An Epic/MRA poll of “active voters” conducted from August 4-10 reports a 49-42 advantage for John Kerry in Michigan, with 3 percent for Nader, and 6 percent “unsure.”
TDS Strategy Memos
Latest Research from:
Editor’s Corner
By Ed Kilgore
-
July 26: The Obama Coalition Revisited
It’s pretty obvious Kamala Harris’s candidacy changes the 2024 presidential race more than a little, and I wrote at New York about one avenue she has for victory that might have eluded Joe Biden:
During her brief run for the Democratic presidential nomination in 2019, Kamala Harris was widely believed to be emulating Barack Obama’s 2008 campaign strategy. She treated South Carolina, the first primary state with a substantial Black electorate, as the site of her potential breakthrough. But she front-loaded resources into Iowa to prepare for that breakthrough by reassuring Black voters that she could win in the largely white jurisdiction. She had the added advantage of being from the large state of California, where the primary had just been moved up to Super Tuesday (March 3). For a thrilling moment, after her commanding performance in a June 2019 debate, Harris seemed on track to pull off this feat, threatening Joe Biden’s hold on South Carolina in the polls and surging in Iowa. But neither she nor Cory Booker, who also relied on the Obama precedent, could displace Biden as the favorite of Black voters or strike gold in the crowded Iowa field. Out of money and luck, Harris dropped out before voters voted.
Now Kamala Harris is the presumptive Democratic presidential nominee for 2024 without having to navigate any primaries. But she still faces some key strategic decisions. Joe Biden was consistently trailing Donald Trump in the polls in no small part because he was underperforming among young and non-white voters, the very heart of the much-discussed Obama coalition. Can Harris recoup some of these potential losses without sacrificing support elsewhere in the electorate? That is a question she must address at the very beginning of her general-election campaign.
There’s a chance that Harris can inject a bit of the Obama “hope and change” magic into a Democratic ticket that had previously felt like a desperate effort to defend an unpopular administration led by a low-energy incumbent, as Ron Brownstein suggests in The Atlantic:
“Polls have shown that a significant share of Americans doubt the mental capacity of Trump, who has stumbled through his own procession of verbal flubs, memory lapses, and incomprehensible tangents during stump speeches and interviews to relatively little attention in the shadow of Biden’s difficulties. Particularly if Harris picks a younger running mate, she could top a ticket that embodies the generational change that many voters indicated they were yearning for when facing a Trump-Biden rematch …
“In the best-case scenario for this line of thinking, Harris could regain ground among the younger voters and Black and Hispanic voters who have drifted away from Biden since 2020. At the same time, she could further expand Democrats’ already solid margins among college-educated women who support abortion rights.”
Team Trump seems to believe it can offset these potential gains by depicting Harris as a “California radical” and a symbol of diversity who might alienate the older white voters with whom Biden had some residual strength. Obama overcame similar race-saturated appeals in 2008, but he had a lot of help from a financial collapse and an unpopular war presided over by the party of his opponent.
Following Obama’s path has major strategic implications in terms of the battleground map. Any significant improvement over Biden’s performance among Black, Latino, and under-30 voters might put Arizona, Nevada, Georgia, and North Carolina — very nearly conceded to Trump in recent weeks — back into play. But erosion of Biden’s support among older and/or non-college-educated white voters could create potholes in his narrow Rust Belt path to victory in Michigan, Pennsylvania, and Wisconsin.
These strategic choices could definitely affect Harris’s choice of a running-mate, not just in terms of potentially picking a veep from a battleground state, but as a way of amplifying the shift produced by Biden’s withdrawal. Brownstein even thinks Harris might consider following Bill Clinton’s 1992 example of doubling down on her own strengths:
“The other option that energizes many Democrats would be for Harris to take the bold, historic option of selecting another woman: Whitmer. That would be a greater gamble, but a possible model would be 1992, when Bill Clinton chose Al Gore as his running mate; Gore was, like him, a centrist Baby Boomer southerner—rather than an older D.C. hand. ‘I love Josh Shapiro and I think he would be a great VP candidate, but I would double down’ with Whitmer, [Democratci consultant Mike] Mikus told me. ‘I don’t think you have to go with a moderate white guy. I think you can be bold [with a pick] that electrifies your base.’ I heard similar views from several consultants.”
Whitmer’s expressed disinterest in the veepstakes may take that particular option off the table, but the broader point remains: Harris does not have to — and may not be able to — simply adopt Biden’s strategy and tweak it slightly. She may be able to contemplate gains in the electorate that were unimaginable for an 81-year-old white male incumbent. But the strategic opportunity to follow Obama’s path to the White House will first depend on Harris’s ability to refocus persuadable voters on Trump’s shaky record, bad character, and extremist agenda. Biden could not do that after the debate debacle of June 27. His successor must begin taking the battle to the former president right now.
“This is going to get ugly in the very near future.”
When John McCain bested Bush in NH back in 2000 and became the darling of Dems, independents, the media and others hungary for authenticity, Bush, feeling cornered, turned to his base in SC; and boy did it deliver.
Look for that again. As Bush and his far right sponsors begin to sense that things are slipping away, we can expect an avalanche of vitriol from those wonderful people who gave us Bob Jones Univ. and the sludge about McCain’s family. Don’t be surprised when Repubs start talking about Gov. McGrevey being palsy with Kerry.
These people have no shame when it comes to winning elections. Its going to get very ugly.
Kerry is kicking off two weeks of economy focused campaigning, and I’m sure he’ll be going to Ohio quite a bit. Ohio does offer one of the best contrasts between what GW says about the economy and what is actually going on. I’m sure the Kerry people would also like to strengthen and secure that 9 point swing ARG is reporting.
I think the cross-country whistlestop tour was a great thing to do between the convention and the olympics, but now its time to get back to the battlegrounds.
Kerry needs to build on Ohio.
This is going to get ugly in the very near future.
It would be nice if the Kerry team could use Bush’s need to go intensley negative against him. Bush is in a corner, and there should be a way to play that to Kerry’s advantage – perhaps by giving the media a narrative about what Bush is being forced to do. If we can get the media to start throwing around terms like ‘desperate’ when they cover Bush attacks, it would help.
Anything that forces Bush to spend more resources on ground that was assumed to be already his, is a good thing as long as Kerry doesn’t spend too many of his own resources.
Just got off the phone from a long conversation with a high school friend from SW Ohio — much of it talking Politics. Look — Kerry needs to get back there and talk Economics and Jobs — but he should also send Wes Clark in to talk Military talk — particularly around Dayton. (They love him in Dayton because of the Dayton Agreements forged at Wright Patterson.) Edwards needs to visit Hamilton and Middletown, both of which are near bankrupt because of the loss of the steel fabricating industry. They won’t win a majority in that neck of the woods — but apparently there are lots of pick-up votes to be had.
Everyone has been assuming that OH would be secure for Bush so the latest ARG poll is very encouraging. Kerry can pin him down there for a long time. It will also be interesting to see if there is any bounce from the winger-lite convention or whether voters are further alienated by smirking Bush, sneering Cheney and the Swift boat attacks. So far the trend is promising. As the election gets closer swing voters appear to be more comfortable with a president Kerry.
With any luck JK will have the blue states sewed up by Labor Day. That leaves two months to take some states Bush won in 2000. Best bets: NH, NV, WVA, MO, & (drum roll) FL.
Now something else! I wonder how this resignation of New Jersey’s Governor Will affect the Polls? The Right Wing is really starting to through the XXXX now.
American Research has posted a poll for Ohio, taken from 8-9 through 8-11. It has Kerry at 48% Bush 45% Nader 2% Undecided 5%. On the heals of the new Florida polls that have Kerry up 6 and 7 points, things are looking pretty damn good!!
I hate to see EDM engaging in this semantics game (even though it was probably unintentional).
A seven point advantage in Hawaii is a ‘strong lead,’ but the same advantage in Michigan means the state is only ’tilting towards’ Kerry.
I think in these times a seven-point lead is a pretty strong no matter what state you’re talking about.
According to Salon.com GWB, while in Florida, said that a national sales tax is “an interesting idea that we ought to explore seriously.”
Yahoo! says that JK is about to start a two week capaign push on the economy and taxes.
I believe this is the break we need. Team Kerry needs to go to the juglar with this comment from Bush. And if he does, I believe, New Mexico, Nevada, Arizona, and Colorado will be ripe for the picking. And that would create an insurrmountable electoral lock.