| If you read the coverage—and campaign finance toplines—you might think Kamala Harris has rocketed to a commanding position against Donald Trump. Even before drawing unmatched positive reviews for her debate performance, her public favorability numbers had jumped by almost 20 points since her low point in January and 10 points from Democrats’ summer nadir. In battleground states, she’s doing an average of about 4 percentage points better than Joe Biden was before she replaced him as the presidential nominee. But at Thursday’s mark of 53 days before Election Day, history suggests Harris supporters have good reason to be skittish. In RealClearPolitics’ national poll of polls, she’s still trailing Trump by 1.3 points—within the margin of error. Going back 20 years, the eventual losers of presidential contests at this point were, on average, down 2.6 points in the RCP average. Harris is only faring a bit better than that. Put simply: It’s really hard to climb out of a deficit this late in a cycle, but it’s possible for a leading campaign to stumble if outside forces intervene. That’s what arguably explains how Hillary Clinton blew a 1.5-point advantage at this point in 2016 (Looking at you, James Comey) and how John McCain seemed to be up by 2.3 points before losing in 2008 (A pesky Wall Street meltdown unfolded in the interim). Still, Democrats have a clear advantage over Republicans when it comes to enthusiasm, which could make all the difference in turnout. Democratic enthusiasm right now tops even levels seen right before Barack Obama’s 2008 election, according to Gallup polling. Most pollsters agree that, after the debate, the race is in the midst of a reset, one that will show up in the next round of surveys that will come out early next week. Even then, any bump may be short lived, but sufficient if it lasts deep enough into early voting. That explains why Democrats remain bullish about their odds, from the top of the ticket down to individual state legislative races. The campaign finance reports that are due this weekend should offer some hints about how millions are sloshing around in some fairly inefficient places; Texas’ Senate candidates have already raised $97 million for a contest that has remained firmly Sen. Ted Cruz’s to lose. To be sure, this race stopped being a potential blow-out when Biden stepped aside. With the President off the ticket, Republicans are finding it tougher to link their rivals with an unpopular incumbent that even his strongest allies had to acknowledge had become a drag down-ballot. Strategists for House and Senate campaigns in both parties are bullish overall, although there are clear races that are more problematic for one side than the other. Republicans, however, are openly fretting that their money machines might not be able to keep pace with Democrats’ new zeal. Still, the top of the ticket is what is driving so much of the conversation, and that trickles down into the other pieces of the political ecosystem. Harris’ stans are right to think she salvaged Democrats’ fortunes up and down the ticket, but they are far from a lock for the biggest prizes in politics. The fight for every last vote is one that is going to be a vicious one, as the hostility on display during Tuesday night’s unevenly matched debate showed. There’s no reason to think the other contests will dodge the same twist toward nasty. What is less known, however, is this: will any of it harden either presidential candidates’ softest supporters and ensure they turn out? Trump’s die-hards have proven their ability to tune out inconvenient hassles, while Democrats tend to be intractable when turned into true-believers. Historical trends, though, show ideological optimism is seldom sufficient to break inertia, especially absent some dramatic intervention. And counting on that is not a sensible strategy for Harris or her KHive—even if it’s what history tells us works best to retake the upper position. | 
Comentarios
Publicar un comentario