The day before Election Day, Trump opened fire again, directly calling the Democratic candidate a “communist jihadist” and saying that once in office, they would blow up everything that exists. That’s a harsh thing to say, and it’s certainly attention-grabbing. But what I’m not sure about is this: how many votes can an extreme label like that actually bring in on the final day? Based on past experience, the closer we get to Election Day, the more this kind of tough talk seems aimed at rallying his base rather than winning over moderate voters. The strong-get-stronger logic applies in politics too: whoever has the loudest voice gets the headlines, and whoever gets the headlines can draw the last 24 hours of attention their way.

From a tactical standpoint, dropping high-conflict terms like “communist,” “jihadist,” and “blow up everything” on the final day is indeed effective for spreading a message. A slogan at a rally can be clipped into a short video within minutes and circulate on X, TikTok, and Facebook. When supporters share it with captions like “They’re crazy” and “We have to vote,” emotions flare immediately. In 2016, the Trump campaign repeatedly used labels like “Crooked Hillary” and “Lock her up.” In 2020, it framed its opponents as the “radical left” and “socialists.” The effect may not have shown up in how many moderates were persuaded, but it was clearly visible in how supporters who had been wavering were pushed back to the polls. AdImpact, a political ad tracking firm, once estimated that political ad spending during the 2022 midterm election cycle was close to $9.7 billion, with the final weeks marking the peak of ad placements. On the final day, free media exposure is even more valuable than paid ads: one harsh remark can generate a full day of news coverage.

But that’s also where the problem lies: the marginal impact of extreme labels is diminishing. The closer Election Day gets, the fewer undecided voters remain. Those who are genuinely swayed by a phrase like “communist jihadist” were probably going to vote for Trump anyway; moderates who are alarmed or put off by the wording may become even more firmly opposed to him. In other words, tough talk on the final day is more like a “get-out-the-base order” than a “pitch to persuade swing voters.” Having a loud voice and dominating the headlines does fit the strong-get-stronger logic of political messaging, but whether that attention turns into votes still depends on less visible factors like grassroots mobilization, turnout, and local organizations. So yes, the remarks are harsh and spread quickly, but I still have my doubts about how many new votes a label like this can bring in on the final day. Share any additional thoughts in the comments.