Harris’ momentum may finally be breaking through. After an extensive period of neck and neck polling, and it is still very close, Vice-President Harris may finally be getting the edge she needs to beat former President Trump. While Harris has previously done well in states such as Michigan and Wisconsin, it appears that Harris is on track to take Pennsylvania. 12
All Eyes on Pennsylvania
While states such as North Carolina, Arizona and Georgia have gotten much of the attention and have shown some potential for the Harris campaign, it has been increasingly clear that the election will likely be decided in the key states of Michigan, Wisconsin and Pennsylvania.34When Harris entered into the race, I speculated that the most likely outcome would be a race for the Midwestern states and the rust belt. 5 With under 60 days left in the election, it is becoming increasingly clear that such a prediction is holding strong.
While The Washington Post has argued that Harris was leading Trump by 2 points, other analyses have suggested that it was much closer.6 Larry Sabato’s Crystal Ball at the UVA Center for Politics puts all the swing states as toss-ups, suggesting that the states are unlikely to shift one way or the other soon. 7
Graphic by Larry Sabato’s Crystal Ball, August 20th, 2024. Screenshot by Author
Hesitation Turns to Confirmation
The New York Times wasn’t so generous to the former President, putting Pennsylvania as a tie all the way to September 11th of this year. In addition, the former President has been trailing Harris in their national polling. 8
Graphic by New York Times, Updated September 16th, 2024. Screenshot by Author
However, with the weak debate performance by Trump and a strong showing by Vice-President Harris, early signs in the polls have shown some momentum for Harris, and that momentum has seemingly put the Vice-President ahead in Pennsylvania by two points in their polling averages. 9
Graphic by New York Times, Updated September 16th, 2024. Screenshot by Author
More recent polling has also shown significant improvements for Harris. A recent Suffolk poll conducted among 500 likely Pennsylvania voters showed the Vice-President leading the former President by 3 points.10 While within the margin of error, the poll is consistent with larger momentum in other states such as North Carolina which has also shown support for the Vice-President. Last week, a Quinnipiac poll showed Harris leading Trump by 3 points in North Carolina, a state that has consistently gone for the GOP over the last several elections. 11
While it is far from a forgone conclusion, the momentum thus far seems to be working in Harris’ favor and if her polling in Pennsylvania holds, it could send her all the way to the White House.
If you like my work and want to support me, you can find the donation link on my Kofi link. Thank you, I really appreciate it.
The interview, which will review his new book and its significance focuses on the two right-wing presidents and their legacies
Thumbnail by NateTalkstoYou
Good evening everyone,
I hope this article finds you well. Here at The Progressive American, I have interviewed multiple figures across the political spectrum, including Ira Shapiro and former Congressional candidate Qasim Rashid.12 I am happy to announce that the Washington Post’s Max Boot will be coming on the show this Thursday, September 19th.
Introducing Max Boot
Max Boot is “a historian and foreign-policy analyst, as well as a senior fellow at the Council on Foreign Relations and a columnist for the Washington Post.” 3His recent book “REAGAN: His Life and Legend,” examines the complicated legacy of the 40th president of the United States and his sometimes contradictory character.
What We Will Be Discussing
While there is much that could be said about Reagan, for the sake of time and relevance, we will be specifically focusing on the role and responsibility Reagan has in creating Donald Trump and the differences between him and Reagan.
We will be going live at 3:15 PM CST and you can watch it on my YouTube linked down below:
If you like my work and want to support me, you can find the donation link on my Kofi link. Thank you, I really appreciate it.
In yet another display of brazen violence, an alleged gunman has seemingly attempted to assassinate the former President.1 In much the same vane as I noted in my prior essay on the Pennsylvania attempt on Trump, political violence and assassination are completely and utterly unacceptable.
What We Know and What We Don’t
The FBI reported on Sunday that an alleged gunman was hiding in the bushes at Mara-A-Lago with an AK-47 and a scope, along with a GoPro to seemingly record the suspect’s actions.2 The Financial Times reported that the FBI had “responded to West Palm Beach, Florida, and is investigating what appears to be an attempted assassination of former president Trump.”3
Trump remains unharmed and it thus far remains unclear if any shots were fired by the alleged gunman and why said gunman fired on Trump in the first place. The gunman, has been identified as Ryan Wesley Routh. However, it is unclear if the gunman has any particular political affiliations as of writing. 4 Nor is it clear if the Routh fired on any secret service personnel.
The Responsibility of Ignorance
While there will inevitably be much to be uncovered in coming minutes and hours, it is important in this highly interconnected and hyper-partisan political environment to avoid any and all baseless claims. Already, there have been conspiracy theories about a supposed trans mass shooting trend, much of which has been debunked. 5
It is tempting to try and fill in the gaps when information is lacking and that temptation can sometimes lead people to ignore the burden of proof. By allowing themselves to avoid the necessary patience to confirm information, people can intentionally or unintentionally create justifications for engaging in baseless speculation. It is the responsibility of every consumer of the news to recognize what they know and what they don’t.
We still don’t know why this attempt took place and we don’t know all the details. It is critical that we remember that simple fact and avoid baseless speculation.
Condemning Political Violence
As many of my readers will know, I have previously condemned the first attempt on Trump’s life in Butler, Pennsylvania.6 I would like to further reiterate my position as I stated it in July.
My readers will almost certainly know how I feel about the former President; I think he’s a criminal, a racist, and a massive narcissist who put our nation’s security at risk on a whim. Nonetheless, it is important to reiterate the clear and present danger of inadequately addressing the attempted assassination of a presidential candidate. Failing to adequately condemn the reality of such violence, especially when said violence killed a bystander in the crowd, means setting a poor standard not just for this election but also for elections in the future.
– Conor Kelly, The Attempt on Trump’s Life is Unacceptable, July 15, 2024
Our future is not simply determined by political violence or the removal of anyone political figure from the stage. It is determined by the standards we set for our actions and the actions of those around us. Failing to condemn violence and failing to uphold the values of stability and pluralism will not create a healthier and more well-established democracy. It will only encourage more violence and hostility. While we still don’t know the specifics of the attempt on Trump’s life, it is clear that we can’t allow ourselves to be consumed by hatred to justify the actions of this alleged assailant.
If you like my work and want to support me, you can find the donation link on my Kofi link. Thank you, I really appreciate it.
Keeping track of an increasingly complicated political field can be difficult with the election in full swing and the polls showing a tight race. 12 Media attention given to debates quickly turns to rallies, scandals, and polls. However, it is in these complicated times that we should always remember what is at stake in the upcoming election: the future of our country and the consequences of a violent attempt to overturn the will of the people must be remembered.
Running From The Past
Despite blatantly encouraging an attack on the Capitol through his lies, former President Trump has repeatedly attempted to avoid the consequences of what happened that day.34All the while, he has continued to stump for the rioters who attacked the nation’s most powerful legislative body. In a recent piece, The New York Times’ Charles Homans and Alan Feuer detail the effort by Trump to both stay true to the people he motivated to attack the Capitol while also avoiding the inevitable results of their radicalism. 5
For years, Mr. Trump has helped craft an alternate history of that day, one in which the violent attack was a “love fest,” the jailed rioters were “hostages” and their prosecution was a part of a larger story of persecution — of both Mr. Trump and his supporters — that has been at the core of his argument for a return to the presidency.
But as he courts voters beyond his loyal base ahead of the November election, he and his campaign have engaged in an awkward push and pull over how closely to associate with the riot’s legacy. A recording of jailed Jan. 6 defendants singing the national anthem no longer plays at his rallies. When some defendants, including a man whom federal prosecutors have described as a “white supremacist and Nazi sympathizer,” gathered at Mr. Trump’s Bedminster golf club for a fund-raiser, the former president, who has attended similar events, sent his support in a video message instead.
“Our hearts are with you,” Mr. Trump said in the video. “Our soul is with you.”
The former president’s close-but-not-too-close relationship with the Jan. 6 cause is a tacit acknowledgment of his personal attachment to an issue with questionable political benefits, and of the country’s stark partisan divide over the Capitol riot, a divide largely of Mr. Trump’s own making.
Despite willingly promoting their cause, even as many of these rioters are being prosecuted at record numbers, the former President is trying to have the best of both worlds where he can hold onto his victim-hood complex while also keeping the actual people who might undermine his campaign at arm’s length. Nobody should be surprised that someone as deceptive as Trump is also willing to throw the very people who fought for him under the bus.
The Dangers of Forgetting
While the Harris campaign has not made January 6th the centerpiece of her attack on Trump as Biden previously did, there is still a need to remember and evaluate what happened. For the first time in decades, the United States failed to ensure a transfer of power occurred without violence. The rioters assaulted nearly 140 officers, and at least one person was killed in a confrontation with police. 67
The result of the attack was not only tied to the destruction of property but also tied to the serious threat to the well-being of duly elected members of the House and Senate, along with then-Vice-President Mike Pence. This sounds abstract and to some, not that worrying, as politicians are rarely seen in a good light. However, it is worth reiterating just how important those officials are not only because of their inherent dignity as human beings, which should be enough in and of itself to change hearts and minds, but also worth noting that several of the people whose lives were threatened that day were in the presidential line of succession.
Under the line of succession, if the President is in any way incapacitated, the Vice-President takes charge of the executive functions of the federal government, but in the event of the Vice-President being incapacitated or, worse, killed, the Speaker of the House takes the job. 8
In the case of January 6th, then Vice-President Mike Pence and then Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi were present in the Capitol building when Trump’s supporters attacked the Capitol. Even the backup to these two people, The President Pro Tempore of the Senate, Senator Chuck Grassley, was present at the Capitol when it was stormed. If anything had happened to either of these figures, not only would it be a travesty in its own right, but it would send a message that access to the most powerful executive position in the country can be seized by violence and usurpation.
It is not unreasonable or even partisan to say that our nation’s security and stability were threatened that day, and Trump’s failure to acknowledge his responsibility for the lies he propagated that day should be disqualifying. If America is to move forward, not only does Trump need to lose this election, but he must also be forced to face the full power of the law for his involvement and his cowardice. America must never forget when its own citizens tried to destroy the peaceful transfer of power.
If you like my work and want to support me, you can find the donation link on my Kofi link. Thank you, I really appreciate it.
The first debate between former President Donald Trump and Vice-President Kamala Harris came and went, and it was painfully obvious who won: Kamala Harris. 1The debate, while long anticipated, was surprisingly one-sided, with Harris meeting all of the points she needed while Trump fell for trap after trap.23 While the debate itself isn’t likely to decide the election on its own, the failure by Trump to capitalize on any key point and weaken Harris’ image will almost certainly hurt his presidential bid.
The Pre-Debate Considerations
As many of my readers know, I covered the debate last night in a livestream, where I both provided context regarding the importance of Harris’ momentum and how the polling stood before the debate.
Throughout that stream, I noted that Trump, while recovering from Harris’ entry into the race, was still facing an uphill battle in the election. In states like Michigan, Wisconsin and Pennsylvania, Trump is struggling to keep Harris at bay. In Wisconsin, Harris leads Trump by two points, on average.4 A Marquette Law Poll found that she leads him by four points, showing that Harris’ momentum seems to continue.5 Although, it may take time for the full extent of the debate to appear in the polls.
In states like Michigan and Pennsylvania, Trump’s position is far from ideal, with Trump only managing to tie Harris in Pennsylvania.67 In states that Trump needs to hold onto, such as North Carolina, Trump’s position may not be as strong as initially suspected. A Quinnipiac poll found that the former President trails Harris by three points.8 In the New York Times’ average, Trump is losing by one point, showing that he is not guaranteed a normally strong Republican state. 9
However, I also explained that these polls were subject to change and even with the debate now over, it still remains unclear how the debate will effect the election.
A Victory for Harris and an Embarrassment for Trump
Throughout the debate, Trump failed to hit on key points to criticize Vice President Harris on her record. He repeatedly rambled and came off as overwhelmed by grievances. At one point, Trump fell into bait that Harris left for him about his rallies, which prompted the former President to claim that nobody goes to Harris’ rallies.
The petty response from Trump was the first of many signs that Trump couldn’t stay on topic or avoid the bait that Harris was setting for him.10 Prior to the debate, his own allies were frustrated by his performance. A report by The New York Times summed this up perfectly.11
Ms. Harris dominated the proceedings from nearly the start. She laid bait. He took it. It began with her needling Mr. Trump that his bored supporters had been leaving his rallies. It continued with her comment that he had inherited riches from his father. And on it went as she invoked his Republican critics, including those who served in his administration.
On the back foot, Mr. Trump repeatedly spun down rhetorical cul-de-sacs.
At one point, Ms. Harris invited viewers to watch a Trump rally for a more unfiltered view of the former president. “You will not hear him talk about your needs,” she said.
He responded not by talking about voter needs but about crowd numbers.
“People don’t leave my rallies,” he pushed back.
Shane Goldmacher and Katie Rogers, “Harris Dominates as Trump Gets Defensive: 6 Takeaways From the Debate,” The New York Times, September 11, 2024, sec. U.S.
Nor did Trump disappoint with his strange and unusual commentary, repeating a ridiculous assertion that Haitian migrants in Springfield, Ohio, were eating the dogs and cats of local residents. 12 The absurd claims, which come from a Facebook post, was yet another example of Trump’s inability to respond to key issues that matter to everyday Americans.
Where Harris focused heavily on issues such as abortion, the economy and bipartisanship, Trump repeated absurdity after absurdity and without any real vision, was unable to justify his bid for the presidency. One can only hope that this horrendous performance by Trump will lead to a swift and decisive victory for Harris.
If you like my work and want to support me, you can find the donation link on my Kofi link. Thank you, I really appreciate it.
With the debate on Tuesday, there will be a live-stream about what to expect and the aftermath!
Thumbnail by NateTalksToYou
The debate between Kamala Harris and Donald Trump is officially set for Tuesday. With the debate upcoming and increasingly close race in the polls, election coverage becomes increasingly pertinent. 1Harris, who leads Trump in the polls nationally and who leads him in multiple key states, albeit narrowly, will face her first true test against the former President and I will be covering it live!
The debate starts at 9 PM EST/8PM CST.2 However, for the sake of a polling update and other information before the debate, I will be starting at 8:30PM EST/7:30PM CST.3
Here is some background.
What to expect from the livestream/debate
While I previously noted that some risks that could hamper Harris in this debate.4 Trump’s need to talk over his opponent would be one potential problem, however, that likely won’t be an issue going forward, as the microphones will be muted when the other candidate is talking. 5 What I will be looking for, more specifically, is how Harris reacts to Trump’s attacks. And make no mistake, he will attack her.
Beginning, the stream will begin with a review of the polling in the key states based on updated polling. While not much has changed since I last wrote my last piece on the state of the election, we can expect to see some electoral changes within the next few days, both before the debate and after.67 That said, depending on how either candidate performs in the upcoming debate, the race could change. Even a slight change in the key battle ground states could lead to significant results.
Barring a particularly egregious performance by either candidate, we can expect to see partisans stay where they are in the race. However, the independent voters could be swayed and thus, give one candidate momentum and/or take away momentum from the other. Harris has benefited significantly from her sudden entry and it wouldn’t surprise me in the slightest if a strong or even decent performance against Trump would lead to strengthened support in the states she needs.
Where can you watch the debate?
I will be watching the debate via a screenshare of another livestream. However, my stream will be available on my YouTube and Twitch. Assuming all goes according to plan, you will also be able to watch it on Facebook live as well. 89
I look forward to seeing you all during the livestream! See you then!
If you like my work and want to support me, you can find the donation link on my Kofi link. Thank you, I really appreciate it.
A new indictment by the FBI shows extent of Russian influence peddling
Federal Bureau of Investigation, Public domain, via Wikimedia Commons
In another display of just how far the Russian government, and some commentators, are willing to go to spread propaganda and undermine the public good, the FBI has caught a conservative media company taking money from two Russian operatives.1 The indictment and the response to it, is yet another example of how dangerous foreign influence in our politics truly is.
The Indictment: A Sign of Conservative Disloyalty
The FBI’s announcement, which was first reported on September 4th, alerted the public an indictment against Kostiantyn Kalashnikov and Elena Afanasyeva, two contributors to the pro-Russian propaganda site, RT. The indictment accuses the two of laundering $10 million in an attempt to sow division in the public and undermine support for Ukraine. As The Washington Post explained:
The 32-page federal indictment accuses Kostiantyn Kalashnikov and Elena Afanasyeva, employees of RT, a Russian-state news site formerly known as Russia Today, of conducting a money-laundering operation that spent nearly $10 million on efforts to covertly influence public opinion and sow social divisions, including placing blame on Ukraine regarding the war with Russia.
Authorities said the U.S. company, which was not identified by name in the indictment, allegedly created and posted hundreds of English-language videos on social media sites, including TikTok, Instagram, YouTube and X, that echoed Russian state propaganda and garnered 16 million views on YouTube alone.
-David Nakamura, et al., “Justice Dept. Charges Two Russian Media Operatives in Alleged Scheme,” Washington Post, September 4, 2024.
The company, while unnamed in the indictment, is Tenet Media, founded by Canadian conservative commentator Lauren Chen and her husband Liam Donovan. The description of the media company that received the money matches Tenet’s own website and comments by figures like Tim Pool have effectively confirmed that the Tenet is the one that received the money.23
My statement regarding allegations and the DOJ Indictment
Should these allegations prove true, I as well as the other personalities and commentators were deceived and are victims. I cannot speak for anyone else at the company as to what they do or to what they are instructed…
It is worth noting this company, which started in 2023, was no small operation. Tenet enjoyed access to talent across the conservative media sphere including the likes of Tim Pool, Lauren Southern, Matt Christiansen and Benny Johnson. These figures likely were not aware of the full extent of the funding and were kept in the dark about the nature of the fundraising or the intentions of the people providing funds to Tenet.
The same can’t be said of Lauren Chen, who, as I have previously mentioned in my video on her, is a far-right provocateur.4 I find it highly unlikely that the same woman who founded the company would also be unaware of the company’s source of funds.
The fact that Chen would be involved in anyway with such an endeavor is sadly not surprising to me as her content has always been dishonest, misleading and bigoted. She would be a perfect source of bigoted content for far-right Russian propaganda and providing funds to expand her ability to spread such divisive content is almost certainly in Russia’s interest.
While it is still too early to say how this case will go, and Chen herself isn’t facing an indictment as of today, it should serve as a clear and present reminder that the right sees its political ends as more important than defending America from its adversary’s propaganda.
It happened again. America had another mass shooting. This time, in Winder, Georgia. The shooting which killed four, two children and two adults, leaves yet another hole in the heart of America.1 The suffering that comes with said hole inevitably provokes outrage and calls for change. These calls for change, namely in the form of gun control, need to be heard, both in terms of how the media responds to said shootings and how we as a society enact policy when it comes to gun regulation. More than that, however, we are faced with a much more painful reality. The reality gun violence is and always a political issue.
The Political Nature of Gun Violence
The last time I made this point about gun violence was in 2022, when the horrific shooting in Uvalde took place. During that period, I was concerned and and still am, that our failures to talk about gun control in the wake of shootings, which are motivated in part by a desire to respect the dead, sadly lead to a failure to act to prevent future tragedies. The article I wrote, which was titled Gun Violence is Inherently Political, focused on the important nature of public threats.2 In that article, I explained that:
Shootings, as consistent as they are in the United States, are a public problem. They destroy the lives of American citizens, subject the survivors to abject horrors for the rest of their lives and destroy the faith the people have in their public institutions and their own safety. Such a threat to the well-being of the American people will always be a matter of political concern.
The idea that this wouldn’t be political or a matter of public concern is not only naive but restricts the American people’s ability to prevent tragedies like this from happening in the future.
– Conor Kelly, Gun Violence is Inherently Political, 2022.
The unfortunate reality is that public problems inevitably become political ones. This reality doesn’t necessarily have to be partisan, but when it comes to systemic failures to act and when people abuse the well-intentioned desire to respect the dead, the issue becomes partisan by the very nature of a given party’s failure to act. In this case, the GOP’s opposition to substantive gun control measures puts the lives of the American people at risk.
How Many More Have to Die?
While the Federal government doesn’t keep track school shootings in and of itself, others do. Since 1999, The Washington Post has kept a tracker of all the incidents of gun violence at schools and the amount of children who are exposed to gun violence. According to their tally, an estimated 382,000 children have been exposed to gun violence at school and there have been 419 school shootings since Columbine. That same report found that since they began counting “at least 213 children, educators and other people have been killed, and another 464 have been injured.”3
These numbers are unacceptable and the fact we continue to debate over whether or not we should talk about gun control after a shooting is reprehensible. It is one thing to want to respect the dead, it is another thing entirely to wait for a pre-approved, seemingly unattainable date for when it is appropriate to talk about enacting sensible gun legislation while the next tragedy sits right around the corner.
Our citizens are dying, our children are dying. No amount of civility politics will protect the public and failing to call out the problem for what it is only leads to more suffering and tragedy. It is high time that the government enact critical legislation to protect the American people. We can’t wait any longer.
The debate, scheduled for September 10th, will be the first direct confrontation between Harris and Trump. Here’s what that could mean
WASHINGTON (March 4, 2021) Official portrait of Vice President Kamala Harris, March 4, 2021. (U.S. Navy photo courtesy of the White House by Lawrence Jackson)
The presidential race is drawing to a close, and the stakes couldn’t be higher. With polls showing Harris and Trump neck and neck, nothing can be left to chance.123That is especially true with the upcoming debate between former President Trump and Vice President Kamala Harris. With the debate next Tuesday, September 10th, many Americans wonder: What can we expect from the two candidates?
Considerations and Caution
When the debate was first announced, it was under the auspices of a Biden vs. Trump race.4 With the less than ideal debate performance by President Biden and his subsequent announcement to not seek reelection, the calculation has changed significantly. Harris’ entry into the race not only shifted the electoral map, but also the rhetoric surrounding the race itself.56 This has worked both to undermine Trump’s position in the race and put him on the defensive in many key states, it would be a mistake to assume that the debate couldn’t harm Harris.
While Harris has previously seen success in debates, such as her debate against then-Vice President Mike Pence, debating Trump is a whole different scenario. 7 Trump could easily disrupt the debate as he has in the past, blithering through the debate or actively attacking her on the border. This could harm Vice-President Harris despite the fact that she has very little power over the issue.
Nonetheless, Harris has shown a tenacity to her and has even used the over confidence of some of her opponents against them, letting them dismantle their own position. In one instance, her opponent for the United States senate decided it was a good idea to dab near the end of the debate, prompting Harris to respond “So, there’s a clear difference between the candidates in this race.”8
In another instance, her opponent was asked about whether or not he planned to engage in double dipping, meaning the use of both pension and salary while in office. Rather than attacking him, Harris let her opponent, Steve Cooley, sink himself with his answer, “Yes, I do… I have earned it.” 9
These kind of responses and overall approach could work for Harris in her case against Trump. The former President isn’t known for his restraint and at times, he has struggled to stay on script. As the New York Times10 puts it:
“On Monday in Pennsylvania, he struggled to clarify a previous comment that he believed the Presidential Medal of Freedom, which honors civilians, was “much better” than the Medal of Honor given to military members. On Tuesday in Michigan, he claimed that Vice President Kamala Harris had won the Democratic nomination after a “vicious, violent overthrow of a president” and called Chicago, which hosted the Democratic convention, “a war zone that’s worse than Afghanistan. He openly rejected advice from allies to limit his personal attacks on Ms. Harris and other Democrats during a speech on Wednesday in North Carolina. He called the nation’s first Black vice president “lazy” during a stop in Arizona on Thursday afternoon and, that night, rambled during a 10-minute phone call with Fox News. The anchors ultimately cut him off and ended the interview, but Mr. Trump picked up where he had left off by quickly phoning into Newsmax.”
Michael C. Bender and Michael Gold, “Trump’s Carefully Scripted Week Kept Veering Off Script,” The New York Times, August 24, 2024
His rhetoric since Harris’ entry into the race in July hasn’t adapted adequately and his debate performance, while likely to be similar to his approach to President Biden, will likely be of similar quality. So, Harris’ strategy of letting Trump destroy himself could work to her advantage but there are limitations to this approach.
What Harris has to Do
While Harris’ strategy of letting Trump speak may work to undermine his favorability, something he already struggles with, it would be a mistake to assume that is enough. 11
Graphic of Trump’s favorability by FiveThrityEight, September 3rd, 2024.-Screenshot by Author
Simply because Trump is a bad candidate and unfit to serve may not be enough. Harris must also communicate her plan both to Americans and for them. What is she going to do to help the American people? Those questions are critical if she is to be viable going forward.
Simply stating a vision is not enough. Stating a clear vision that can be defended is another. While I have noted that Harris’ entry into the race has resulted in a less than strong response from Trump, that negativity in and of itself doesn’t justify a Harris presidency.12 Harris’ policies are the justification that Americans will have to see come next Tuesday.
If Harris is to prosper, she needs to keep her on the target and speak directly to the people. She needs to show that not only is she a better choice than Trump, she needs to show that she is good for America’s future.
If you like my work and want to support me, you can find the donation link on my Kofi link. Thank you, I really appreciate it.
Donald Trump’s bad campaign just got worse. North Carolina, which UVA’s Center for Politics had previously rated as leaning Republican, has officially shifted into a tossup, dropping the former President’s presumed electoral count from 235 to 219. The Harris campaign, by contrast, has a presumed electoral count of 226, officially recognizing a slight advantage for Vice-President Kamala Harris.
A Red Race Turning Blue
As my readers know, Harris’ entry into the race has significantly shifted the electoral calculus, effectively eliminating Trump’s edge. A little over a month ago, former President Trump successfully pushed the incumbent President Joe Biden back. However, with Harris’ entry into the race on July 21st, the previously reluctant public turned against the former President and has seemingly coalesced around the Vice-President. As I noted in a recent piece about the Trump campaign’s floundering momentum:
“Trump is not merely losing ground in the states he needs to deny Harris to win; he is losing ground that he simply can’t afford to lose. A recent Cook Political Report survey has shown Trump bleeding even more support, both in the environment of a head-to-head race and in a three-way race with RFK JR. In the seven key states that Cook surveyed, Trump led in only 1 state. Harris led in 5, with Georgia being a tie in both versions of the race. Trump needs to turn the race around, or his last chance at the Presidency could turn to ash.” –
Conor Kelly, Donald Trump is in Trouble: The Race So Far, August 16th, 2024.
To say Trump has lost his edge and may likely continue to lose it is a vast understatement. In just 4 days since I wrote those words, Harris has tied with Trump in Arizona in The New York Times polling averages and put up a strong challenge in Georgia. Granted, if Harris were to win Georgia based on the NYT’s polling averages, she would need Kennedy to appear on the ballot there.
What Does North Carolina’s Shift Mean?
North Carolina’s shift into a toss-up state is not simply a matter of categorization. Rather, it is a sign of a larger shift away from Trump. Biden himself, who beat Trump handily in 2020, with 306 electoral votes to the former President’s 232, failed to capture North Carolina, and not since Obama’s run in 2008 has a Democrat won the state. In many ways, North Carolina is the swing state that got away from the Democrats in 2020, but now the momentum has not only shifted but could make history. The Hill HQ’s polling averages show Harris leading Trump by 0.5 percent, a sign of momentum not yet fully developed.
Hill HQ Desk Polling Average North Carolina, August 20th, 2024.
That said, Polling averages only mean so much. They are meant to capture long-term momentum and overall polling considerations and take time to update and evaluate. Just because a polling average says a candidate is leading doesn’t mean that said averages represent a larger momentum.
However, if a larger sampling of likely voters and differences in support consistently show; and the data shows that support exists outside the margin of error, then there is evidence of momentum.
In that sense, Harris is seeing an advantage develop in North Carolina. The most recent polling shows Harris leading Trump slightly in North Carolina, though well within the margin of error. Additional polling shows Harris leading Trump by 3 percent, 49 to 46 percent. While it is still too early to say for certain, and new polls will be needed to confirm a long-term shift for Harris, one thing is clear: Trump is no longer leading in North Carolina.
How North Carolina Impacts the Election
In a previous video, I mentioned how I thought the states of Michigan, Wisconsin, and Pennsylvania would be key to Harris’s chances of winning the election. I stand by that. However, with the recent shifts in the way of the election, Harris’s chances may have improved to such an extent that she could either see a boost in her electoral count comparable to Biden’s 306 in 2020 or see states like Arizona and North Carolina as a backup if she loses Pennsylvania. It is worth noting, however, that Harris has consistently led Trump in multiple polls evaluated by the New York Times and currently is tied with the former President in their averages. If the averages account for Kennedy’s presence, Harris leads by 1 point. So, she is far from guaranteed to lose this competitive state.
Screenshot of Hypothetical Race 270to Win by Author
Still, if she loses Pennsylvania and Trump manages to hold onto Nevada, Georgia, and South Carolina, it would protect Harris and give her 278 electoral votes to Trump’s 260. Just 8 more than she needs to become President. Again, it is still too close to call this election. There are a little over 2 months to go, and Trump could still find his footing and find a way to push back on Harris’ momentum, but as it stands right now, the change in North Carolina shows that Trump hasn’t done that and if he wants to have any chances at winning a second term, he has to do so soon.
If you like my work and want to support me, you can find the donation link on my Kofi link. Thank you, I really appreciate it.
