On August 22, 2024, Kamala Harris delivered her acceptance speech for the Democratic Party’s presidential nomination. The Democratic National Convention, held under the theme “For the People, For Our Future,” spanned four days and emphasized a vision that starkly contrasts with the “pro-rich, dangerous Trump” narrative.

(Note: This article is not about expressing political views but rather focuses on analyzing the speech itself.)

Focusing on “Who” Rather Than “What,” While Downplaying Gender

The audience was filled with women dressed in white, supporting Kamala Harris’s historic bid to become the first Black Asian-American female president of the United States. White is a color that symbolizes women’s rights, stemming from the women’s suffrage movement of the early 20th century. In 1920, when women won the right to vote in the U.S., suffragists wore white as a symbol of their cause. Hillary Clinton, who aimed to become the first female president in 2016, also wore white during her acceptance speech.

However, Kamala Harris chose to wear a navy pantsuit on this day. In 2016, Hillary Clinton faced criticism for “using her gender to her advantage.” Harris, in contrast, decided to downplay her gender and instead focused on “who Kamala Harris is” over “What she is” or “What she is going to do”. 

Let’s explore how she highlighted “Who” in her speech.

One of the Shortest Speeches in the Last 40 Years

Before diving into the details, it’s interesting to note how short Harris’s speech was. Donald Trump’s speech at the Republican National Convention was an unusually long 92 minutes. In contrast, Kamala Harris’s speech was only 37.3 minutes, making it the third shortest acceptance speech in the last 40 years.

Short speeches are often more challenging to craft. It’s easy to deliver a long speech that covers everything you want to say. However, have you ever thought, “oh I wish this speech were longer”?? It’s usually the opposite, right?!  The best speeches are short, concise, and memorable.

In this relatively short speech, Harris used her mother’s teachings as the central thread to tell a story that emphasized who she is and her values, rather than focusing on detailed policies or past achievements. Yes, she has mentioned these details too, but her speech leaned more on “Who” than “What.” Notably, while the “What” was kept to a minimum, Harris strategically used comparisons and criticisms of Donald Trump throughout, aiming to raise her ethos (credibility) not through logos (logic), but through pathos (emotional appeal).

A Speech with Strong Structural Contrast

An excellent speech requires several types of contrasts: structural contrast, emotional contrast, expression contrast, and so on. Kamala Harris’s acceptance speech excelled in structural contrast.

Structural contrast involves alternating different elements throughout the speech to create a rhythm of change that engages the audience. Harris’s speech structure combined the following elements:

• Storytelling ⇒ Past Achievements ⇒ Raising Concerns about Trump ⇒ Policy Plans ⇒ Comparisons & Warnings about Trump ⇒ Policy Highlights ⇒ More Comparisons & Warnings about Trump ⇒ Another Policy Highlights ⇒ Final Comparisons & Warnings about Trump ⇒ Personal Beliefs, Values, and Patriotism ⇒ Storytelling

Harris used stories to build empathy and enhance positive pathos, followed by past achievements to boost ethos. She then raised concerns about the dangers of Trump to sway pathos negatively, discussed her policy plans to add logos, and continued to compare herself with Trump to sway pathos again negatively. By focusing on women, freedom, and the middle class in her policy highlights, she increased the level of detail and emphasized both logos and ethos. The speech concluded with a call for unity, using storytelling to leave the audience with a positive sense of pathos, ending with, “Together, let us write the next great chapter in the most extraordinary story ever told.” The structural contrasts were skillfully integrated.

The “Book Ending” Effect: Starting and Ending with Storytelling

One of the most distinctive features of Harris’s speech was her use of storytelling throughout. The speech began with a story about her mother immigrating to the United States at the age of 19 and instilling values in Harris like, “Never complain about injustice but do something about it. Never do anything half-assed.” These personal beliefs, she asserted, guide her as a lawyer, politician, and now, as a presidential candidate.

Throughout the speech, she shared other stories, such as one about her school friend Wanda, a victim of domestic sexual violence. But it was the closing of her speech that stood out. Instead of just telling a story, Harris invited everyone to become co-authors of a great story: “Together, let us write the next great chapter in the most extraordinary story ever told.” This twist on the storytelling theme was a masterful use of the “Book Ending” effect.

Nonverbal Weaknesses

While Kamala Harris has a casual and approachable speaking style, her body language during the speech was a concern.

Let’s first discuss the “Mehrabian’s Rule.”

Mehrabian’s Rule: The Power of Nonverbal Communication

Mehrabian’s Rule, proposed by psychologist Albert Mehrabian, suggests that in conveying emotions and attitudes during communication, visual elements (facial expressions, gestures) account for 55%, auditory elements (tone of voice, rhythm) for 38%, and verbal elements (the words themselves) for only 7%. This means that nonverbal cues can have a significant impact on how a message is received.

For example, if body language or tone does not align with the verbal message, the audience may receive a different message, leading to confusion or even distrust.

In Harris’s case, while her vocal tone was fine, her body language, which accounts for 55% of the impact, was a bit weak. Let’s take a look at her body language during the nearly 40-minute speech.

Harris often adopted a “closed” posture, with her hands clasped in front of her body. Her movements were relatively small, sometimes fidgeting, and the pattern of her gestures didn’t vary much. Additionally, she occasionally touched her hair—a common gesture among women that can be distracting during a speech.

Clasping hands in front of the body can be a comforting posture for the speaker, but to the audience, it can create a barrier, especially when speaking from behind a podium which already serves as a barrier between the speaker and the audience. The neutral position for a speech should be “open.” While it’s okay to clasp your hands, it’s important to keep your gestures calm and stable. However, in Harris’s case, her clasped hands often moved in small, fidgety ways, which may have diminished her authoritative presence as a presidential candidate.

Let’s compare this to Michelle Obama’s body language during her speech on the second day of the Democratic National Convention.

Obama’s speech was about 20 minutes long, half the length of Harris’s, yet her body language was open, varied, and dynamic. She did not touch her hair, which was tightly pulled back, and used both her right and left hands, moving them in a balanced manner. She also used her hands meaningfully. For example, placing them on her chest to convey emotion, clenching her fist to emphasize determination, pointing to indicate “them,” and gesturing to her head to reinforce the idea of “thought.” These “meaningful” movements made a significant impact.

With just over two months until the presidential election on November 5, we will see how Kamala Harris, with her neighborly and trustworthy presence, goes head-to-head in debates with Donald Trump, who wields almost religious charisma. It will certainly be an interesting battle!