The specter of China has entered the US election campaign rhetoric – significantly more so among the Republicans than the Democrats

During his speech at the Republican National Convention in July 2024, Donald Trump mentioned China 14 times. During his 92-minute speech, the former president used his much-criticized term “China virus” for the COVID-19 pandemic, said China was stealing jobs in the auto industry, and boasted that his administration had beaten China on several fronts.

China was also one of the keynote speeches at the 2024 Democratic National Convention. On the first night, President Joe Biden said that when he took office, “the general perception was that China would inevitably overtake the United States.”

“Nobody is saying that now,” he added.

Democratic presidential candidate Kamala Harris also echoed this view last night, saying that if elected, she would ensure that “America, not China, wins the competition of the 21st century.”

As an expert on the portrayal of China in U.S. media culture and politics, I believe that China's presence in election rhetoric is hardly surprising—nor is the unequal emphasis it receives on the Democratic and Republican sides.

A proven election trick

Since Biden's withdrawal from the presidential race, the Democratic candidates, unlike their Republican counterparts, have apparently limited their references to China in the election campaign.

Trump and his Republican allies have long used China to position themselves as anti-communist and to burnish their “America First” image. For Trump in particular, this is a tried-and-tested electoral ploy. In the run-up to the 2016 election, Trump invoked China so frequently that the Huffington Post produced a mashup video in which the candidate repeated “China” 234 times.

This has continued in the current election cycle.

Aside from frequent mentions in speeches by Trump and others, the GOP platform for 2024 emphasizes “securing strategic independence from China” as a central commitment by restricting trade and investment, as well as “countering China” to “restore peace through strength.” In contrast, other perceived adversaries such as Russia and Iran were not mentioned in the official Republican platform.

Meanwhile, Project 2025 – the conservative Heritage Foundation's policy plan often associated with Trump, although his campaign denies that connection – mentions China no less than 483 times in a 922-page document. The project's official website even highlights the goal of “taking on China” on its “About” page.

Neither “dragon slayer” nor “panda hugger”

It was no surprise, then, that pro-Trump sections of the U.S. media pounced on the news that Tim Walz, the Minnesota governor chosen as Harris's running mate, had previously taught in China and traveled there an estimated 30 times since 1989, including on his honeymoon.

Although Walz said he was “neither a 'dragon slayer' nor a 'panda hugger'” when it came to China, conservative commentators portrayed Walz as a “Marxist” who would make communist China “very happy.” Fox News host Jesse Watters even called for Walz to undergo an FBI background check because of his China ties.

On August 16, House Oversight and Accountability Committee Chairman James Comer, a Republican, launched an investigation into Walz's “longstanding ties” to China.

The great waltz of China? Hardly

Among the connections that some Republicans find suspect is that from 1994 to 2003, Walz co-owned Educational Travel Adventures with his wife, Gwen Walz. The company they founded helped small-town American students travel to China to learn about the country's history and culture. While in the House, Walz also served on the Congressional Human Rights Commission on China.

Although Walz has always been critical of the Chinese government, he also recognized that relations between the United States and China do not necessarily have to be hostile and that there can be “many areas of cooperation.”

Despite his extensive experience with China, the Democratic vice presidential candidate has so far not mentioned China in his major campaign speeches. Unlike the speeches of Harris, Trump and Walz's vice presidential rival, JD Vance, China did not feature in his speech at the party convention.

Walz's apparent reluctance to flaunt his knowledge of China also contrasts with the behavior of a previous Republican presidential candidate, Jon Huntsman, who served as ambassador to China and is fluent in Chinese. During his campaign in 2011, arguably at a different time in U.S.-China relations, Huntsman repeatedly demonstrated his ability to speak Chinese and was often praised for it.

Harris' big leap forward, not back

One reason for the different emphasis on China for the two candidates, I believe, is the different focus of the election. For Democrats, the upcoming election is about movement – they project a choice between regression and progress. Slogans like Harris' “We are not going backwards” position the United States and its people as moving toward a future of unity, promise, and opportunity that, in their view, leaves behind the chaos, division, and oppression of the past.

In this framework, China's role as a threat is anchored primarily in the area of ​​high-tech competition; Harris mentioned China in her speech at the party congress with regard to the future of space and artificial intelligence.

In contrast, the Republican campaign is more focused on protecting an imagined Americanism from foreign powers, which is why we hear more from Trump and Vance about the much-dramatized “invasion” of immigrants crossing the border illegally, “bringing” drugs and crime with them.

The same logic, I would argue, underlies the Republican Party's frequent invocation of China as a geopolitical and economic threat.

After all, Trump has long attributed a variety of actions to the Chinese government, from calling it the inventor of the “Wuhan virus” to accusing it of being responsible for the climate change “hoax.” In his speech at the convention, Vance directly linked China to the illegal cross-border drug trade. At a rally in Michigan on August 27, he also accused Harris of using taxpayer money to “pay the Chinese Communist Party to build factories on American soil,” while failing to mention that the Republican-led Congress had developed this program.

This characterization of China fits with what I called the “racialization” of the Chinese state in my book Disorienting Politics. The rhetoric portrays China as a powerful actor committing nefarious acts that can only harm America.

“Everything revolves around China”

Over the past two decades, sections of the American media have equated the rule of the Chinese Communist Party with fascism and totalitarianism.

This rhetoric about the “Chinese virus” during the pandemic sparked a spike in reports of racist attacks against Asians in the United States, showing that artificially created fear of a distant country like China can also fuel hatred against people believed to be from there.

In this sense, Walz's reluctance to mention China may reflect a refusal to oversimplify China's complex society. “The best way to get to know people is to listen to them talk about where they live,” the former social studies teacher said in 1991 when he spoke to a local newspaper about a pen-pal program between the United States and China.

As the election season progresses, the specter of China is likely to resurface, even as more pressing geopolitical conflicts continue to dominate the headlines.

Finally, even one of Walz's former students – a self-described “sleeping Republican” who tried to defend Walz against Republican attacks on his character – advised the Trump campaign to focus on policy and “Make it an issue in China.”