With great importance placed on digital methods of engagement, technology seems to be playing a deciding factor in shaping campaign strategy as well as public opinion across the undecided voters of this rapidly evolving 2024 U.S. Presidential Election. Democrats and Republicans also use extensive digital mobilizations to bring out voters: they both are devising unique ways to connect with them with generative AI for campaigning on social media combined with analytics. Digital tools gave candidates the speed and accuracy that is unprecedented in U.S. election history in targeting messages to specific voting demographics.
Social media venues were a new way to reach more youthful voters. The “Kamala is brat” was Vice President Kamala Harris’s effort at generating attention by exciting voters through the development of a “youth-oriented, Gen Z-centric social media push that involves heavy pop culture usage as an incentive to motivate Americans in order to vote. In terms of popular celebrities, Harris sought relatability from those in Gen Z voting districts through influential personalities, for example, the trending pop artist Charli XCX. The campaign employs popular TikTok trends and meme culture, mirroring the ways in which candidates are using digital fluency to build loyalty among youth often skeptical of old political rhetoric.
Social media has dramatically been able to amplify the messages of the candidates—and misinformation. A space has been created for how voter sentiment can be fashioned through viral posts, ads, and even AI-generated contents. The policies have drastically changed at X under Elon Musk and cause deep concerns about the kind of dissemination of disinformation. Weak moderation may, again, create an “echo chamber,” where the fractured ideas would be fortified so that more polarization may manifest in this already splintered political spectrum. Donald Trump was infamously banned from X when it was Twitter, but after Musk’s acquirement of it, not only was he brought back, Musk has been openly siding with the Republican side.
In terms of which party has better utilized technology, both parties have played to their strengths. Democrats tend to lead in using data analytics to create targeted digital organizing. Republicans have centered their campaign on high-impact visuals and rapid-response tactics, such as AI-generated videos threatening dire consequences under a possible Democratic presidency. This is how Republicans play on emotive messages with a focus on mobilizing voters that react to the fear narrative. The Democrats have adapted social media to their participatory cause as a strategy of building a grassroots, community-based movement, at least within the swing states like Michigan and Pennsylvania where children’s voting may spell the difference.
Outcomes vary between these two, but both are eyeing undecided voters and swing states that would seal their fate in this contest. More recently, polling suggests that engagement among Gen Z on platforms such as TikTok may become indispensable: content native to such spaces has a higher potential of resonating with a youth undecided voter group. They have closely monitored digital trends and youth engagement metrics in the swing states, knowing that such interactions may well decide the course of a razor-thin race.
Both Kamala Harris and Donald Trump are focusing heavily on swing states, where changing demographics and shifting voter preferences can swing the difference. States such as Arizona, Georgia, Michigan, Nevada, North Carolina, Pennsylvania, and Wisconsin have historically small margins of victory and other issues specific to the region feed into the strategy of the candidate. For instance, Arizona voters demand border security; Harris has a lousy record on immigration. Trump being extremely stringent on borders might work well here but Harris supporting economic policies such as CHIPS Act, targeting local manufacturing, which Arizona economy-centric voters would appreciate
In Georgia, where Blacks make up a majority of the electorate, Harris hopes to hold the narrow margin that Biden won in 2020. Yet, controversies surrounding Trump-including charges of election interference in Georgia-may wound and mend him at the same time: the allegations will alienate some voters while his resilience to bounce back will harden support in his loyal base. Michigan presents a different kind of challenge altogether for Harris. The state has been an important support of the auto industry, long considered a Democratic stronghold, but frustration with Biden’s policies, particularly among Arab American voters, could portend uncertainty if Harris is unable to address economic and foreign policy concerns. This election heightens a polarized political climate even more, digging deeper crevices between Democrats and Republicans over core issues like immigration, economic reform, and personal freedoms.
Only social media and technology amplify this through creating echo chambers where opinions only serve to reinforce what each side thinks, the flow of misinformation increases, but the idea is not something new in American politics – and polarization has strengthened its hold in recent electoral times with fears that this might see it extend to acts of violence. Since 2016, analysts believe that rhetoric on stolen elections and allegations of corruption fueled distrust in electoral processes between both parties, which were seen as existential threats to American values. The historical divide between the Republican and Democratic platforms has grown sharper; indeed, it has at times moved toward cultural battles over social issues, racial justice, and environmental policies.
Gun control, immigration and abortion are among the high-stakes issues of recent years that have elicited extremely emotional responses from voters while fueling anger between both camps. Social media compounds the divisions as inflammatory content goes viral and creates an urgency and existential threat amongst Democratic and Republican voters. This has meant that the campaigns for this cycle have been more viciously hostile, and candidates have focused not just on policy differences but framed the opposition as fundamentally bad for the future of the nation. There is a real concern that this environment could provoke violent acts by individuals or groups unwilling to accept the election outcome.
The 2020 election precipitated the dangerous partisan animosity that is the January 6 Capitol riot, among other ugliness. Such animosity deepens security concerns surrounding another disputed outcome. For many, November 2024 will feel a lot like January 6. The most vulnerable regions would probably be the swing states where there is keen competition, which is being hot-wired by rhetoric with both camps and some observers believing that this kind of rhetoric may just culminate in violent ends if either perceives there is no fair end to the competition. In other words, the technological aspect of public opinion influencing and amplifying discord impacts the way campaigns are handled while potentially creating a different stage for unprecedented post-election turmoil. After all, technology in the 2024 U.S. Presidential Election only intensified voter polarization because digital environments favor the amplification of ideological differences and push information towards the silos where falsehoods can thrive easily. This election merely shows just how deeply technology is woven into the very fabric of modern politics-from how campaigns operate to how public discourse around politics plays out. This trend will continue as the strategies of political campaigns follow the evolution of platforms. It seems like technology is going to take an increasingly larger role in U.S. elections from here onwards as technology continues to grow