On Tuesday, October 1, George Stephanopoulos joined Vanderbilt’s United States Elections Class as a guest speaker via Zoom. He shared a wealth of information, from his personal journey into politics to his views on the Presidential Election. A key takeaway from his lecture was his belief that elections have fundamentally transformed over time. When asked how running for president in 1992 compares to today, Stephanopoulos described it, “like running in a different country.”
Stephanopoulos’ Journey into Politics
The prominent political commentator, former White House Communications Director, and ABC news host George Stephanopoulos accredits his lifelong career in politics to a pivotal undergraduate course: American Politics at Columbia University. In this class he excelled, and graduated summa cum laude and as the salutatorian of his class in 1982.
Seeking to broaden his horizons, Stephanopoulos pursued a Master of Arts in Theology as a Rhodes Scholar at Balliol College, Oxford University, This international experience enriched his understanding of global affairs and deepened his intellectual pursuits.
Upon returning to the United States, Stephanopoulos immersed himself in the political arena, working as an aide to Democratic congressman Ed Feighan of Ohio. His role involved crafting critical documents, such as letters, memos, and speeches, providing him with invaluable hands-on experience.
Stephanopoulos’s political journey gained momentum in 1988 when he joined Michael Dukakis’s presidential campaign. This experience exposed him to the intricacies of national politics and solidified his determination to make a lasting impact on the political landscape.
Following his experience on the Dukakis campaign, Stephanopolous worked as communications director for Bill Clinton’s 1992 presidential campaign, and later became Clinton’s White House communications director. Stephanopoulos played a pivotal role in shaping Clinton’s public image and developing key campaign messages. Professor Jon Meacham aptly referred to him as the “face of the campaign,” highlighting Stephanopoulos’ skill in dominating the news cycle in order to secure Clinton’s 1992 and 1996 campaign victories. In the Clinton administration, Stephanopoulos served as a senior advisor for policy and strategy.
The Role of the Media in Transforming Elections
Stephanopoulos highlighted the evolving media landscape as a significant factor influencing modern elections. The influx of information in the new media era presents a challenge for campaign managers, who must sift through a vast amount of data to identify crucial issues and potential threats. The widespread adoption of smartphones has introduced a new channel for reaching voters, forcing campaigns to adapt their strategies. Campaigns today face the complex task of navigating a hybrid media environment that is both hyperlocal and hypernational. While social media allows for rapid dissemination of information on a national scale, campaigns must also tailor their messages to specific local communities.
Undecided Voters
Stephanopoulos observed a significant shift in voting patterns compared to past elections. In 1992, voters were more likely to cross party lines. As a result, campaigns were for the undecided voters. Campaigns were targeted to influence undecided voters. The job of campaigns now is to mobilize supporters rather than change people’s minds.
With this being said, Stephanopolous expressed that he does not discount the possibility of something crazy happening between now and election day that will change everything and sway undecided voters. He provided the example of the 2016 election expressing that he believesHillary Clinton would have won had it not been for the James Comey email scandal.
Stephanopolous also reframed the idea of an “undecided voter.” Typically, undecided voters are thought of as people who have not decided who they are voting for. However this year, Americans are not undecided about a candidate per se, but rather whether or not they will cast their ballot. Many people have already made up their minds about who they would vote for if they were to vote. The undecided voter is undecided about whether they will be voting at all.
The Transformation of Swing States
One main difference Stephanopoulos identifies between the 2024 election and the 1992 election is the number and importance of swing states. In 1992, he shared that Clinton was competitive in 19 swing states. Yet today, he explains that there are at most 7 battleground states. Unlike in 1992, today, most resources are poured into swing states. This shift reflects broader changes in electoral strategy, where campaigns focus their efforts and funding on a smaller number of highly competitive states that can swing either way. This is partly due to demographic shifts and increased polarization, making certain states more predictable in their voting patterns.This strategic focus can lead to a disproportionate allocation of attention and resources, often leaving other regions with less campaign engagement.
The Biden v. Trump Debate
Stephanopoulos recalls watching the Biden-Trump debate at home with his older daughter, Elliot. As Biden entered the stage, Stephanopolis turned to Elliot and said, “this is not good,” Previously, he had considered the 2020 debate between Biden and Trump to be the worst debate in history, convinced it had determined the election’s outcome. However, after witnessing the 2024 debate, he remarked that this one was even worse. This was the first time that he had ever seen a candidate completely collapse . He observed that Trump effectively “won” the debate by simply remaining silent. Reflecting on the words of strategist James Carville who had suggested that Biden should consider dropping out, Stephanopoulos recalled Carville’s prediction that the debate could either be “very, very good or very, very bad.” Carville’s hope that it would be the latter, prompting Biden to exit the race as Carville did not believe Biden would win against Trump.
After the Debate
In the aftermath of the debate, it became clear that Biden could not remain in the race without a significant turnaround. A few days later, Stephanopoulos received a call requesting an interview with President Biden. He recognized this as Biden’s final opportunity to demonstrate his ability to handle tough questions. Knowing Biden personally, Stephanopoulos felt the Biden campaign was seeking someone who could deliver a challenging interview without being overly aggressive. He was the man for the job.
During the interview, Stephanopoulos observed that Biden appeared more engaged and alert than he had in the debate, perhaps due to the earlier time of day. He posed a crucial question: Was the debate a mere bad episode or indicative of a deeper issue? Biden insisted it was simply a bad night, a response that was vital given that his health was a primary concern for voters.
Stephanopoulos continued the interview, noting that Biden answered every question except one: whether he would drop out of the race if former House Speaker Nancy Pelosi and Senate Majority leader Schumer suggested it. Biden could not affirm that he would not drop out of the race if they do ask. Instead, he confidently stated that they would not make such a recommendation.
Stephanopoulos’ Hope for Future Debates
When asked about what he hopes to see in future debates, Stephanopoulos emphasized the importance of the performance of news outlets. He pointed out that ABC made a commitment to fact-check the debate between Harris and Trump, a decision he supported wholeheartedly. However, he expressed disappointment that CBS chose not to undertake a similar responsibility.
Stephanopoulos views this as an abdication of journalistic duty, highlighting the critical role that media organizations play in ensuring transparency and accountability in political discourse. He believes that thorough fact-checking is essential, not only for informing the public but also for holding candidates accountable for their statements. As misinformation becomes increasingly prevalent, he argues that news outlets have a moral obligation to uphold rigorous standards of reporting, especially during high-stakes moments like debates.
A New Mindset About the Transfer of Power
Another difference Stephanopoulos identifies between past elections and this year’s are new attitudes towards the transfer of power. Stephanopolous stated that before this election, there has never had a campaign where one side is not committed to peaceful transfer of power. He elaborates that there are figures saying that they won’t accept the results of the election. Simply put, George says that the contemporary Republican party truly believes,“if I lose, it means by definition the election is not fair.” Stephanopolous reiterated, “we have never seen anything like this before.”
He made it very clear that he was not solely speaking about the mindset of former President Trump. He shares that senators and congressmen echo this sentiment, that senators and congressmen are willing to say things that are inaccurate. With this, Stephanopolous identifies yet another key difference: the accuracy behind statements shared in campaigns today. He conveys that the danger and risk of standing up for truth and facts is that one can be charged with political bias. Stephanopolous personally does not believe that fact-checking is political bias.
Predictions for the Election
When asked if he was hopeful about the transfer of power, Stephanopolous responded, “No, you can’t be right now.” He expressed concern about changes in Pennsylvania and Georgia and their mail-in ballots. He suggested that it could take longer to determine the outcome of the election with the challenges of counting ballots.
As far as Stephanopolous’ prediction for who will win the election, Stephanopoulos imagines a wide array of outcomes. He could see battleground states going the same way or splitting. But, one major observation Stephanopolous shared was that there is a, “simple way to think about it: are women moved more by abortion? Or are men moved more by immigration? If you know the answer, you will know who will win.” While Stephanopoulos conveyed that he could see many different outcomes with the electoral college. But he stated that if the election ends up being a 270-268 with the electoral college, “I don’t know what will happen in Washington after.”
George Stephanopoulos’ insights during his visit to Vanderbilt’s United States Elections class highlighted the profound transformations in the political landscape, emphasizing the evolving roles of media, shifting voter behaviors, and the unprecedented challenges surrounding the transfer of power, leaving students with a clearer understanding of the complexities facing today’s electoral process.
