The State of Critical Thinking in Modern Politics:
Analyzing the Electorate's Choices in Kamala Harris's Election
Introduction
In a society where democracy relies on informed decisions, are we truly engaging in critical thinking, or has independent thought been overshadowed by emotional influence and party loyalty? The health of democracy depends on the ability of voters to question, analyze, and reflect—qualities that are increasingly at risk in today’s political landscape.
This essay will explore the role of critical thinking in the 2024 election by examining voter support for Kamala Harris, the key themes of her campaign, the presence of logical fallacies in her rhetoric, how voters engaged with policy discussions, and whether identity-driven voting is always irrational. Finally, it will discuss ways to strengthen critical thinking in voter decision-making.
Percentage of the Population that Voted for Kamala Harris
In the 2024 U.S. presidential election, former President Donald Trump won the popular vote with 77.3 million votes (49.8%), while Kamala Harris received 75 million votes (48.3%) (Wikipedia, 2024). This marked the first time a Republican had won the popular vote since 2004.
Harris received strong support from African American (87%), Hispanic (65%), and Asian American (70%) voters (Pew Research Center, 2024). The closeness of the election highlights the nation’s deep political divide and raises important questions: Did voters critically evaluate policy positions, or were their choices driven by party loyalty, identity politics, or media narratives?
The Basis of Kamala Harris’s Campaign and Critical Thinking
Kamala Harris’s campaign focused on social justice, healthcare reform, climate action, and economic equity (Politico, 2024). She advocated for expanding the Affordable Care Act, addressing systemic inequalities, and implementing aggressive climate policies.
These platforms gave voters clear policy choices to evaluate. However, media coverage frequently emphasized Harris’s identity as the first Black and South Asian woman to run for president, which may have shaped voter perceptions in ways that discouraged policy-based engagement (Brookings Institution, 2024).
At the same time, some voters did critically engage with Harris’s policies. For example:
Healthcare policy: A Kaiser Family Foundation survey found that 55% of voters who supported Harris cited her stance on expanding Medicare as a decisive factor in their decision (KFF, 2024).
Climate action: Voter surveys indicated that progressive and younger voters were drawn to her detailed climate policies, which outlined carbon emission reduction targets (The Atlantic, 2024).
Economic policies: Harris’s proposal for tax relief for middle-class families was a key factor for many suburban voters (NBC, 2024).
This demonstrates that while some voters were influenced by media framing, others actively analyzed policy proposals before making their decision.
Logical Fallacies in Kamala Harris’s Speeches and Interviews
Like most politicians, Harris employed rhetorical techniques to persuade voters. Some of these fall into logical fallacies, which can subtly discourage independent analysis:
Appeal to Authority (Ad Verecundiam)
Harris frequently cited endorsements from Barack Obama and Michelle Obama to validate her candidacy. While endorsements can enhance credibility, relying on them as primary justification for electability may discourage independent evaluation of her policies (CNN, 2024).
Appeal to Emotion (Ad Misericordiam)
Harris often shared personal stories about her mother’s struggles as an immigrant to connect with voters. While emotional narratives can be powerful, they can also overshadow objective policy discussions (Dornan & Dees, 2011).
Either/Or Fallacy
Harris framed climate change as a binary choice, stating, “Either we act now, or our children will face an uninhabitable planet.” While climate action is urgent, such framing oversimplifies complex policy solutions (The Atlantic, 2024).
Is Identity-Driven Voting Always Irrational?
A common critique is that voting based on identity rather than policy is irrational, but this argument oversimplifies reality. Identity-based voting can still be rational when it aligns with tangible policy concerns.
For example:
Black voters overwhelmingly supported Harris because of her commitment to criminal justice reform and voting rights, issues that disproportionately affect their communities (Pew Research Center, 2024).
Hispanic voters prioritized immigration policies and healthcare access, which were central to Harris’s platform (NBC, 2024).
This suggests that while emotional and identity-driven factors influence elections, they do not necessarily preclude critical engagement with policy.
How Can We Improve Critical Thinking in Politics?
Given the increasing role of media framing, emotional persuasion, and misinformation, strengthening critical thinking in voter decision-making is crucial. Here’s how:
Media Literacy Education
Schools should implement media literacy courses that teach students how to critically assess political messaging, logical fallacies, and misinformation (Brookings Institution, 2024).
Fact-Checking Resources
Organizations like Politifact and Snopes should be integrated into mainstream platforms to help voters verify claims in real time.
Encouraging Debate and Nuance
Social media platforms should promote algorithmic diversity, exposing users to a wider range of political viewpoints rather than reinforcing echo chambers (APA, 2023).
Conclusion
The 2024 election highlights the complexities of voter behavior. While some voters were influenced by identity factors and media narratives, others engaged critically with policy proposals. Harris’s campaign rhetoric contained logical fallacies, but her policies also attracted voters who analyzed her stance on healthcare, climate, and economic reform.
To strengthen democracy, we must prioritize critical thinking and media literacy education. Without these safeguards, emotional persuasion and superficial narratives will continue to dominate elections.
The future of democracy depends on an informed, critically engaged electorate—one that challenges rhetoric, questions biases, and evaluates policies beyond surface-level appeals.
Works Cited
American Psychological Association. (2023). The role of emotions in voter decision-making. Retrieved from https://www.apa.org/news/press/releases/2023/10/emotions-voter-decision-making
Brookings Institution. (2024). Media literacy and the decline of critical thinking. Retrieved from https://www.brookings.edu/research/media-literacy-and-the-decline-of-critical-thinking
CNN. (2024, November 6). Kamala Harris voter reasoning: Representation and trust. Retrieved from https://www.cnn.com/2024/11/06/politics/kamala-harris-voter-reasoning
NBC News. (2024, November 6). Why Hispanic voters supported Kamala Harris. Retrieved from https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/2024-election/why-hispanic-voters-supported-kamala-harris
NPR. (2024, November 6). Voter trusts Obama’s endorsement of Kamala Harris. Retrieved from https://www.npr.org/2024/11/06/election-voter-trust-obama-endorsement
Pew Research Center. (2024). The impact of identity politics on the 2024 election. Retrieved from https://www.pewresearch.org/politics/2024/
Politico. (2024, August 23). Kamala Harris DNC speech: Theme and analysis. Retrieved from https://www.politico.com/news/magazine/2024/08/23/kamala-harris-dnc-speech-theme-analysis-00175973
The Atlantic. (2024, October). Echo chambers and the illusion of critical thinking in modern politics. Retrieved from https://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2024/10/media-literacy-education-election/
Wikipedia. (2024). 2024 United States presidential election. Retrieved from https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2024_United_States_presidential_election
Note: While Wikipedia is a valuable starting point for information, it's advisable to cross-reference with primary sources or official publications for academic and professional research.
About the Creator
T. E. Door
I’m a raw, introspective writer blending storytelling, poetry, and persuasion to capture love, pain, resilience, and justice. My words are lyrical yet powerful, to provoke thought, spark change, and leave a lasting impact.
Keep reading
More stories from T. E. Door and writers in History and other communities.
No More Power to Washington: Why True Federalism Must Be Defended
Power, once taken, is rarely given back. That’s the truth woven through America’s history and reflected in today’s politics. When I look at Washington, I don’t see a system begging for more authority—I see a government already heavy with influence, finding new ways to stretch its reach.
By T. E. Door5 months ago in History
Small Farmer Fights Back Against Massive Company After Crops Are Destroyed: ‘It’s a Historic Day’
In a dramatic showdown between a small farmer and a multinational agribusiness, a local grower has achieved what many are calling a historic victory. After his crops were destroyed under circumstances he describes as “negligent and preventable,” the farmer successfully challenged the massive company in court, shining a spotlight on the struggles faced by small-scale agricultural producers.
By Salaar Jamali5 days ago in History
Why Countries Are Preparing for Future Wars
The World Is Re-Arming: Why Countries Are Preparing for Future Wars Across the world, countries are increasing their military spending at a speed not seen in decades. Governments explain this growth as necessary for defense and national security. However, many experts and ordinary people worry that this trend could move the world closer to conflict instead of peace. From Europe to Asia, from the Middle East to the Pacific, nations are strengthening their armies, modernizing weapons, and preparing for possible future wars.
By Wings of Time 6 days ago in History
Comments (3)
This was a well-researched and timely piece—really appreciated the balanced tone and depth of analysis. You’ve managed to explore both the psychological and structural forces shaping voter behavior, without falling into the trap of oversimplification. The section on logical fallacies in Kamala Harris’s rhetoric stood out for its clarity and fairness—it’s rare to see political analysis that acknowledges nuance without losing its critical edge. I also found your discussion on identity-driven voting particularly insightful. Framing it as not inherently irrational, but context-dependent, adds a valuable layer to the broader discourse on voter motivation. Your call for greater media literacy and fact-checking infrastructure is not just relevant but necessary in today’s polarized climate. Overall, this is the kind of thoughtful engagement our democracy desperately needs. Looking forward to reading more from you.
Interesting ⭐️⭐️⭐️
Hi, it would be an interesting piece was it not based entirely on falsities - many (if not all) of your references are completely made up and do not link to real articles. It is dangerous to write an article (if it can be said to be writing when it is AI doing the heavy lifting) based on non-existent research.