Donald Trump’s remarkable election victory has been rightly attributed to the long shadow of inflation combined with mass illegal immigration across the southern border. While these factors dominated the national swing, an under-discussed element of the Republican campaign was the relentless targeting of voters in swing states with paid advertising linking Kamala Harris to radical trans ideology. Why was this – and what lessons should be drawn for Labour in the UK?
The ads were simple. Their tagline: ‘Kamala Harris is for they/them. President Trump is for you.’
The ads were simple. Their tagline: ‘Kamala Harris is for they/them. President Trump is for you.’ They showed clips of her, from 2019, pledging her support for sex-change operations for prisoners. Others referenced Democrats supporting the right of trans-identifying males to play in women’s sport.
It’s been reported that the Republicans spent at least $17 million (£13 million) on these ads – some estimates say much more – which aired over 30,000 times, including in swing states such as Pennsylvania, Georgia, Michigan, and Nevada. Analysis by Future Forward suggested that one such ad shifted voters 2.7 percentage points towards Trump.
Polling has indicated that almost 70 per cent of Americans think transgender athletes should only be able to play in competitive leagues that match their sex at birth. The Republican Party was simply more in touch with public sentiment than the Democrats on this issue.
The ads captured the core Republican campaign message that a Harris presidency would be dominated by activists pushing identity politics, with no regard for the concerns of working American people. This narrative fed into the broader Republican critique that Democrats’ priorities involve promoting activist causes such as defunding the police, denigrating American history, and promoting radical trans ideology and critical race theory in schools.
In the recent UK General Election, Keir Starmer tipped his hat to the idea that radical trans ideology is not popular with the public. Rowing back on earlier statements, he acknowledged that women do not have penises. The Labour manifesto contained a pledge to honour the Cass Review – albeit sitting awkwardly alongside another pledge for a ‘trans-inclusive’ ban on conversion therapy.
Since the election, however, Labour has been in a holding pattern. Ministers, such as Health Secretary Wes Streeting and Education Secretary Bridget Phillipson, have retained – for now – a number of key Conservative safeguards. These include a ban on prescribing puberty blockers to children and interim guidance on Keeping Children Safe in Education – published in the wake of Policy Exchange’s report, Asleep at the Wheel – which emphasised the need to respect the findings of the Cass Review.
They have not, however, gone further. In this, they are largely duplicating the initial behaviour of the Conservative government after 2019, which, with a small number of exceptions, sought to avoid speaking about trans issues. Just as the Tories did, however, Labour will soon learn that doing nothing is not an option.
Radical gender ideology is already deeply embedded in the public and private sector, as previous Policy Exchange reports, such as The Case of the Royal Free, have revealed. Grassroots women’s sports continue to allow male participation in the name of ‘trans inclusion’. Too many schools and hospitals are promoting gender self-ID and other contested notions as fact. In the face of ministerial silence, the activists will advance further – as demonstrated by Cambridge University, which just weeks ago voted to rejoin Stonewall’s controversial Diversity Champions scheme.
The political lesson of the US election is that it is not enough for a party of the left to refrain from championing these unpopular causes. Harris made a valiant attempt to pivot her campaign messaging to the centre, but it was not sufficient. In the eyes of voters, the long-term association of the Democrats and their outriders with activist causes could not be shaken.
What does this mean for Labour? If they are to distance themselves from the radical minority on this, they will need to take on the activists on their own side. In the US, Harris never properly clarified whether she did, in fact, plan to offer sex change surgeries to inmates – despite reported advice from Bill Clinton to do so.
In contrast, Labour needs to actively repudiate the policies of Stonewall and others – and follow it up with concrete actions to root these ideologies out of the services that should be serving the public.
A public row with Stonewall and their Labour MP outriders would do Starmer no harm at all
They will need to table a bill making the current puberty blockers ban permanent (so far, they’ve extended it twice through emergency legislation). While Wes Streeting has demonstrated staunch commitment to the safeguarding of children, Labour’s high command will need to take decisive action against those of their MPs who oppose the evidence-backed ban. They must also implement the draft guidance on gender-questioning children – without watering it down – to prevent schools socially transitioning children behind their parents’ backs, and ensure that contested ideologies are not being taught as fact.
Tony Blair tore up Clause 4. David Cameron picked a fight with his own backbenchers on grammar schools. Starmer himself, famously, kicked his own predecessor out of the party to demonstrate that the Labour party would no longer tolerate anti-semitism.
A public row with Stonewall and their Labour MP outriders on trans ideology would do Starmer no harm at all, particularly if it is followed up by genuine action to protect children and the sex-based rights of women and girls. The alternative is to leave open a political vulnerability that he can be confident his opponents will exploit.
Lara Brown is a Senior Research Fellow in Policy Exchange’s Culture and Identity Unit
Comments