Cover Image Source: Getty Images | Photo by Chip Somodevilla
The past ten days have been particularly consequential for Donald Trump’s 2024 presidential campaign, with events like the Madison Square Garden rally marking a pivotal moment in what some analysts see as the unraveling of his bid. Michael Tomasky, a journalist for The New Republic, shared his thoughts on Morning Joe, pointing to the rally as a significant turning point for Trump, citing the inflammatory nature of the speeches and the overall tone as indicators that Trump is “losing it.”
In a recent article, Tomasky discussed the Madison Square Garden rally, which he says was filled with racist and sexist rhetoric. “I think journalists and future historians will look back at the Madison Square Garden rally as a key, key moment,” Tomasky explained. “When we first learned about that rally, I immediately wrote, ah, Fritz Kuhn, 1939; this is what he is trying to emulate,” he added, drawing a comparison to a rally held by the German-American Bund in 1939, which was notorious for its alignment with Nazi ideology. For Tomasky, the tone and content of the Madison Square Garden rally highlighted a divisive approach that could ultimately backfire.
Tomasky argued that Trump missed an opportunity to demonstrate inclusivity and moderation by choosing speakers who could appeal to a broader audience. “Trump had an opportunity to have moderate speakers and people representative of America to prove naysayers wrong,” Tomasky remarked. Instead, however, the event became what he described as “a crazy hate fest,” which he believes reflects poorly on Trump’s campaign.
In contrast, Tomasky pointed out that Vice President Kamala Harris has taken a very different approach in recent weeks, focusing on messages of optimism and progress. “What has Kamala Harris spent the last ten days doing?” Tomasky asked rhetorically. “More than ten days, actually. ‘We’re not going back,’ and ‘It is time to turn the page.’ This is what Doris [Kearns Goodwin] was saying. This is hopeful, optimistic, and forward-looking, and it is a contrast,” he explained. By presenting an alternative that emphasizes unity and progress, Tomasky believes Harris’s approach could resonate more positively with voters who are seeking stability and a clear vision for the future.
Tomasky also emphasized the importance of “vibes” in shaping voter perception, asserting that Harris’s recent messaging appears more presidential in contrast to Trump’s recent “WTF moments.” According to Tomasky, the optics of Trump’s last ten days — punctuated by controversial statements and divisive rhetoric — stand in stark contrast to Harris’s more hopeful messaging, which may appeal to a broad swath of voters.
While Trump’s Madison Square Garden rally has garnered criticism, Tomasky suggests that the cumulative effect of recent events could be damaging to his campaign’s long-term prospects. For Tomasky and others observing the political landscape, the rally and subsequent “WTF moments” reflect a campaign struggling to connect with a diverse electorate. Rather than expanding his base, Tomasky believes Trump’s approach could reinforce negative perceptions, particularly among moderates and undecided voters.
As the 2024 race unfolds, the contrasting approaches between candidates are becoming more apparent. With Harris and other Democratic figures pushing forward-looking messages and Trump doubling down on his established rhetoric, Tomasky sees a clear divide emerging in the strategies of the two camps. This divergence, he argues, could prove critical in shaping the outcome of the election, with voters increasingly attuned to the “vibes” and overall demeanor of each campaign.
Ultimately, for Tomasky, Trump’s choices in recent days have brought his campaign to a critical juncture. Whether or not Trump can pivot and adopt a more inclusive tone remains uncertain, but Tomasky’s analysis suggests that failure to do so may cost him significantly in the race for the presidency.
