Does policy matter?

Lessons from two elections and one ongoing campaign

The last of the national elections that defined 2024 which was, by any standards, an epic year for election enthusiasts is rapidly approaching. Three score and ten days remain for the citizens of the United States to pick a government; and, while it was the Republicans who were the party of Abraham Lincoln, it is the Democrats who are clothing themselves in his mantle this time around, declaring they are "for the people".

One question that is worth asking at this point, however, is this: Are elections about policy, after all? The Democratic Party has surged in opinion polls recently - though probably not enough to win because of what people are calling "vibes". The replacement on the ticket of the current octogenarian President by his much younger vicepresident seemed sufficient to significantly expand the party's coalition of voters. Data shows, for example, that the median age of donors to Kamala Harris' campaign is 56, while the same statistic for Joe Biden's campaign was 66. (The distribution of donors to the President was also significantly skewed, with the mode at above 70.) This has happened without a significant shift in policies. After all, vice-presidents cannot exactly define themselves independently from the Presidents they serve.

To some extent, Ms Harris' rhetoric about issues like peace in West Asia is distinct from that of her boss in her convention speech, she focused both on defending Israel but also on the rights of the Palestinians. But the criticism that her campaign has been light on broader policy initiatives may be relatively justified.

But, if the vibes are working, do policy proposals even matter? Perhaps it does under certain circumstances.