Just Because Harris Didn’t Mention Antitrust In The Debate Doesn’t Mean She Abandoned It

Populist messaging on holding corporations accountable remains a strong part of the Vice President’s campaign strategy.

A lot has changed since the June Presidential debate, which brought an abrupt end to Joe Biden’s campaign. Now, with Vice President Kamala Harris carrying the Democratic Party’s mantle, there’s a sharp contrast between her energetic approach and Trump’s playbook.

However, despite this reshuffling of candidates, the core issue driving this election remains unchanged: the economic insecurity felt by the American public. Both the June debate and the one held on Tuesday night began with moderators prompting the candidates to outline their respective approaches to the economy. On this topic (as well as others addressed throughout the debate) Harris' message seemed to resonate more with political commentators and the public alike; and that’s without much mention of her more populist policy proposals. 

A key aspect of Harris’ economic platform that got less attention than perhaps expected was her call to ban price gouging for rent, food, and groceries. This is somewhat understandable, given that she had to regularly navigate Trump’s tendencies to derail the conversation with repeated half-truths and blatant lies (largely centered around xenophobic and racist remarks to various migrant communities). However, another reason Harris’ antitrust policies went under-discussed could be because of influential actors within her campaign. 

Harris was, after all, prepped for the debate by Karen Dunn—a prominent attorney and political operative with equally close ties to the Democratic Party and the tech industry. Dunn's involvement is notable considering she is advising the Harris Campaign while simultaneously defending Google in a monopolization lawsuit brought by Harris’ own administration. This obvious conflict of interest—which we at the the Revolving Door Project have called out (much to the frustration of centrist pundits like Matt Yglesias)—has opened Harris up to opportunistic, but valid, attacks from the Trump Campaign about this relationship’s potential influence on Harris’ policy stances.

While it was always likely that certain aspects of Harris’ debate prep would be left on the cutting room floor, Dunn’s close ties to both Harris and Big Tech invite skepticism towards the reasons for this omission of Harris’ antitrust policies.

However, the key operatives (polling, ad makers, etc.) that manage Harris’ massive paid media budget clearly believe that Harris’ populist policy proposals are good politics worth highlighting. In the week leading up to the debate, the Harris campaign released a new advertisement specifically calling attention to the anti-price gouging policies. The ad slammed Trump for his plan to provide tax cuts for “corporations [who] are gouging families” while reiterating Harris’ commitment to "make groceries more affordable by cracking down on price gouging.” 

We at the Revolving Door Project support this approach, and have consistently urged Harris to pick loud fights with Big Business. Despite what neoliberal pundits may say, pursuing a corporate crackdown agenda is both good economics and good politics, and it’s reassuring to see that elements of Harris’ campaign also agree. 

For all the influence Big Tech revolvers like Dunn may have had on Harris’ debate pivots and points of emphasis, it’s reassuring to know that equally influential members of the Harris campaign see a clear path to victory through populist messaging. If Harris is committed to defeating Trump come November, she would do well to continue highlighting her strong antitrust platform regardless of what the revolvers in her camp may say.

Follow the Revolving Door Project’s work on whatever platform works for you! You can find us on that website formerly known as Twitter, Bluesky, Instagram, and Facebook. 

Want more? Check out some of the pieces that we have published or contributed research or thoughts to in the last week:

The Other Group Praised By Ginni Thomas

Ethics Are Overrated Says Man Who Vouched For The Legitimacy Of The 21st Century’s Largest Scammer

Independent Agency Spotlight Update September 2024

Powell Should Recuse Himself from Basel Endgame Process

Corporate Polluters Still Want to Kill California’s Clean Air Regulations

Heatmap’s Poll on Permitting “Reform” Is Worse Than Useless

Matt Yglesias’ Understanding of Inflation is Still Fake

Political Appointees Need A Bright Line Ethics Rule: No Individual Stocks