The Politics of Food and the 2024 US Election

Food can be a powerful conduit for connection among friends, families, and even strangers. It's often said that "food is a universal language," connecting people across different cultures, religions, and demographics.

In an election season, food can be used by presidential nominees and congressional campaigns to meet voters via a method known as gastrodiplomacy. Both candidates in the 2024 US presidential election-Vice President Kamala Harris and former President Donald Trump-scheduled stops at restaurants in battleground states in hopes of meeting and wooing voters before the election on November 5.

So how important is food during US elections? We asked SIS professor Johanna Mendelson Forman and University of Milan professor Andrea Borghini for their analysis.

Why does food matter during an election?In case you have not noticed, both presidential candidates are talking about food, at least according to chef and food guru Mark Bittman. With concern about high food prices and child nutrition, there is lots to say. Everyone must eat, but food must be accessible to all. Healthy food versus processed food, climate-friendly growing methods versus factory farms- these issues have all become part of the 2024 debate. And after the election, whoever wins, will still have to negotiate the Farm Bill, which expired on September 30, and is legislation that matters to consumers and farmers alike.Does what you eat predict how you will vote?The idea that consumers vote with their food choices has stayed alive in the US through the teachings of contemporary chefs like Alice Waters, journalists like Michael Pollan, and scholars like Marion Nestle. It is quite natural that such a talented pool of communicators would elicit some backlash from those in the opposite camp. Some readers may recall a study conducted prior to the 2020 elections, which amusingly predicted with some striking accuracy how people would vote based on a recent picture of the products they had steeped in their refrigerators. There are studies showing that people shop and order food in ways that align with their political inclinations. Of course, all of this is subject to shifts based on aspects such as age, gender, social class, geographical location, and cultural background; it is natural for a political candidate to set specific food-related examples and choices that favor personal tastes. Remember, food is a connector, but it may not always predict your choice at the ballot box.What does eating together do when it comes to building trust with potential voters?Conviviality can function as a ladder or a barrier to building cooperation. Research by psychologists showed that social eating, i.e., having a meal together face-to-face, is an effective way to build trust. These findings underscore what we know about the power of gastrodiplomacy, social gastronomy, and even culinary diplomacy to persuade voters about a candidate's commitment to certain food policies. Gastrodiplomacy is the art of creating occasions for political trust using food and dining as a vehicle. After all, food is a form of soft power that candidates can deploy.During this election season we are also witnessing the weaponization of food, a phenomenon that is directly inverse to social eating. Telling voters that Haitian immigrants were eating pet dogs and cats in Ohio serves to create division and distrust. This perspective characteristically exploits another fundamental emotion associated with eating, namely disgust. Since the 1980s, research in this area has taught us that there is a complex continuum between core and moral disgust, which contributes to developing our sense of identity since early childhood and which is characteristically at play in food consumption.Why do politicians make stops at local restaurants on the campaign trail?Where we eat is a metaphor for a community and for the values that it holds sacred, as described in a new study, "Gastrospaces: A Philosophical Study of Where We Eat." Think of the political role of some bars for the LGBTQ movement in the US, the cultural role of juke joints for the African American community in the South, cafes in central Europe, the social value of pubs in the United Kingdom, etc. Plazas, public parks, and venues for religious communities can serve similar roles as well. When a candidate stops at a local venue, it links their image with the people and values that gather in those spaces, a metaphor that swiftly reverberates throughout all the venues of the same sort.What restaurants/food stops are most advantageous for politicians? Is McDonald's a great equalizer? Or is the county fair the place that politicians can shine?During a presidential election campaign, state fairs become a stage for politicians seeking the vote. The Iowa State Fair is the most important because it the state where the primary process begins. It's a political beauty contest rivaling the other attractions that fairs offer visitors. Kamala Harris's 2019 appearance at the fair was a test of her earlier efforts to gain the presidency. In 2023 it was former President Donald Trump who used his visit to the Iowa State Fair to spoil the appearance of his rival, Florida Governor Ron Desantis.So why all the controversy? McDonald's is a universal symbol of American gastrodiplomacy's gift to the world, a reminder of its connection with every man and woman in this country. At the end of the Cold War, journalist Thomas Friedman proffered the "Golden Arches Theory of Conflict Prevention." He wrote that no two countries that had McDonald's ever went to war with each other.Could the same thesis about economic and commercial interests have a domestic equivalent in today's polarized society? Maybe after this campaign season, the presence of a McDonald's could be the last stand of our democratic state, a place for the revival of a more vibrant civic culture. Let's see what happens on Tuesday, November 5.

Public link

Please use the above public link if you want to share this noodl on another website.