Celebrity Endorsements Are Taking Over The Election, Proving We’ve Lost The Plot

An eclectic yet passionate celebrity circus has formed around Donald J. Trump. Model, former women’s rights activist, and reality TV star Amber Rose took the stage at the Republican National Convention, as did UFC executive Dana White and WWE wrestler Hulk Hogan. Many others have oscillated between flirting with the campaign to outright stumping for Trump, including rappers 50 Cent and Sexxy Red, musician M.I.A, as well as comedian Roseanne Barr, tech mogul Elon Musk, and singer Kid Rock. None of these entertainers are exactly A-list talent, and yet, each endorsement has made headlines. And the figurative political tent the Republicans are building feels more and more like a Big Top with each passing day. But let’s be real: the fact that a former reality TV show host is the Republican nominee for President for the third election cycle in a row shows that celebrity influence on politics is the new normal. 

Fame has evolved into a prerequisite for running for office, proving that we have officially lost the plot. This isn’t just an issue for the Trump campaign. Both the Republican and Democratic National Conventions felt more like pep rallies than opportunities to caucus and develop party priorities. Harris 2024 campaign rallies have been star studded and her figurative wallet is just as full with the money of A-listers like Oprah Winfrey and heiresses like Abigail Disney. The Harris campaign came under fire when Megan thee Stallion opened one of her rallies with a performance not because Megan isn’t affected by politics but because political events are digging less and less into actual policy. People are saddled with debt, struggling with inflation, sick, angry, and feeling unheard. But instead of being regularly engaged on the issues, they’re being given merchandise and a photo-op. 

As more wealthy and famous flood the electoral process, it begs the question: why do we care what celebrities think and say to begin with? I don’t subscribe to the “shut up and dribble” perspectives that others have. People don’t need to be an expert to have an opinion. A democracy should be participatory and if politics is too inaccessible, that is an indictment on those in power. Further, with large platforms comes enlarged responsibility and I do believe those in positions of influence should use that for more than just selling us the latest product. However, I don’t love the way we put celebrity opinions on a pedestal and attach more weight purely because of their visibility. Sure, some have lived experiences like ours. But most are just wealthy people who did some work people like. Is that enough of a qualification to shape political representation so immensely?

To answer that question we must first uncover why celebrities flock to campaigns like this and interrogate what they hope to get from their endorsements and support. “I like Trump,” Sexxy Red said during a podcast interview. “Once he started getting Black people out of jail and giving people that free money… We need him back because, baby, them [stimulus] checks.” It's clear that misinformation is at the heart of her support. Stimulus checks were congressionally approved and while Trump may have contributed to the First Step Act’s pathway to early release for incarcerated people, he’s also helped incarcerate and vilify Black people too. On stage at the RNC, Amber Rose doubled down on similar ideas and declared “American families were better when Donald Trump was President. We were safer, wealthier, and stronger.” This is also untrue. The celebs jumping up and down about Trump checks are seemingly well-off people. Could a one-off $1200 payment have canceled out everything else they’ve seen and heard from Trump’s own mouth and administration? 

There is a prevailing myth in some arenas that Trump is a man of the people. Trump is savvy enough to use accessible language, short sentence structure, and alliterative slogans which have certainly gained more traction than his opponents on all sides of the aisle who prefer a more sophisticated approach to talking policy. Trump’s choice to make JD Vance his running mate was also strategic and further cemented that perception. But Trump also doesn’t want you to forget that he’s a successful businessman and billionaire, which directly contradicts the sentiment that he’s more down to earth and attuned to Americans needs than Kamala Harris is. That wealthy version of Trump is who many celebrities (and billionaire tech elites) see themselves in and who they’re hoping to put back in power, even as they tell us something else. 

There are all sorts of theories about why Trump remains so popular but I’ve yet to see pundits explore how tantalizing individualism is to selfish people who believe that mentality is already working in their favor. Many of Trump’s celebrity campaigners are, in my opinion, engaging in acts of self preservation that have nothing to do with race or gender and everything to do with seeking attention.. and money. Kamala Harris has stayed in lockstep with the majority of Democrats by calling for a wealth tax on those with net worths of $100 million or more alongside more corporate taxation too. Such proposals are long overdue in a nation with such extreme income inequality and where executive salaries at many of the top performing companies outpaces workers’ pay more than 100 to 1. For people like Elon Musk, a wealth tax signals the end of evasion and asset hoarding so no wonder he’s spending so much money and leveraging his various platforms to keep America unequal. 

There’s too much money in politics and that problem is only worsening as foreign actors, private committees, and wealthy elites rush to invest in their future success by manipulating the way we approach politics. Luckily for Trump and his collection of misfit surrogates, the “American Dream” is enough of a mirage to draw people into the desert without the requirement of actually quenching their thirst. Even without delivering similar results to others, Trump and his famous surrogates are hoping they can hold the carrot out just close enough for voters to believe they, too, can amass that level of wealth. But only with Trump in power, of course. This is the danger of blanketly trusting any campaign surrogates without interrogating why they’re at the table to begin with. We live in a world of scratching backs and collecting favors. In such a world, we must always be vigilant of those who are incentivized to push poison on the people. 

Campaign surrogacy was developed in earnest to allow more voters to be seen and heard by political campaigns. Candidates simply couldn’t be everywhere at once but also didn’t want to leave any Americans out of their outreach strategy. Surrogates became a way to mobilize like minded community leaders and respected individuals to not only endorse the campaign but regularly share why. While spouses and elected allies still carry on that role, the influx of more celebrities has transformed the practice from an innovative fix to a popularity contest, namely, who can get the most celebs to write checks and amaze fans. But that’s just it. Voters shouldn’t be engaged like fans, and celebrities are supposed to complement a robust strategy, not replace it. 

Each election cycle, the obsession with advertisements and celebrity endorsements further eclipses the public interest component of pursuing elected office. Nine figures have been spent so far over the last several months and there are still several weeks to go. This level of spending and fanfare is neither sustainable nor effective. It’s a distraction and one that is turning voters off, not on. We need accountable representatives not ego-driven messiahs. Instead of throwing content at voters, campaigns of all sizes need to get back to talking to the people they claim to serve. Less pomp, more substance. It’s time we get back to earning votes.