Fraser SeitelFraser Seitel

Ironically, a second unsuccessful attempt to assassinate Donald Trump could afford him one last opportunity to alter the public relations calculus and help the former President win reelection.

Granted, in light of Mr. Trump’s unwillingness to listen to others—his initial response to blame Biden/Harris rhetoric for the gunman was all wrong—the possibility of convincing him to change his vindictive tune is slim. But with empathy back on his side after enduring yet another close call with death, it’s once again within his power to expose a more mature, thoughtful and well-meaning side that could carry him to victory.

With the presidential sweepstakes in its home stretch, the big surprise is that Kamala Harris has become the front-runner. “Surprise” because a month ago, VP Harris was an afterthought, unloved by Democrats and considered a mediocrity by Republicans who pointed to her undistinguished 30-year political career, with few notable achievements, lots of office turnover and little charisma as a speaker or leader.

So, how could Ms. Harris so quickly reverse public opinion and stand on the cusp of becoming the next President of the United States?

For one thing, she’s listened assiduously to her public relations advisors. She no longer cackles or swings her arms around wildly at the podium. She keeps her answers to questions and statements in speeches short, rather than getting preachy or philosophical or long-winded. And she good-naturedly dismisses her opponent’s bluster, refusing to take seriously his persistent threats, accusations and name-calling.

That’s why, with less than two months left, she’s winning, principally because—as she demonstrated in the ABC debate—she has let Trump be Trump. And “Trump as Trump” is getting old.

Consider his rallies, his debates and his post-debate appearances. He’s bitter, frustrated and self-pitying. And this public posture, accelerated by an irrefutably anti-Trump media, will only hurt his chances of convincing the fence-sitters to vote for him.

Indeed, the only reason this election is at issue at all is that there are still thousands of voters in six or seven swing states that haven’t made up their minds. That’s it. Convince these uncommitted independents and you’ll be the next President.

So, as much he resists it, the only way to convince these presumably more thoughtful voters, who are uncertain about Harris but wary of Trump, is to embrace a public relations strategy that represses the rancor and contempt that have formed the basis of Democrat arguments against him and emphasizes the clear and precise—not to mention mostly true—distinctions between his opponent and himself on the several issues that matter ... with simple talking points like these.

The economy

  • I am pro-business; she is not.
  • Her Justice Department and Federal Trade Commission, in the name of “equity,” have tried to dismantle America’s greatest companies—from Apple and Google to Meta and Microsoft—that provide tens of thousands of jobs and fairly-priced products.
  • My administration oversaw inflation at two percent, unemployment at historic lows and six million jobs added to the economy.
  • I’ve spent my life building businesses and making workers more successful. She has no experience building anything.

Immigration

  • I favor secure borders and legal immigration. Her record is one of open borders and unfettered entry into our country by undocumented immigrants.
  • She has supported sanctuary cities—like New York, San Francisco, Chicago and Los Angeles—that have had to pay millions in taxpayer money to feed and house huge numbers of southern-border immigrants and have been afflicted by criminal activity from undocumented migrants with no place to go and nothing to do.
  • My administration secured the southern border by tightening immigration laws and will restore sanity to immigration if reelected.

Foreign policy

  • I ask for mutual respect and fairness from our allies and deal from strength with our adversaries. Her policy is one of accommodation and weakness.
  • Her record has been marked by a disastrous withdrawal from Afghanistan and continuing involvement in lingering conflicts in Ukraine and Israel, which has cost U.S. taxpayers nearly $100 billion.
  • She would continue to be passive in these conflicts and with our adversaries. These wars would continue. My commitment is to end these wars, in the best interests of the United States and its allies.

Schools

  • I believe schools should provide a safe and secure environment for traditional learning. She believes schools should be hotbeds for social and political indoctrination.
  • I believe in greater school choice and a greater say for parents and communities in the school life of their children. She believes in a stronger federal role in education and confidentiality between schools and students that would subordinate the involvement or even knowledge of parents in personal matters such as gender preference.
  • My emphasis in education favors the more traditional learning environment that prepares students to become successful individuals and good citizens. Her emphasis favors more political, progressive issues, such as gender and race.

Will Trump finally decide to ditch the venom and follow such a public relations course that lays out the stark differences between the two candidates? Probably not.

This is why the uncommitted voters of Arizona, Georgia, Michigan, Nevada, Pennsylvania, North Carolina and Wisconsin may well decide that a President Harris, untried and unknown as she might be, is still the safer choice.

***

Fraser P. Seitel has been a communications consultant, author and teacher for 40 years. He's the author of the Pearson text “The Practice of Public Relations,” now in its 14th edition, and co-author of “Rethinking Reputation" and "Idea Wise.” He may be reached directly at [email protected].