As the 2024 U.S. presidential election heats up, a familiar figure has resurfaced in the rhetoric of both major political parties: China. Speaking at the Republican National Convention in July, former President Donald Trump invoked China 14 times during his 92-minute address, making it a central theme of his speech. Repeating the widely criticized term “China virus” to describe the COVID-19 pandemic, Trump accused China of stealing American auto jobs and claimed his administration had outmaneuvered the Asian powerhouse on multiple fronts.
China also featured prominently at the Democratic National Convention. On the first night, President Joe Biden challenged the notion that China was destined to surpass the United States, a belief he argued was widely accepted before he took office. “No one is saying that now,” Biden declared, reflecting his administration’s efforts to counter China’s rise. Democratic presidential nominee Kamala Harris echoed this sentiment on the final night, pledging that under her leadership, “America, not China, wins the competition for the 21st century.”
The increasing emphasis on China in the 2024 election rhetoric is unsurprising to those familiar with U.S. media culture and politics. The prominence of China as a political issue, however, varies between the two major parties. While Republicans have consistently used China as a foil to assert their anti-Communist and “America First” credentials, Democrats have been more selective in their references to China, especially since Biden’s decision to exit the presidential race.
For Trump, invoking China is a well-worn electoral strategy. In the lead-up to the 2016 election, his frequent mentions of China became a hallmark of his campaign, so much so that The Huffington Post created a mashup video of Trump saying “China” 234 times. This tactic has continued into the current election cycle. The 2024 GOP platform prominently features a commitment to “Secure Strategic Independence from China,” advocating for limited trade and investment with China and a broader strategy to “counter China” and “return Peace through Strength.”
The platform’s focus on China is so pronounced that it mentions the country far more frequently than other perceived adversaries such as Russia and Iran, which receive little to no attention. This prioritization of China is echoed in Project 2025, a policy plan associated with the conservative Heritage Foundation, which is often linked to Trump, despite his campaign denying any direct connection. Project 2025 mentions China 483 times in its 922-page document, underscoring the central role the country plays in the conservative agenda. The project’s website even highlights the goal to “take on China” on its “About” page.
Trump-supporting elements of the U.S. media quickly seized on news that Tim Walz, the governor of Minnesota and Harris’ running mate, had significant ties to China. Walz, who has taught in China and traveled there an estimated 30 times since 1989, has come under fire from conservative commentators who have portrayed him as a “Marxist” with ties that would please the Chinese Communist Party. Fox News host Jesse Watters went so far as to call for Walz to undergo an FBI background check due to his China connections.
On August 16, the House Oversight and Accountability Committee chair, Republican James Comer, opened an investigation into Walz’s “longstanding connections” to China. The investigation focuses on Walz’s role in running Educational Travel Adventures with his wife, Gwen Walz, from 1994 to 2003. The company facilitated trips for students from small-town America to China, offering them an opportunity to learn about the country’s history and culture. Walz also served on the Congressional-Executive Commission on China, which monitors human rights in the country, during his time as a House representative.
While Walz has been consistently critical of the Chinese government, he has also acknowledged that the U.S.-China relationship does not have to be adversarial and that there are opportunities for cooperation. Despite his extensive experience with China, Walz has refrained from mentioning the country in major campaign speeches, a stark contrast to the frequent references made by Harris, Trump, and Walz’s Republican rival for the vice presidency, JD Vance.
expertise reflects a broader shift in the Democratic Party’s strategy in this election. Unlike in previous cycles where candidates might have highlighted their foreign policy credentials, particularly in relation to China, the Democrats appear to be focusing more on domestic issues and framing the election as a choice between progress and regression.
The Democrats’ framing centers on the idea of moving the country forward, away from the chaos and division that characterized the Trump era. This forward-looking narrative is captured in Kamala Harris’ campaign slogan, “We’re not going back,” which emphasizes unity, opportunity, and a future defined by technological innovation and social progress. Within this context, China is mentioned primarily in relation to the United States’ technological and economic competition, particularly in areas like artificial intelligence, space exploration, and other high-tech industries that are seen as critical to future global leadership.
Harris’ remarks during the Democratic National Convention about ensuring that “America, not China, wins the competition for the 21st century” reflect this emphasis on technological rivalry rather than a broader geopolitical or ideological confrontation. By contrast, Trump and the Republicans have consistently cast China as a broader existential threat to American values and sovereignty, tying it to issues such as the economy, national security, and even the integrity of American borders.
Racialization of China in U.S. Politics
The stark contrast in how China is framed by the two parties also speaks to a deeper racialization of the Chinese state in American political discourse. In my book “Disorienting Politics,” I describe how China has been depicted as a monolithic, malevolent force, embodying the worst fears of authoritarianism and economic domination. This racialization of China has historical roots but has been amplified in recent years, particularly during the COVID-19 pandemic when terms like “Chinese virus” became part of the mainstream political vocabulary.
The racialization of China is not just about the Chinese government but extends to people of Chinese and broader Asian descent in the United States. The spike in anti-Asian hate crimes during the pandemic is a stark reminder of how political rhetoric can have real-world consequences. By casting China as an all-encompassing threat, politicians not only target a foreign government but also contribute to a climate of suspicion and hostility toward Asian Americans.
Walz’s decision to downplay his connections to China could be seen as an effort to avoid contributing to this oversimplified and racially charged narrative. His background as a social studies teacher who once promoted a U.S.-China pen-pal program suggests a more nuanced understanding of China as a complex society rather than a monolithic enemy. In 1991, he was quoted as saying, “The best way to study about people is to hear them tell what it is like where they live.” This perspective contrasts sharply with the Republican rhetoric that paints China as an inherently hostile and unchanging entity.
As the election season progresses, it is likely that China will remain a central theme in the rhetoric of both parties, though in very different ways. The Republican strategy of emphasizing China as a multifaceted threat seems to resonate with a significant portion of their base, particularly those who are concerned about issues like trade, national security, and immigration. Trump’s characterization of China as the source of the “Wuhan virus” and his accusations of China manipulating climate change narratives are part of a broader attempt to link China to various global challenges that, in his view, harm the United States.
JD Vance, Trump’s running mate, has followed a similar line, directly linking China to the illegal drug trade across the U.S. border. During a rally in Michigan on August 27, Vance accused Harris of using American tax dollars to fund Chinese factories on U.S. soil, a claim that omits the fact that the program in question was developed by a Republican-led legislature. This tactic of associating China with a range of domestic and international problems is likely to intensify as the election draws closer.
Meanwhile, the Democratic approach, as exemplified by Harris and Walz, seems to be more focused on presenting China as a competitor in specific areas like technology and trade rather than an overarching existential threat. This reflects a broader Democratic strategy of framing the election as a choice between a forward-looking, inclusive future and a return to the divisive, isolationist policies of the past.
The media plays a crucial role in shaping public perceptions of China in the context of U.S. elections. Conservative media outlets, in particular, have been instrumental in amplifying the narrative of China as a major threat to American interests. This narrative is often tied to broader themes of national decline, loss of economic sovereignty, and the erosion of traditional American values. For example, the scrutiny of Tim Walz’s connections to China by conservative commentators and the subsequent investigation by Republican lawmakers are part of a broader effort to portray the Democratic ticket as soft on China or even complicit in its rise.
In contrast, mainstream and liberal media outlets tend to focus more on the nuances of U.S.-China relations, highlighting the complexities and potential areas of cooperation alongside the challenges. However, the polarization of the media landscape means that different segments of the American public are exposed to very different narratives about China, depending on their media consumption habits.
China Factor in 2024 U.S. presidential election
As the 2024 election approaches, the China factor is likely to become even more pronounced in the political discourse. Given the ongoing geopolitical tensions, particularly around issues like Taiwan, trade, and technological competition, both parties will continue to use China as a key issue to rally their bases. However, the way in which China is framed – either as an existential threat or as a competitor in specific domains – will reflect the broader ideological and strategic differences between the two parties.
For Trump and the Republicans, China represents a convenient symbol of all that they see as wrong with the current global order. By positioning themselves as the party that will stand up to China, they appeal to voters who are concerned about the perceived decline of American power and influence. This message is particularly resonant among those who feel left behind by globalization and who see China as a direct competitor for jobs and economic opportunities.
For Harris and the Democrats, the challenge will be to address the complexities of the U.S.-China relationship in a way that resonates with voters without falling into the trap of simplistic or racially charged rhetoric. This requires a delicate balancing act: acknowledging the legitimate concerns about China’s rise while also promoting a vision of international cooperation and technological leadership that aligns with their broader campaign themes.
China is portrayed in the 2024 election could have significant implications not just for U.S. domestic politics but also for the future of U.S.-China relations. As both parties continue to invoke China in their campaigns, it will be important to watch how these narratives evolve and how they are received by the American public. The outcome of this election will not only determine the direction of U.S. policy toward China but also shape the broader global landscape in the years to come.
