The most successful nicknames and/or monikers in political attacks have three ingredients: They’re catchy and memorable; they convey an ugly but unspoken truth; and, most importantly, this truth contradicts the candidate’s desired branding.
Take Bill Clinton, for instance. “Slick Willy” stuck with him because it captured an essential truth about “the man from Hope,” who sought to be portrayed as the next John F. Kennedy but was more akin to the next Teddy Kennedy. Same goes for “Low Energy” Jeb Bush: The attack wouldn’t have worked if Jeb was chugging Red Bulls and belting out exciting speeches. Jeb(!) didn’t want to be perceived as near-comatose, of course, but sometimes your body language betrays you.
So what do you do with a problem like Kamala?
Trump’s trouble is an embarrassment of riches: There’s just so much meat on the bone it’s tough to winnow it down to a single snappy nickname. Do you attack her as a DEI hire? Name her after the border debacle or the BLM rioters she supported? Her penchant for GPT-style word salads? Which way do you go?
It’s a vexing challenge for the Trump campaign because she’s like the human version of Pringles: Once you start pointing out her flaws, you can’t stop. There are just… so… many!
Thus far, Trump’s messaging error is that of excess: He’s called her so many (accurate) things, both big and small, that no single adjective will stick. In PR, specificity is everything. When you need an audience to associate one or two specific adjectives with a brand, you can’t overwhelm them. You need to streamline your messaging, or your message will be buried under an avalanche of irrelevant words.
Ask yourself: Out of all the truthful things about Harris, which one or two would be the most odious — as well as demonstrably accurate — to the American people? And of these truthful things, which one would most forcefully undercut her core PR campaign?
To me, it’s obvious: She’s Queen Kamala.
This isn’t someone who’s earned the nomination. Instead, it was handed to her on a silver platter. She has no accomplishments as VP — her cupboard is completely bare. Even now, she’s not allowing interviews… because why should she bother with mere peasants?
This might be an election year, but this isn’t an election: It’s a coronation.
And it’s a coronation that the media is spearheading, promoting, cheerleading, and ordering you to attend. You didn’t choose her — Joe Biden and the media did — but don’t dare question her credentials! You don’t want to be responsible for ending democracy, do you?
During her entire tenure as vice president, absolutely nobody said, “Kamala Harris is doing an amazing job and would be a fantastic president!” The opposite was true: She was widely perceived as unpopular, ineffective, and a political liability. As recently as September of 2023, The Washington Post was running op-eds, arguing that Biden must drop Harris from the ticket!
And they weren’t alone: There was this Newsweek article from June 2023: “The Democrats Shouldn’t Ditch Joe Biden — They Should Replace Kamala Harris.” And a month earlier, in May 2023, Politico ran an article: “Will Kamala Harris Harm Joe Biden’s Reelection Chances?”
Until a few weeks ago, the consensus media opinion was that Kamala Harris was an inept, word-mangling albatross. And now, simply because Joe Biden isn’t running, she’s the greatest, most inspiring leader of our generation. You can trust her so completely that she doesn’t even need to trifle with interviews.
All this is completely normal. (What, are you “weird” or something?)
The same people who were so honest and transparent about Joe Biden’s mental acuity are surely, 100 percent telling you the truth about Queen Kamala being the rightful heir to the American Empire.
The good news is that Americans already know most of the relevant facts. (It’s really not a complicated story!) But you still need to take your audience by the hand and help them connect the dots. That’s the essence of good PR.
If Joe Biden hadn’t agreed to an early debate, Kamala Harris would still be perceived as an unlikeable dimwit, and the media would still be telling us what a razor-sharp thinker Joe Biden is (when nobody’s looking, of course). That’s been the narrative for 99 percent of the Biden-Harris term.
They only switched the script a few weeks ago!
The American people have an instinctive aversion to meritless ascension. We loathe things like that. It pisses us off when someone underserving steals the brass ring. This is a sacrosanct American belief: Royal lines and nepotism suck! It’s anathema to the ethos of our country.
The media wants to cover the coronation of Queen Kamala. They want you to bow and curtsy, assuming your rightful spot by her feet. The media is firmly in Queen Kamala’s court: Grovel in low homage!
Call the media out. Explicitly make this connection, so when the media heaps upon her (even more) undeserving praise, it comes across like a jester desperate to dance for his Queen. And with her grating, cloying mannerisms and a speaking style reminiscent of a schoolteacher admonishing kindergarteners, the “Queen Kamala” nickname will become an indelible part of her brand. It fits her… like a crown.
Kamala might want to be queen — and the media can’t wait to play the part of jester — but the PR ball is still in Donald Trump’s court. At least for a little while.
He just needs to sink the shot.
Join the conversation as a VIP Member