The Basics

At a time when her opponent’s campaign is struggling to hold onto even the staunchest of Republicans, Hillary Clinton is continuing her attempt at expanding her middle class base by announcing new details of her tax policy plan yesterday. This new expansion will double the existing Child Tax Credit to a maximum of $2,000 per child up to age 4. Clinton will also make this credit more accessible to low-income families by changing the income threshold. Her campaign estimates that these expansions will lower federal tax revenue by up to $200 billion over the next 10 years, a move which she hopes to pay for by raising taxes for high earners and Wall Street traders. In contrast to Trump’s plan, which has drawn criticism for being a deduction and not a credit, Clinton’s advisors say that this tax plan is targeted at working-class families and is much more progressive. Clinton even said in her release that “this new tax credit will make their lives a little bit easier” in reference to working class families.

Family Ties

Again, we see Hillary reaching out to the middle class by presenting new plans in the context of family. Just like her rally in Pennsylvania last week, she is honing in on her image as a mother to attempt to expand her working class base and appear more approachable to the everyday American. In the release on her website, they quote her as saying, “hard-working, middle-class families are struggling with rising costs for child care, health care, caregiving and college. This new tax credit will…help restore fairness to our economy.” At a time when Trump is facing isolation because of derogatory comments toward women, Clinton is focusing on the image of a wholesome family. Her campaign is utilizing some of the core principles for persuasive communication by pitching her message, even something as mundane as taxes, at a level of generality that has emotional resonance for people. Working class Americans want to know that their president will advocate for their children. By rolling out plans and speeches that continue to paint her as that kind of president, Clinton can slowly expand her base while Trump struggles to maintain his.

 

Photo credit

With it being October, we are drawing nearer and nearer to Election Day on November 8^th. Donald Trump and Hillary Clinton continue to clash heads with each other in order to persuade the remaining population of undecided voters. As I was watching the town hall format debate that occurred this week, I noticed that Secretary Clinton seemed far more interested in insulting and condemning Donald Trump for his proposals and ideas than she did on speaking about her middle class roots, something that she effectively spoke of in the first debate. She also didn’t fail to criticize him over the recent video that has emerged from his rude and inappropriate comments about women he made ten years ago. Is this an important issue and one that needs to be addressed? It absolutely is. Is this an issue that she needs to spend the majority of her time on? It absolutely is not. She needs to continue to sway the decisions of the undecided voters, many of who are in the middle class.

While she didn’t spend nearly any time and attention on the middle class in the most recent debate, Secretary Clinton has given members of the middle class plenty of reason to vote for her. She doesn’t want to raise taxes on the members of the middle class. In order to make their lives financially easier, Clinton proposed and was in favor of taxing other things, with one being that she was in favor of adding a 25% sales tax on guns. While I personally think she could find bigger and better things to rather than guns since I am a huge supporter of the second amendment and have grown up around firearms my whole life, this is an effective strategy. Many of her left wing supporters are in favor that stricter gun laws need to be implemented into the United States, especially after the many mass shootings our nation has faced over the past five years. By doing these things, she is slowly but surely increasing the gap between herself and Mr. Trump.

 

Given the current climate of the presidential race, Hillary Clinton has seemingly focused less on appealing to her potential voter base and more on sending Donald Trump packing; especially in light of the recent lewd audio recording tainting his campaign. Last night’s debate consisted more of back-and-forth personal attacks than policy substance, and given the hectic environment, there was little room for Clinton to recite the narrative of her middle class values that she did in the first debate. Thanks to Wikileaks however, news about her rhetoric appealing to the middle class has remained in the headlines.

This recent email leak features part of a speech that she gave at Goldman Sachs, and appears newsworthy because she admits to being “far removed” from the middle class lifestyle in which she grew up. Some of the text is highlighted by the Wikileaks source, however the highlight ends before the sentence ends by saying, “but I haven’t forgotten it.” For this reason, I question the newsworthiness of this rhetoric that some sources have elaborated upon. The truth is that Clinton remains the favorite choice for moderate, middle-class voters, and the argument that she is too removed from them does not achieve much of an effect. Personally, I think that there is grounds for the average middle-class American to look to Clinton as evidence that just because you currently find yourself in the middle class, doesn’t mean you will never be able to “climb the ladder” and rise out of it. No one will ever be able to take that away from Clinton despite all of her other shortcomings, and that is why she is able to manipulate middle-class rhetoric so well.

“Kind of far removed.”

Surprise! It’s October, which means the election is heating up with leaks and new revelations designed to cause political mayhem. This election cycle’s ‘October surprises’ have not only brought chaos, but they have also wreaked complete havoc for Republican presidential nominee Donald Trump’s campaign. While the Trump camp is suffering, Clinton has not gotten off easy with WikiLeaks releasing new emails from the Clinton campaign. Emails? You’d think voters would be sick of that by now, but the emails reveal Clinton admitted to Wall Street firms that she is “kind of far removed” from the middle class.

Same Story, Different Audience

The opposing side has promoted this message as a negative comment from Clinton, one that illustrates Hillary Clinton’s lack of appeal to middle-class voters. However, when looking at Clinton’s full statement, her message is consistent with what she has been saying throughout the campaign. Clinton’s middle-class upbringing and her professional experiences make her empathetic to middle-class struggles and capable of fixing them. The leak only reveals that Clinton uses both personal and professional experiences to influence her policies and reach various audiences. This rhetoric is in her speeches to Wall Street firms as well as her speeches on the campaign trail.

Clinton’s full statement to investment banks highlight her childhood in Illinois, “We had solid middle-class upbringing. We had good public schools. We had accessible healthcare. And now, obviously, I’m kind of far removed because of the life I’ve lived and the economic, you know, fortunes that my husband and I now enjoy, but I haven’t forgotten.” Hillary Clinton consistently highlights her middle-class upbringing on the campaign trail, just as she did to Wall Street investment bankers. It’s a tool that not only puts her at an equal level with voters, but it also shows she’s on their side. Clinton argues that someone who has experienced middle-class hardship is far more likely to work to end it, compared to someone who has lived a life of luxury.

Clinton’s Weakness: Being a politician

If nothing else, the leak portrays Hillary Clinton as a typical politician, which seems to be the worst thing one can be in the current political environment.  Russell Berman of The Atlantic noted the emails, “Capture a candidate, and a campaign, that seems in private exactly as cautious, calculating, and politically flexible as they appeared to be in public.” Clinton’s campaign is marked by her inability to connect with voters, particularly middle-class voters. The WikiLeaks emails do not appear to reveal the personal information one expects to find with email leaks. The leaks only play into Clinton’s private and cautious persona.

Clinton addressed her public image in a recent Humans of New York piece stating, “I know that I can be perceived as aloof or cold or unemotional, But I had to learn as a young woman to control my emotions. And that’s a hard path to walk. Because you need to protect yourself, you need to keep steady, but at the same time you don’t want to seem ‘walled off.’” Despite her honesty, Hillary Clinton still struggles to appear authentic and relatable, particularly with middle-class voters.

Coming full circle: Clinton’s Policies

In recent weeks, Clinton has focused on her middle-class upbringing, using rhetoric similar to that in the email leak, to connect with voters. Her attempts in the first and second debate performances portray her as one who has endured middle-class struggles. Clinton targets middle-class voters by advocating policies that attempt to fix Obamacare and make college affordable and debt free. This strategy seems fitting after reading the leaked email in which Clinton states her middle-class upbringing allowed her ‘accessible healthcare’ and ‘good schools.’ Clinton’s policies reflect her history, but the only missing piece for many middle-class voters is the ability to see her as an average American. Only time will tell if Clinton can persuade voters, but in the meantime, Republicans will continue to portray Hillary Clinton as a ‘corrupt politician.’

What Matters to Voters 

While “October surprises” have been no cakewalk for Hillary Clinton, it is clear that her opponents will use anything to discredit her. This is true even when the ‘facts’ like the leaked email comment stated above show that Clinton has been consistent in using her middle-class upbringing to highlight the fact that she, “hasn’t forgotten.” The Republican nominee, now ‘unshackled‘ from his own party, may continue his combative and divisive tone in an attempt to profit from Clinton’s ‘October surprise.’ However, if the past few days are any indication, it appears that Trump’s camp would rather continue the war against the GOP than save their campaign from imploding. With Clinton’s email leak, and Donald Trump’s sexual assault video coming out at the same time, it begs the question: Which issue will resonate the most with voters? Especially among middle-class voters, a group high in family and women voters, one would guess sexual assault takes precedence.

 

Hillary Clinton’s campaign centers on bridging “the gap between the rich and poor” and portray her as someone who “understands the plight of the average working class”. In order to gain the support and votes of the middle class, Clinton has continually tried to portray herself as someone who grew up in a middle class lifestyle. She claims to know what the middle class is going through and is “vowing to fight for the middle class”. Clinton is one of the wealthiest people and “got that way profiting off of public service”. She claims to want to fight for the middle class but that is who she seems to be taking the money from. She may identify as a middle class citizen but her and her husband’s net worth of 52.7 million dollars, states otherwise. I guess it just depends on your definition of middle class.

She has not had an easy time trying to connect because she does live such an extravagant lifestyle. For example, she wore a jacket that was over $12,000 to a speech she gave about inequality. As much as she tries to relate to the middle class, her attempts do not seem to go the way she intends them to. This seems to be where the disconnect lies between Clinton and the middle class. Her actions do not reflect her words or the spirit of which she centers her campaign on, which can lead people to believe that she is not a trustworthy candidate for president.

Middle-Class Pennsylvania 

Singing. Dancing. Sign waving. Chants. You might expect to find these at a Trump rally. At last night’s town-hall meeting in Harrisburg, Pennsylvania, however, it was all cheers for Hillary. Thus far, Clinton’s campaign has struggled to create enthusiasm from even her own party, but that lack of buzz was no where to be seen in Harrisburg. Clinton spoke to the people as one of them. She spoke of her Scranton roots and the identity Pennsylvanians have of themselves as  “blue-collar, hardworking, capable of manufacturing the steel that built the country and producing energy that keeps on the lights.” While the rally centered on reaching out to these middle-class workers, a central theme of family dominated Clinton’s responses last night. By focusing on what matters to families, Hillary Clinton managed both to humanize herself and expand her middle-class base in the important battleground state of Pennsylvania.

 

Past Record

“When I think about this election, I think of my own family.” That’s how actress Elizabeth Banks started off the rally. From that moment onward, the theme of the night was clear. Banks, as well as Clinton and her daughter Chelsea, all focused on Hillary Clinton’s track record of looking out for children. In an important moment, Chelsea even addressed the concept that perhaps Clinton is simply focusing on family just to gain votes: “I wish that people really understood that… putting families and children first isn’t rhetorical for my mom. It’s something I watched her do my whole life.” Hillary also focused on steps she has taken and will continue to take to help working parents, including focusing on paid family leave. By backing up rhetoric with past actions, Hillary was able to highlight that she will work to protect what every middle-class American has: a family.

 

Other Issues

An important aspect of her family theme yesterday was that Clinton expanded the idea beyond just the nuclear family. She spoke about various topics that are currently on the minds of middle-class America. Clinton touched on her plan to make college free for students that are from families making less than $125,000. Issues related to the significance of body positivity for young girls and the importance of care for the elderly also were brought up. Perhaps yesterday’s town-hall meeting garnered so much enthusiasm because it showcased a Hillary that middle-class America can get behind; a candidate for whom family matters.

As the days and nights until November begin to wind down, the presidential race is all but winding down. Unlike Trump, Mrs. Clinton is rapidly losing middle-class votes and being that the middle class accounts for most of the votes in the election, this is something that she cannot afford to happen. Hillary Clinton’s lead over Donald Trump is decreasing by the date and her chance of winning the presidency is becoming slimmer and slimmer.

In order to appeal to gain the potential votes of the middle class, Mrs. Clinton used a blatant contrast between her father and Donald Trump’s father by saying that Donald was given a head start in life because his father was a “wealthy real estate developer.” Clinton then went on to say how her grandfather was an American factory worker and her father was a small businessman made her a “product of the American Middle Class.” This method to gain back voters from the middle class isn’t nearly as effective as providing statistics and benefits that one might gain from a Clinton presidency.

In her days in the senate, Hillary Clinton continued to claim that she was opposed to raising taxes on the middle class, but she constantly voted to raise them anyway. In 2008 however, Clinton voted to raise taxes on single people who were making as little as $41,500, and on married families that were making $83,000. Hillary thinks that she can slide her way around this issue, but unlike her emails, there is no way to erase the voting records.

If we are being honest here, Hillary Clinton hasn’t been associated with the middle class in close to thirty long years. Through her stories of her childhood and her families occupations growing up, a sense of ethos is established within the voting audience that can prove to be effective in gaining votes. But on the other hand, her taxing methods and proposals are absolute asinine when a voter looks back upon her senate days and sees how untrustworthy of a person that she is. Though unorthodox, Mrs. Clinton’s Rhetoric is proving to be effective in the election. This should make up for an interesting end to the 2016 presidential election.

 

One of Hillary Clinton’s most frequent allusions to her middle-class roots illustrates her father’s humble profession working with silk screens. More recently, she appealed to the middle class in an op-ed by describing the lessons she learned as “a mother who works.” Simply put, since Clinton cannot truly relate to the middle class population, she merges her appeals with stories and memories of family with which everyone can relate.

The truth is that Clinton has been out of touch with the middle class lifestyle for over 25 years. This disparity continues to grow as both Hillary and Bill continue to reap the benefits of their powerful positions, evidenced especially by their 2014 Tax Returns. Giving speeches at an average fee of $210,795 is a far cry from squeegeeing silk screens with her father.

With regard to the title, I must point out the irony that Clinton touts her relatability to the middle-class in a wardrobe valued at around $200,000.

All kidding aside however, the power of Clinton’s strategic combination of family values and middle class values is evidenced through her current popularity. Though the narratives of working at her father’s business and living humbly as a new mother in Little Rock are irrelevant to the current election, they still resonate with voters and give Clinton a degree of traction over Trump. As far as tax brackets and annual earnings are concerned, Clinton and Trump are more similar than they are different. Nevertheless, it is the crafty rhetoric illustrating an honest, middle-class upbringing that enables Clinton to make voters think otherwise.

Hillary Clinton may be a part of the so-called ‘establishment,’ and a ‘Washington insider,’ but in the world of campaigning, her messaging and marketing strategies make her seem like an outsider. Although catchy, “I’m With Her,” “Breaking Down Barriers,” and “Stronger Together” lack the clear, consistent, and concise message of, “Make America Great Again,” that attract much of Trump’s white working and lower-middle-class base. However, Clinton’s messaging was polished and precise at the first Presidential Debate when she attacked Donald Trump’s financial record and economic plan for deceiving and exploiting the middle class. She may have trouble with her marketing strategy, but on debate night it was clear: Clinton believes Trump just wants to, “Make the Rich Richer.”

Trumped-Up Trickle Down

With all public communication, Clinton has trouble projecting ethos and her campaign’s changing message only makes it harder for voters to connect, especially voters late in the deciding process. However, during the Presidential Debate last Monday, Clinton combined her strengths in policy and her experience as a public servant to sling shots at Donald Trump in an appeal to the economic struggles and experiences of the middle class. In doing so, she also may have used one of her most powerful phrases yet: “trumped-up trickle-down.”

Middle Class Roots

The first question of the debate addressed the economy, an issue that draws many voters, both working and middle class, to support Trump. Clinton focuses on the middle class, highlighting policies and tax cuts that will assist the middle class. She compares them to Trump’s plan which she refers to as “trumped-up trickled-down.” She points out their differing economic views as being the result of both candidates’ upbringings. She comes from a middle-class family and Trump, from a more privileged background. She uses a personal story about her father, an effective strategy in political campaigning, to distinguish the two candidates. Clinton compares Trump, someone from a privileged and wealthy family who, “started his business with $14 million, borrowed from his father” to her father, “…a small-businessman who worked really hard.” This is effective because it joins Trump to his own trumped- up trickle-down economics which Trump does little to rebut.

Trump: A History of Deception 

One of Clinton’s best moments in the debate was her attack on Trump’s tax returns and his exploitation of the economic crisis in the early 2000’s. Clinton pressed Donald Trump hard on his tax returns, pointing to past records which show he paid nothing. Trump replied, “That makes me smart.” She also uses a tactic consistently employed by the Clinton campaign: using Donald Trump’s own words against him. This time, she quotes him talking about the housing crisis back in 2006 saying, “Gee, I hope it does collapse because then I can go in and buy some and make some money.” Once again, Trump takes the bait saying, “That’s called business.” Clinton immediately pounces citing, “Nine million people- nine million people lost their jobs. Five million lost their homes. And $13 trillion in family wealth was wiped out.” Clinton is not only discrediting Donald Trump but she’s pulling at the strings of families who suffered during that time, many of whom are undecided, and many of whom originally backed Trump for his economic success.

So why was Clinton’s debate appeal to the middle-class effective? She brought real solutions to the table and consistently showed how Trump’s strongest appeal, his business record, takes advantage of disadvantaged middle-class families.

Post-Debate 

Why is this significant? It’s one of the few issues from the debate still being discussed and one of the few issues that has gained traction since the debate. Yesterday the New York Times leaked pages from Donald Trump’s 1995 tax records revealing he declared a $916 million loss on his income tax returns. The NY Times and a hired team of tax experts weigh in that the deduction could have allowed him to dodge federal income taxes for a whopping 18 years. The new findings bring further skepticism on his ‘successful businessman’ image and bring further doubt on Trump’s ability to grow the economy and work for middle and working class families. As Clinton said in the debate, “If he’s paid zero, that means zero for troops, zero for vets, zero for schools or health.” Simply put, if he hasn’t upheld his civic duty to help these groups in the past, what evidence is there that he will in the future? From a marketing perspective, only time will tell if Clinton’s message will reach voters, but it is certainly causing problems for the Trump campaign.