Why Taylor Swift can influence the US elections

September 11, 2024. Minutes after the US presidential debate ended, Taylor Swift posted the following message on Instagram. “I will vote for Kamala Harris because she fights for rights and causes that need someone to defend them.” A day later, he reiterated his support for the Democratic Party candidate at the MTV VMA awards – in which he was crowned with seven awards – and encouraged the American population to mobilize ahead of the elections on November 5. “If you are 19 years old, please register to vote. “It is an important election,” he claimed.

CBS reported that the effect of his words had been immediate: registration increased by “400% or 500%”, which translated “between 9,000 and 10,000 people per hour”, when 48 had not been reached since it was announced. publicly postulate. It was not the first time that the support of the international star pushed participation. In 2018, 65,000 people registered in a single day after the artist announced on her Instagram account that she would vote for Democratic candidates in the midterm legislative elections that were held on October 9 of that year.

Now, Swift is not the only one – she has not been the first nor will she be the last. celebrity to run publicly in elections. And they do it using different speakers; either in the form of post on social networks, speeches at galas and concerts, or with performances within the campaign events themselves (as is the case of Mumford & Sons and Gracie Adams at the Harris rally in Wisconsin last week).

“People should not be afraid to express their opinions. The vice president supports a future for this country in which these freedoms and many others are defended and protected,” rapper Eminem also said at a Barack Obama rally ten days ago. “A Trump victory would be four more years of shit. I will always be an American rather than a Republican. That’s why, this week, I’m going to vote for Kamala Harris and Tim Waltz,” actor and former Republican governor of California Arnold Schwarzenegger warned in X on Thursday.

Even Mariah Carey has spoken out, transforming her traditional welcome to Christmas with her well-known All I Want For Christmas Is You by a video in which actress Kerry Washington intervenes to remember that it is not yet time to receive gifts from Santa Claus, but to “vote.”

Billie Eilish, Ariana Grande, Jennifer Anniston, Bruce Springsten, Spike Lee, Jennifer Lopez, Mark Ruffalo, Scarlett Johansson, Stevie Wonder, Beyoncé, Demi Lovato, Leonardo DiCaprio, Jennifer Lawrence, Anne Hataway, Sigourney Weaver, Barbra Streisand and Robert de Niro They are other figures that add to the list of support for Harris. Also Rufus Wainwright, who described Trump’s use of Hallelujah during one of his campaign events, without his permission or that of the representatives of the estate of the song’s composer, Leonard Cohen.

On the other hand, there are other names such as Mel Gibson or Clint Eastwood, who have run in favor of the former president. Once their opinions have been confirmed, the big question is whether their opinions really have the power to determine the future of the electoral results.

The “shortcuts” to choosing your vote

Political scientist Lluís Orriols explains to elDiario.es that, “in general terms,” citizens “do not form opinions about which policies or candidates are good just by looking at the programs or by getting exhaustive information, but rather they look for shortcuts. Reliable sources that tell them what to think.” “Just like when you want to buy a car you ask someone who knows about cars. And the same with computers. This makes the endorsements [estrategia de comunicación que usa la imagen de figuras reconocidas para recomendar productos] they work a lot. The population is constantly aware of who would be an authoritative voice to be able to form an opinion in a simple and low-cost way,” reflects the expert.

Of course, the next thing would be to consider “if the cerebrities whether or not they are a reliable source.” Whether they are or not, the political scientist values ​​that “they do have a significant impact capacity because they are role models for a lot of people.” In the case of Taylor Swift, “especially among the young community, so it can generate a certain mobilization effect, which does not mean changing votes.” Lluís Orriols explains that the fact that the singer publishes a statement on her social networks causes “the electoral campaign to reach a portion of the citizenry that had no idea about these issues except through these channels.” “That Taylor Swift talks about politics during the campaign helps to ensure that there are citizens who are more aware than they otherwise would be,” he concludes.

That Taylor Swift talks about politics during the campaign helps to make citizens more aware than they otherwise would be.

Lluís Orriols
— political scientist

Along the same lines is Paco Camas, director of Public Opinion Research at IPSOS Spain, a multinational focused on market research and consulting, who also points out: “Speakers that have prestigious artists or businessmen, whether it be Elon Musk with Trump or Swift with Harris, they are absolutely necessary,” especially because “the United States is the king of the political spectacle, it is experienced as a kind of show.”

And even more so in elections like the present ones that, as he describes, “are the closest in the last fifty years. The difference between Harris and Trump is less than five points. In such a close type of dispute, anything counts. For both parties it is absolutely necessary to mobilize as much as possible and convey the message to as many people as possible, from all walks of life.”

The art and architecture historian Miguel Ángel Cajigal Vera (@elbarroquista) explains that in the United States, the influence increases because there “there is not only one party A or party B, during the primaries of each one, each person aligns and supports.” “In Europe there is not so much tradition of participating in the partisan game,” he compares. The historian emphasizes that the link between art and politics has a long tradition, and provides examples from composers such as Wagner or Strauss, to the painter Gustave Courbet, who directly participated in the Paris Commune riots in the 19th century.

More recently, it highlights the role played by the American urban artist and designer Frank Shepartd Fairey (OBEY), creator of the iconic poster with the phrase “Hope” that Barack Obama used in his 2008 election campaign. And the sculptor Jeff Koons , who donated up to $50,000 to Hillary Clinton’s campaign in 2016, and continues to speak publicly on a political level. In the 2024 elections, he is part of the list of artists who are auctioning works to finance Harris’ candidacy, along with Shepard Fairey himself, as well as Carrie Mae Weems, Njideka Akunyili Crosby and Judy Chicago.

Activate vs. convince

“They do activate, another thing is that they manage to convince people to change their vote. That is more doubtful,” Lluís Orriols reflects on the room for maneuver that artists’ statements have. The first effect for the political scientist is to “bring the campaign closer to many people. The increase in registrations after the endorsement by Taylor Swift supports the idea that mobilizing, mobilizing, and managed to sneak the campaign through unusual channels.” However, it is not clear to me that because the singer “says she is going to support Harris, many Trumpists are going to go there.”

In that sense, he considers that it is even more complicated in “contexts as polarized as the present, where if Swift makes a statement, counter-opinionists are already seeking to question the authority or quality of a singer’s opinion. If you are already aligned with a political trench, just because Taylor tells you to change trenches, you are not going to do it.” Paco Camas also defends that it is “difficult to statistically measure the effects.” “It can be observed in issues such as a debate, which is the political event par excellence and one of the demonstrations that most helps decide the vote,” he emphasizes, recalling that it was precisely as a result of a debate that “led Biden to resign.” ”.

Paco Camas emphasizes that the “very high polarization” implies a “greater risk” for artists who decide to raise their voices. “That they are positioning themselves so clearly shows how much is at stake in these elections,” he warns, while pointing out: “There is a much greater fear about the impact it could have on your career as an artist.”

When comparing the implications in the US with those in Spain, he assures that here “it is penalized a lot” – a clear example was the repercussions that those who supported ‘No to war’ had in 2003. Lluís Orriols explains that “traditionally, writers or actors have been a lot in the public debate on political issues. “They have had that authority.” With his sights still on Europe, Paco Camas remembers another paradigmatic case, when Mbappé called to vote against the extreme right in the French elections last June. He did so in the first and second rounds, for which he insisted on the “urgency” of voting to stop Le Pen.

“He is one of the best-known and most influential French figures. Not only as a footballer, but also because of his origins, his family and the book he published telling his life. A position of this type clearly has an impact and has consequences when being in a polarized society,” says the expert. Finally, the left union managed to win the elections.

This Tuesday, November 5, the future of the US Government will be decided, where Kamala Harris or Donald Trump will become the new president of the country. The countdown for the allegations made by well-known artists and figures comes to an end and, with it, a new list of names that may or may not have exercised their power of convening and citizen inclination in the elections.