The Drum asked "what Trump’s win will mean for the global economy and the broader marketing sector”.

Jamie, along with a few other agency leaders gave their take.

Jamie Williams, managing partner, isobel says:

 "There are a lot of unknowns surrounding Trump, and the economic impact of his return to the White House. Will Trump impose his promised import tariffs? Doing so will be seriously bad news for UK economic growth. At 78 years old, will Trump stay in charge and fully involved for four years, or will his new more radical team take control? And within this team, what economic policy role will Elon Musk play?

Trump has a fondness for the UK, and a trade deal was very much hoped for during his first term. But if Trump heads to the golf course and Project 2025 takes shape, this fondness will likely vanish. And who knows what Trump’s foreign policy intentions will mean for Ukraine and the Middle East, and what this will mean for the global economy."

You can read what other agency leaders had to say 

Agency leaders on Trump's win

It’s crunch time in the US Presidential election. And earlier this week, the Nate Silver designed 538 Politics model, which uses polling, economic and demographic data to explore likely election outcomes, ticked towards a Trump win on November 5th. If (according to the model), the election was held today, Trump would win 52 times out of 100.

There has been a general sense within most media outlets of a momentum shift towards Trump. But this visible reflection in the 538 model will be causing serious panic within the Harris campaign. Their worst Trump returning fears could be playing out in front of them.

Well, successful presidential campaigns are based on simple clear messaging. A message that can be repeated at rally’s, in ads and remembered by voters as they head to polling stations.

Barrack Obama ran on hope and change. Bill Clinton stood for ‘putting people first and being on your side’. George W Bush ran on compassionate conservatism. And in 2016, Make America Great Again took Trump to the Whitehouse.

This time around, Donald Trump’s message is very clear. He’ll close the border and cut taxes. But what does Kamala Harris stand for? I’m not sure voters know.

When President Biden stood down in July, making way for Vice President Harris to take the party nomination, the Democrats saw a big bounce in the polls, and a huge momentum boost. But unfortunately for Harris, this now feels like an ‘anyone but Biden’ bounce. There was huge relief and excitement in having a smart, dynamic, much younger candidate, who had the energy and charisma to campaign properly. And this was immediately reflected in the polls.

The presential debate was another great moment for Harris. She showed off her prosecutor skills, argued for her policies, and was widely considered the clear winner, versus a seemingly aging Trump, who couldn’t resist talking about Haitian illegal immigrants eating dogs in Ohio.

But since that high point, when she was favourite to win, Harris seems to have lost her momentum.

The problem for Harris isn’t in her skills as a debater, or her delivery at campaign rally’s. It’s her foundational message. Or lack of it.

As we enter the last few days of the campaign, Harris is throwing everything at Trump. From a comparison to Adolf Hitler, to his unchecked power threatening American democracy, ex-Trump allies and cabinet members are coming out with emergency danger stories about him, and Harris is utilising all of them.

But will the ‘unstable and unhinged’, ‘anyone but Trump’ message be enough?

Especially against the populist America First brand that Trump has built over the past 8 years.

Having previously been criticised for not doing any sit-down interviews, the VP has been speaking to everyone, from 60 Minutes to NBC and even to Fox News. She’s just done a live CNN Town Hall with undecided voters, but was denied a second debate opportunity, by Trump declining the offer.

But whilst she’s getting the opportunities to speak, and perhaps impressing people with her overall performances, she’s not landing an overarching message, or a key vision for the future. Instead, she’s just laying into Trump.

As wise marketers and brand experts know, this is very likely not enough.

If America needs to hear more from Harris, ironically, the danger from Trump is talking too much. Whatever your view on his policies and character the Trump Brand is strong.

Even a stunt at McDonalds, serving a few hand-picked Trump supporters Big Macs and fries, reinforced everything about his populist ‘in touch with real people’ brand. And his supporters are Lovin’ it.

As a candidate, Trump is not the same person as he was in 2016. He’s older, seemingly less energetic, not as sharp, more prone to mumbling and having weird moments on stage. And he doesn’t have the one-line campaign catchphrases of 

. He’s not the new news challenger brand he once was. But the fact is, he’s spent time building his brand, and it’s strong. In many ways, he doesn’t need to say anything new, or do any debates or interviews. His brand is doing the talking for him.

You can accuse Trump of lots of things (and many people have, in courts across America), but you can’t say he doesn’t stand for something. His MAGA brand of populism, America first, no-nonsense politics is a powerful movement, almost religious in certain parts of America. And whilst this cultish passion won’t be in play in the key suburbs of the critical swing States, the foundations of brand Trump will be. People know what Trump stands for.

So, the question for November 5th is, can Kamala Harris nudge her numbers up a couple more percent, and become the first ever female US President? The polls are so tight, and swing State margins so thin, that it currently feels like a coin toss. But if Harris can spend a little less time talking about the dangers of Trump, and articulate a simple, clear and positive vision for America, based on the economy, with her own style of populism, to connect with undecided voters, she’ll give herself more of a chance.

Kamala Harris has a serious messaging problem

You sell sofas. Or maybe it’s TVs. Or fridges, bikes, tables, beds and mattresses – anything that costs at least several hundred quid and quite possibly a few grand, that people use daily and keep for years.

And you’ve got a familiar problem – how do you sell the most you can, at the best price you can? And how do you do it while spending the least you can?

This isn’t a unique problem, but it’s a tricky one. These products are expensive, important, and vital to the smooth running of everyday life, but they don’t exactly scream “look at me!”

They’re not as dull as finance or utilities, but they’re not as frequent as FMCG. They sit awkwardly in a middle ground, and the usual marketing models don’t really fit.

Take the classic purchase funnel. What’s striking in this case is how much of the consumer journey isn’t a journey at all. Sure, you can draw a chart that starts with 'awareness' and ends with 'purchase' or 'recommendation', but it ignores the big, messy space outside the funnel – those years between purchases when the consumer is so far out of category any hope of converting them into a sale is beyond forlorn.

And that’s where things get tricky. If someone isn’t going to be in market for five years (and let’s face it, that’s fast for some categories), and the active part of their journey lasts just a few months – usually triggered by urgent need – then at any given moment, 95% of your potential customers aren’t paying attention.

Given this observation, you (or some other member of the executive team) might reasonably ask the question, "Why are we tossing money away in untargeted media? Most of the people we're reaching aren't in market. Why don't we fish where the fish are?! Go after the low-hanging fruit!"

Why indeed? Many years ago, a clever man named Jim Lecinski at a company named Google gave us the term 'The Zero Moment of Truth'. It was a riff on P&G's classic model and a cunning bit of marketing, as it suggested that the consumer journey started when someone typed something into Google (or Bing, if you're that way inclined). Anything else before that moment? Irrelevant. Well done, Jim.

And if you buy into this idea, everything else falls into place – find people who’ve left the relevant digital breadcrumbs, get in front of them fast, and stay there. They won’t be in market long, and there’s a big-ticket purchase on the line, so win it at all costs. Be No.1 on search, saturate their social feed, pay whatever it takes to stay there. Then, motivate the sale. And what motivates sales better than price? “30% off!”, “£100 Cashback!”, “BUNDLE DEAL!” etc.

The consumer buys. They feel like they got a deal, you hit your sales target, and Alphabet and Meta shareholders pop champagne.

Everyone wins. You’ve fished where the fish are, picked the low-hanging fruit, and you’re a genius. Article finished.

Except – one question... how much is your product worth?

Sure, you know what it costs to make, distribute, and market, but that’s not the same as what it’s worth. Worth is defined by what a consumer is willing to pay. And if the first price the consumer sees is a discount, that discount becomes their anchor. “I’m being asked to pay £500? Okay, I guess it's worth £500, tops.”

And if that's how much it's worth, and that's how much it's on sale for – then that's not a deal. And if there's no marginal value there for the consumer to be motivated by, then we just gave up maybe 70% of our own margin for nothing.

And that’s where things start to unravel. Discounts can't drive urgency if they're what set price expectations. And those laser-focused ads? They’re now just part of the noise, lost in a sea of identical offers. You’re on the consumer's radar, sure – but so is everyone else. The radar is jammed.

This whole 'fish the low-hanging fish' approach might look efficient on paper, but in practice it fails.

Why? Because it's looking at the problem from the business' point of view. It doesn't see things from the consumer's perspective. It doesn't set the consumer up to think, “£500? For that? Wow!”

Because the fact that 95% of your consumers aren’t in market is actually your big opportunity. While everyone fights for the fruit of the 5%, you have room to plant your seeds in the 95% of uncontested space.

Be creative, not for its own sake, but because it will help your brand burrow deep into the dry dust of their brain and stay there, waiting for the rains to come. They won’t remember specifics, so don’t sell them specifics. Make an impression. This audience doesn’t care much about what you have to say, so make it entertaining. They won’t act now, so don’t ask.

A business that doesn’t do the necessary brand groundwork in the long fallow periods between purchases is like a student who crams the night before an exam. If your measure of success is scraping by, then maybe that’s good enough. But if you want to win, you have to put in the yards and the years.

So, focus on building your brand while your competitors are busy playing whack-a-mole with short-term wins, and you’ll be in a much better position long-term.

When a consumer finally comes round to become one of the 5% actively in market – and they hit the zero moment of truth and officially begin their purchase journey – they already know you. They’ll notice your offer amidst the clutter. They’ll have a sense of what you’re worth, and they’ll see that your price is lower than they expected. They’ll also have an idea of why you’re different, and why you might be right for them, even if you’re not the absolute cheapest at the moment.

In other words, good business requires that you build your brand with the silent majority, even if it looks like you're missing an opportunity by not spending everything maximising on the obvious 5%.

Or, to stretch and scramble the metaphor just a little bit, if you want to fish the low-hanging fish, start by planting where the plants aren’t.

Agency leaders on Trump's win

Agency leaders on Trump's win

Kamala Harris has a serious messaging problem

No good deal without a good brand