Words are more than just tools for communication—they are powerful instruments that shape our perceptions, beliefs, and behaviors. Whether in a debate, a conversation, or a public statement, the language people use can evoke emotions, influence decisions, and leave lasting impressions. The recent Presidential Debate between former President Donald Trump and Vice President Kamala Harris serves as a case study in the psychology of words and how carefully selected language can sway public opinion and shape political narratives.
During the debate, both candidates used specific language to convey their messages and appeal to the emotions of the audience. For example, when former President Trump used the term “weak” to describe the current state of leadership, he wasn’t just making a statement—he was invoking a deep-seated fear many people have about ineffective leadership. Similarly, when Vice President Harris used the phrase “Putin would eat Trump for lunch,” she aimed to illustrate perceived vulnerability in Trump’s approach to foreign policy, using a vivid metaphor to leave a strong impression.
These examples show how intentional words are used to create emotional responses. Words like “weak” or “strong” don’t just describe—they carry connotations of safety, fear, confidence, or insecurity. In this case, both candidates were trying to frame the other as lacking the strength required to lead, but their strategies also revealed something deeper: the power of words to make people feel.
Another important aspect of the debate was how each candidate discussed opportunity and the economy, two topics that resonate with the everyday concerns of the public. Harris framed her plan around the concept of an “opportunity economy,” focusing on building up the middle class and creating a sense of possibility. She said, “I imagine and have actually a plan to build what I call an opportunity economy”(1). This choice of language is aspirational, inviting listeners to envision a better future where they can thrive.
On the other hand, Trump focused on the failures of the current administration, using words like “disaster” and “worst in history” to emphasize the economic difficulties Americans face. His use of such strong, negative language is designed to evoke concern and urgency in voters, pushing them to see his leadership as a solution to these challenges. Both approaches use intentional language to tap into emotions—hope and fear—showing the dual nature of words in shaping how people think about the future.
Slogans are compact yet powerful tools in political campaigns, encapsulating key messages in just a few words. Vice President Harris’s slogan, “We’re Not Going Back,” signals progress and a forward-looking vision, aiming to inspire hope and resilience. Former President Trump’s “Make America Great Again” appeals to nostalgia, suggesting a return to a past era of perceived greatness. Both slogans evoke specific emotional responses—Harris’s focuses on future progress, while Trump’s taps into a desire for restoration. These concise messages demonstrate how a few intentional words can shape voter perceptions and drive influence.
Words are not confined to the debate stage. Shortly after the debate, cultural icons like Taylor Swift used their platforms to endorse candidates(2). Swift’s endorsement of Vice President Harris, posted on Instagram, is an example of how influential voices can amplify political messages. Her post wasn’t just about policy—it was about values, identity, and the language of support. With millions of followers, Swift’s words carried significant weight, influencing public perception well beyond the political sphere.
This demonstrates the broader power of words. Whether spoken on a debate stage or written in an Instagram post, language can reach people on a personal level, shaping their thoughts and guiding their decisions. In politics and beyond, influential figures understand the importance of carefully chosen words in crafting a message that resonates.
Throughout the debate, the candidates used language not only to assert their own capabilities but also to frame the other’s weaknesses. However, the psychology of words goes deeper than the surface-level claims each candidate made. Words like “opportunity,” “weak,” “disaster,” and “strength” carry deeper psychological meanings that are designed to connect with specific emotions and perceptions within the audience.
Whether it’s evoking fear, instilling hope, or affirming confidence, the language used in high-stakes situations like a debate is always intentional. Each word choice is a calculated move designed to influence how voters perceive leadership and competence, ultimately guiding them toward a decision.
The debate between former President Donald Trump and Vice President Kamala Harris offers an insightful example of how words can be wielded to shape perceptions and influence decisions. Language is more than just a means of conveying information—it is a psychological tool that can evoke emotion, create trust, and instill doubt.
Whether through the language of strength, opportunity, or critique, the debate showcased how powerful intentional words can be. In the broader landscape of communication, from politics to popular culture, understanding the psychology behind words allows us to become more discerning about the messages we encounter and the choices we make.
(1) Harris, Kamala, and Donald Trump. READ: Harris-Trump presidential debate transcript. Hosted by David Muir and Linsey Davis, ABC News, National Constitution Center, Philadelphia, September 2024. ABC News, https://abcnews.go.com/Politics/harris-trump-presidential-debate-transcript/story?id=113560542.
(2) Swift, Taylor. Endorsement of Kamala Harris. Instagram, September 2024,
https://www.instagram.com/p/C_wtAOKOW1z/?igsh=bWlqMG83dXcya2pu.