The Economist explains

Will Taylor Swift’s endorsement of Kamala Harris matter?

Celebrity endorsements are unlikely to change voters’ minds. But they may boost turnout

Taylor Swift performing on stage at Wembley Stadium. London
Photograph: AP

IT HAD ALL the ingredients of an internet hit: star power, good timing—and cats. Minutes after the presidential debate between Kamala Harris and Donald Trump ended, Taylor Swift told her 283m Instagram followers that she would be voting for Ms Harris “because she fights for the rights and causes I believe need a warrior to champion them”. Ms Swift signed the post, in which she is pictured holding her cat, as a “Childless Cat Lady”, a dig at J.D. Vance, Mr Trump’s running-mate, who said that such people run America. Ms Swift’s post racked up millions of likes and almost eclipsed news of the debate itself. But will it have any effect on the election?

Explore more

Discover more

Close-up of chrysotile asbestos fibers on a gloved hand.

Is RFK junior right to say America allows more toxins than the EU?

He is, but things are slowly beginning to change

A photo illustration showing a pile of coal gradually disappearing.

What would it cost to kill coal?

The price of shutting down coal power, and what would be gained


A bumper sticker on an SUV reads 'FLUORIDE - THERE IS POISON IN THE TAP WATER' in Blackhawk, Colorado, USA.

Should America ban fluoride in its drinking water?

The idea by Robert F. Kennedy junior—nominated by Donald Trump as health secretary—may have teeth


Why is Donald Trump keen to use “recess appointments”?

The president-elect is testing the loyalty of the Senate’s next majority leader

Will Donald Trump’s power be unchecked if Republicans win the House?

A “trifecta” of presidency, Senate and House of Representatives would provide a huge opportunity

Why The Economist endorses political candidates

Our independence is protected by our principles and structure