Democratic Senate candidates in key “blue wall” states—Pennsylvania, Wisconsin, and Michigan—are increasingly distancing themselves from Vice President Kamala Harris and the Biden administration as they head into the high-stakes 2024 elections. These strategies appear aimed at appealing to some former Trump supporters while maintaining the support of their base. Notably, Democratic incumbents are focusing on their records and local issues rather than attacking Trump or his policies, suggesting a strategic pivot to secure their seats. This approach reflects a calculation that aligning with Trump-like populism might resonate better with working-class voters in these critical battlegrounds.
In Pennsylvania, incumbent Senator Bob Casey is an example of a Democrat attempting to navigate this delicate political landscape. His campaign has adopted a narrative emphasizing independence from the Biden administration, even going so far as to praise Trump’s tariff policies. Casey’s advertisements are devoid of explicit party mentions, opting instead to highlight his history of supporting fracking and his collaboration with Trump on trade issues. This framing seeks to position him favorably against his Republican opponent, David McCormick, while also appealing to voters dissatisfied with Biden and Harris. Data suggests that Trump has a slight edge over Harris in the state, further complicating Casey’s campaign dynamic as the nonpartisan Cook Political Report recently categorized the race as a “toss-up.”
Similarly, in Wisconsin, Senator Tammy Baldwin has intentionally minimized references to both President Biden and Vice President Harris during her campaign, focusing instead on substantive policy issues. Her strategy includes criticizing opponent Eric Hovde’s support for tax cuts and austerity measures—shifting the discussion away from Trump and toward local economic concerns. Just like Casey, Baldwin has employed some populist rhetoric, tapping into themes that echo the former President’s message while avoiding any direct confrontation with him. This course reflects a broader trend among Democrats in these pivotal states to attract votes by embracing certain aspects of Trump’s populism, particularly on tariffs and American manufacturing.
The Republican response has highlighted the contradictions in these strategies, pointing out the history of Baldwin and Casey’s opposition to Trump during his presidency. The National Republican Senatorial Committee criticized their attempts to align with Trump, calling them disingenuous given their prior actions, including voting to impeach him twice. However, Democrats like Baldwin have defended their actions by emphasizing bipartisanship on job protection initiatives, arguing that their collaboration with the previous administration was geared toward benefitting constituents rather than ideological alignment. This tactic, however, may not be enough to shield them from Republican attacks as they attempt to present themselves as pragmatic leaders who prioritize their states’ interests over partisan loyalties.
In Michigan, Democratic candidate Elissa Slotkin mirrors the cautious approach of her counterparts in Pennsylvania and Wisconsin. Slotkin has expressed concern about Harris’s standing in her state, even referring to the Vice President’s challenges in polls as a cause for worry among Democratic supporters. Instead of directly engaging with Trump, she has focused her campaign on local issues while downplaying her ties to the Biden administration, which has faced criticism from voters concerned about inflation and border management. As she articulates her bipartisan track record, Slotkin is also cautious in confronting Trump directly, choosing instead to highlight instances where she believes he has misled the public. This sidelining of Trump during debates reveals her strategy to appeal to moderate voters without alienating those who might still lean toward Trump’s earlier policies.
Polls indicate that this strategy of separating from Biden and Harris may be effective in these critical battlegrounds; however, it has become increasingly risky as Election Day approaches. Historical trends from the 2016 and 2020 elections demonstrate that the presidential race can significantly sway Senate races, and the current polling reflects a narrowing gap between Democratic candidates and their Republican counterparts as well as the Biden-Harris ticket. The Cook Political Report’s recent assessment of states like Wisconsin and Pennsylvania from “lean Democrat” to “toss-up” reveals that Democratic incumbents cannot take their seats for granted and must continue finding ways to appeal to a broader voter base, including those disillusioned with the current administration.
As the political landscape evolves, the strategies employed by these Senate candidates will be critical in shaping the upcoming elections. The careful balancing act of promoting their achievements while distancing themselves from the national party, especially figures like Harris, highlights the complex interplay of local and national issues that define electoral politics in battleground states. Whether this approach will resonate with voters remains to be seen, but it is clear that Democratic candidates are adapting their messaging in response to the political climate as the 2024 elections draw near.