The election has taken the world by storm and celebrities participating and endorsing political candidates Donald Trump and Kamala Harris, has been a subject of much controversy. However, it’s not just pop stars like Taylor Swift showing their support. Recently Michelle Obama made a speech at Harris’s campaign stressing the importance of women’s rights, specifically abortion.
She warns, on the behalf of women, that “a vote for him is a vote against us”, referring to Trump’s actions towards overturning Roe v. Wade. She then goes on to emphasize how this decision will not only affect women but also men, in an attempt to raise even more support for Harris for men who assume this matter does not pertain to them: “The devastating consequences of teen pregnancy won’t just be borne by young girls, but also by the young men who are the fathers”. Additionally, she went on to discuss how not only is Trump a poor candidate to help meet the needs of women’s health, but the trend of having male politicians making decisions that regard women’s health is wrong.
Obama has already done lots of work advocating for women’s rights that she’s continued outside of her husband’s former presidency, such as her advocation for young girl’s education with her Let Girls Learn program. So, given Obama’s history, it is no surprise that this issue is one she is the most passionate about, especially given she has two daughters.
Given her credibility, it is safe to say that Obama is very qualified to speak out on these subjects. Not to mention, the fact that she does so in a way that also raises support for the candidate she holds the most trust in, just increases the significance of her speech. We need more people like her using their platform and popularity for the benefit of the country and educate the youth. This has become more and more important as the younger generations trust only what they see online. Similar to what we learned in the beginning of the year about the change over time from more traditional media platforms like newspapers and news stations on TV to what we know today as social media and the internet. Overall, it seems that while there is a lot of push back on celebrities endorsing candidates, this really is necessary to increase younger voter turnout and raise awareness on the importance of the policies each candidate supports or opposes.
https://www.nytimes.com/2024/10/26/us/politics/michelle-obama-speech-harris-michigan.html
https://www.washingtonpost.com/elections/2024/10/26/2024-election-campaign-updates-harris-trump/
https://www.cnn.com/2024/10/26/politics/michelle-obama-harris-rally/index.html
https://www.nytimes.com/2024/10/26/us/politics/harris-michelle-obama-michigan.html
7 comments:
Reflecting on this post after the presidential election has been called for Donald Trump, it deeply saddens me that the argument for a more equal society for women and the protection of women's rights was not only an insufficient argument, but one that Donald Trump was almost able to effectively leverage in his appeal to more conservative men.
A few notes on this: I read in a New York Times article the sentiment that I believe is accurate, which is that when Hillary Clinton lost, women were outraged, but the second time, there is a lot more resignation. This is indeed the case. The other problem is that single-issue voters related to abortion turned out to be lower than expected, as is proven where even though women showed up in crazy high numbers for Harris, she still underperformed compared to Biden across the entire country unequivocally, highlighting that the relevance of the topic, at least for the time being, is not the #1 issue even as it is Harris's strongest topic and the most important topic to many women, and with the Democrats continually ceding ground on many important issues towards a very centrist perspective while the Republicans have been able to reframe abortion as a state's issue and continue to stake out more and more extremist positions makes me worried for the future of this country.
https://www.nytimes.com/2024/11/06/us/politics/harris-woman-president.html
I think this is an example of a good sentiment but too late. The reality is, many voters had already made up their minds on abortion and didn’t switch their candidate just to support it. 56.1% of Florida citizens (Floridians?) voted for Donald Trump. Meanwhile 57.1% of them voted to pass Amendment 4 which would allow women the right to an abortion up to fetal viability (22-24 weeks). It didn’t pass as it needed 60% to pass but it shows that people are willing to support the women’s right to an abortion, despite still voting for Trump. I think this is likely because Trump has said that people “wanted the decision back in the states” so he put it in the states. Trump has been back and forth on when he wants abortion to be banned but he said he wouldn’t sign a national abortion ban and that abortions shouldn’t be given to women with exceptions for rape, incest and life of the mother. I think many Americans think that this is not very extremist and is what should be done, and many people have adopted anti-abortion ideals based on religious beliefs. This makes Harris looks like an extremist in the other direction. While Trump does support some rights for women, Republicans in general do not. His vice president JD Vance previously said we should nationally limit abortion and many assume the Trump campaign would limit access to abortion pills. This is women’s healthcare. This is what Michelle Obama is fighting against. But clearly, single-issue voters didn’t show up as much as they needed to, to help Harris.
While speeches such as these do seem important in bringing people together for the Democratic party, the main audience seems to be individuals who have already made up their minds about their votes and care deeply about abortion rights.
The comment about young voter turnout was particularly interesting in hindsight, considering the strong young male vote that went towards Trump. If anything, popular celebrity endorsements of the Democratic party seemed to serve as a detriment towards numbers of voters for Harris. I've read a couple articles recently about how most people are actually tired of hearing what they consider "elitist" celebrity voices -- artists living in a liberal bubble who do not understand the regular lives of the middle/working class. While such endorsements likely did not have a significant impact on the ultimate election results, the change in people's view of more and more celebrities coming out with political opinions is something to pay attention to in future elections.
https://www.nytimes.com/2024/11/08/style/celebrity-endorsements-trump-harris.html
Reading this after the election, I understand that the main purpose of the speech -gaining more support for Kamala Harris- ultimately wasn't enough. However, I still believe that, even after the results, it was important for her to deliver this speech as a reminder to all women of the support they have. It's reassuring to women across the country that there remains people, like Michelle Obama, who will continue to fight for the right to abortions and women's rights as a whole.
This blog immediately reminded me of something I had read about another former (and returning) First Lady, Melania Trump. Recently, she expressed her support for the pro-choice movement during a Fox News interview, stating: “I want to decide what I want to do with my body... I don’t want government in my personal business.” While it’s important she spoke out about her beliefs, I personally don’t have much faith that she will act on it. She has also said, “I let [Donald Trump] be his own person... He has different beliefs, and he will do what he believes if he is elected,” suggesting she won’t actively oppose her husband’s stance. (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Wtbph1tyB7s)
Either way, I am glad to see First Ladies speak out and take advantage of the platform they are given.
Michelle Obama's pleas for equality speaks volumes. As a former first lady, she has seen the power the government has and given the steps her and her husband were to achieve to go forward, it's understandable why she doesn't want to go back. Even more so as a mother, her words have an impact across the country as a figure that America knows well and can trust. Although this wasn't enough to push more people to vote for Harris, I believe their efforts were not in vain as this only motivates people to continue to speak up about abortion rights throughout Trump's candidacy. Given that a main point of the Harris campaign is on prioritizing women health, it means a lot that Michelle Obama took time to show her support.
I think it’s incredibly important that Michelle Obama spoke on behalf of women’s rights, even if it may have been too late in the campaign to have a large impact on the outcome of the election. While I would consider Obama a celebrity, I suppose that wouldn’t be the first category I would place her in. After all, many people constantly rally for the former first lady to run for presidency herself — it seems fitting that she would speak at a rally like this.
However, I’m not sure this speech should have been delivered after all of the celebrity performances to rally support. It seems that much of America has a lot to be educated on policy-wise throughout the course of this election (exemplified by the rise in google searches of “who pays tariffs” after Trump was elected), and having Michelle Obama speak on such an important topic that affects so much of the nation seems like something that should be prioritized much more than it was.
One thing I found very powerful in her speech (that was still very important to get across even late in the election) was the large angle of her speech that discussed how Americans would be affected by new abortion policies; I’ve seen many personalities both in my everyday life and online trading empathy for policy, and taking up an attitude of “well it won’t affect me!” Therefore, it’s important to spread awareness of the fact that policy changes might, in fact, affect many of these people. Even if many Americans didn’t pick up on these changes early in this election, hopefully speeches of this sentiment will allow more Americans to look farther into the future in upcoming elections.
https://thenightly.com.au/politics/us-politics/what-is-a-tariff-google-searches-for-term-tariff-spike-after-donald-trump-elected-as-president-c-16712054?utm_campaign=share-icons&utm_source=clipboard&utm_medium=clipboard&tid=1733216659691
I find the article’s closing statement about celebrity involvement in politics to be a very interesting discussion point, and largely I agree that celebrity endorsements have had a substantial impact on the election. Especially in the recent election, endorsements such as Taylor Swift’s for the Harris campaign spurred much more support for the Democratic party (especially when spread through social media — a large part of Harris’s campaign). However, I think there is a point where having too many celebrity endorsements can leave some unserious impressions. For example, Megan Thee Stallion’s performance at Harris’s Atlanta rally was quickly caught in a wave of backlash from the Republican party that were mainly targeted at her being “unprofessional” (nevermind how Donald Trump called Bryce Hall, a Tiktok star, onstage at a Las Vegas rally).
While Charli XCX’s support gave Harris’s campaign a wave of VERY positive pr at the beginning of summer, quickly there were many calls from many of Harris’s supporters for her to do Tiktok dances and play into the aesthetic of the Brat album. I think it was extremely good that Harris didn’t do these dances, as it would have established her as more of a pop culture celebrity than a politician who should be taken seriously. Additionally, when considering that the actual meaning of the album is centered around cocaine usage, it's maybe not the best association to make past the aesthetic.
As a takeaway, I think the Harris campaign may have had a few too many celebrity endorsements, especially considering that many voters might not be persuaded by an extremely young, new, pop artist. However, Harris’s media campaign (while heavily celebrity-centric) did a very good job of establishing herself in a good light, when playing into meme culture is an especially easy trap to fall into (and often happens with politicians).
https://www.nbcnews.com/tech/internet/kamala-harris-brat-meaning-mean-slang-charli-xcx-what-does-hq-rcna163026
https://uk.news.yahoo.com/kamala-harris-supporters-dismiss-backlash-213405288.html?guccounter=1&guce_referrer=aHR0cHM6Ly93d3cuZ29vZ2xlLmNvbS8&guce_referrer_sig=AQAAAIyZV1Q0EOgbTLIi34nOir98Kba6_UToWb1389hqhMniJmbM7pyIwc5bBEnvccqWQAKV6YdGMg-4ycPHH7drbYyGY62w9ZzaFhA91Hp1C1z8PNEpAIDLpvr7-eQI9o6JnRAPKHeyrK54HwMgBNJha_wVxtGSY6ADs0XKJknG2aFa
Post a Comment