, voices and an accompanying narrative which can restore Democratic credibility among working class voters.

Democrats are hoping for a 2026 electoral comeback that will make Trump’s agenda harder to advance in the second half of his term. If they succeed, it will be via a narrative of positive “we get what you’re going through” advocacy for middle American working-class families, who currently feel unseen and unheard. For this to work, the party urgently needs to find a credible, trustworthy narrator. Currently, none of its most prominent leaders fit that description.

Conclusion

Two competing narratives will take shape in the months ahead, evolving in real time against a backdrop of fast-moving U.S. and global crises. So much depends on which of these narratives persuade, connect or fail to connect with different audiences, and influence actions. The stakes could not be any higher.