On The Presidential Race: Kamala Is a Boon for Democrats But Will Still Lose.
- Nikola Ranick
- Aug 17, 2024
- 8 min read
For Democrats Down-ballot though, this is a Split Ticket Effect that Will Matter
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Sorry to interrupt the Harris-Walz lovefest, but it is a phenomenon we’ve seen before: Democrats and its base are animated – but energy alone is not enough to win elections.
This presidential campaign seems to have evolved into a streaming series, with its punches and shocks packed into a tight release, making political neophiles swoon and the average American nauseous. I like to look at these movements optimistically; they are an efficient feedback loop of the general population's perceptions towards political decisions and both sides looking to appeal to them. Kamala’s late entrance into this presidential race is another such response, with the hopes being that it will inspire black, brown, and youth voters to participate in an election that they seemed more and more despondent about.
At first - and second - glance, this seems to largely be the case. The internet, pop culture, and other fandom seemed immersed first in Kamala's Brat Summer interplay before shifting even more enthusiastically to a Walz-centric Cool Uncle narrative. Polling has moved into Harris' favor, with the Sunbelt again in play and reports of raucous rallies and crowds creating positive press for the Democratic hopefuls. But again - if we look more critically – these do not equal broader electoral support. And if Hillary couldn't win despite outrage over Trumpism when it was new and all the more shocking, then I am not convinced Ms. Harris can either.
Kamala is Competitive, Significantly More Than Her Boss
Polling released since Kamala's late entrance has shown a revival of enthusiasm among the previous blocks listed, essential for modern Democratic wins. Whereas states like North Carolina, Georgia and Arizona were likely to be triaged by the Biden Team due to consistently poor polling, Camp Harris has them back on the menu. As the Harris Team expands the playing field, it requires the Trump campaign to spread its operation further and weave together a larger coalition of support from sympathetic independents than previously expected. This is sure to be a challenge in an election that will largely be decided by base turnout.
Money also speaks volumes, and Harris quickly made more in a few days than Obama did his entire reelection campaign (although that also speaks to broad inflationary pressures inherent to American politics). Money isn't everything but signifies broader enthusiasm among the American electorate for the Harris candidacy; you really need to like a POLITICIAN to give them MONEY. Her inheritance of the Biden apparatus gives a proven election-winning machine a fresh coat of paint. And her charisma and energy alone provide further momentum in an environment where Dems almost always get some degree of advantage from pop culture, media and Beltway gurus sympathetic to their ideology and disgusted by Trump’s.
Narrow Margins Still Favor Trump
The First Rule of Fight Club is there is no Fight Club, but there is a Democratic bias in polls. This dual disadvantage occurs from both electoral outcomes favoring Republican density and a lack of polling engagement from GOP voters that always leaves Republicans looking as though they have less support than they actually do (i.e., the type of voter who refuses to answer an online or phone poll will still turn out to vote for Trump). Pollsters have long worked to correct this and long failed: Look no further than the 2020 polling inaccuracies (significantly larger than 2016's). With this in mind, a polling tie for Trump and Harris is a de facto Trump win in the actual election. Polling has yet to show Harris with a lead enough of a lead to negate these dynamics, and likely will not ever. We are still presumably in a honeymoon period that should level out, meaning this very well could be her peak.
This disadvantage also contains a regional component: As the Sunbelt looks closer still, the traditional Rustbelt remains ripe for Trump's taking, arguably more so with Harris than Biden. Harris’ very identity is a beautiful statement to modern America - but the areas where the election will be decided are populated by disenchanted whites that voted surprisingly well for Biden but may not for Harris. Her VP selection of Tim Walz was meant to assuage these concerns, but most politically minded folks know VP picks rarely, if ever, have a positive effect on a ticket. And Walz's homely image is not breaking through in hostile circles who ignore his decades long centrist congressional record but are critical of his progressive gubernatorial tenure.
With the white working class still seduced by Trump, the question then becomes if Kamala can instead galvanize other groups, which in this electorate would largely be the black working and professional classes. This is a connection I believe our predominantly white punditry has failed to account for. My sources tell me Harris’ very upbringing hearkens to black culture in a way that even Barack Obama could not connect to. The activation of the Divine 9 (Black college fraternities and sororities), alongside the black Baptist church apparatus, is nothing to dismiss.
But still, despite this all - to the chagrin of the Democratic Primary - the electoral map is arranged in a way where robust turnout operation among Black Americans will not counter increasingly Dem-loathing whites alongside indifferent Hispanic populations. This is where Harris struggles. Republicans will wipe the floor with rural voters, leaving suburbs and some exurbs as the true swing area once more. These voters are educated and nuanced, willing to look beyond their own financial means for outcomes that they can culturally stomach (see the collapse of the Red Wave in 2022). BUT self-interest will always outweigh these cultural distinctions in the long run.
As curious as it may be, so many Americans consider the economy in much better shape four years ago, COVID and all (which, it is worth noting, occurred largely during the Biden administration). Among many Americans, a narrative of economic might has sunk into sentimentality, even if it is a “grass is greener” mindset. They tend to forget Trump’s more egregious comments. Indeed, the only debate of the Presidential cycle thus far, with its microphone-cutting effect, made Trump look far more presidential than he ever has, even though this mindset and post-assassination unity seem to be evaporating. Trump, warts and all, is 'the devil America knows,' in contrast to the past four years of Democratic rule that, no longer excitingly unfamiliar, seems middling economically and concerning on a geopolitical level (even if much of that is a matter of coincidence over actual policy). Inflation, more than anything, has spoken for itself. Even as wages go up, the period of adjustment needed to psychologically absorb higher prices has always been a drag on voter confidence globally, and certainly will be during this American election cycle.
In this respect, then, the Harris ticket, too, is associated with a feeble incumbent, turning her vice-presidential status into a liability. With her focus now on the campaign, she will have little control over the Biden’s administration decisions and yet be held liable for them. Harris is making this horse race close, but not close enough to override the underlying fundamentals baked into even this historic candidacy.
This is Where It Gets Fun
Remember voting for more than one party during the same election?? I certainly do, and so do many voters heading to the polls this year. Nuanced as they are, the suburbs are also the ones most likely to split their ticket, a phenomenon inferred by pollsters pre- and post-Harris. Numerous Democratic Senate and House candidates see competitive margins or even leads that far outrun Biden's top of the ticket performance, a reverse-coattail effect. In this aspect then, Harris could create an even more beneficial situation.
For one, this split-ticket scenario is not guaranteed, as polling often suggests more split results than actually occur in elections. But an energetic candidate makes it more likely that they will end up voting at all, which should be a win for the Dems. Secondly, even if she cannot get Trump-sympathetic or nationally frustrated voters to back her, Kamala's presence will energize other straight-ticket voters to the polls, empowering down-ballot candidates across the finish line. For example, a candidate running ahead of the Dem presidential nominee may be getting strong support from suburbanites voting for Trump, but under Biden, the lack of base enthusiasm meant the candidate could not win. With the base now energized for Harris, that could put swing-district down-ballot Dems over the edge, even while the party falls short presidentially.
After all, don't forget many suburban enclaves who elected Dem candidates in 2018. Two years before, they were majority Clinton areas that re-elected Republican House candidates in an assumption of Trump's defeat. They desired a check on presumed President Clinton's power. We could now see the reverse effect, with a presumed President Trump witnessing tight margins in the House and Senate, or perhaps even a Democratic majority in one or two. Technically, that could even lead to a Harris victory... but I still think the fundamentals are against it.
Candidates who benefit from this revived base alongside suburban moderation include Ruben Gallego in AZ, who I expect to beat Kari Lake even as Trump carries the state. Also, look at incumbent Senator Sherrod Brown in Ohio, who has always excited old elements of the Democratic base in a Biden-esque approach, but is unable to galvanize increasingly disenchanted Black parts of the state. He won't have to if Harris does instead. Ohioans will vote for Trump, but Brown could make it to re-election as well. This can also be the case for a slew of swing House seats in Orange County, California, an open Michigan seat, and even Don Bacon's district in Nebraska.
Call it An Ossoff-Warnock Redux
When I think of a ticket whose different coalitions push each other over the top, Georgia's dual runoffs in 2020 is THE case-in-point. Jon Ossoff appealed to a suburban, moderate, largely white electorate impressed by a Jewish, culturally liberal but economically moderate candidate while Warnock raked in support from moderate to liberal and young to older black and brown voters. Neither core Constituency was enough for a 50%+ victory, but together they were the perfect balance to getting each other over the finish line.
But of course, comparing this to a national model bears numerous handicaps. Most Swing State demographics do not match Georgia, and the incumbency of Team Blue is a likely drag that the Ossoff/Warnock didn't need to face. Ossoff and Warnock also benefited from Trump claiming the election was stolen, thereby discouraging his base from voting in the runoff, and dragging then-incumbent Senators Loeffler and Collins down with him. This time, in Georgia and nationwide, Democrats will not have this luxury. The Trump base and lukewarm Trump-adjacent independents are animated with a more organized apparatus, holistically across Republican sectors, and more responsive to early or absentee voting (even as they legislate to ban them). With a built-in advantage in the electoral college, Trump should expect a narrow victory that propels him to the top. I do not expect him to win the popular vote, but Trump doesn’t need to in our system. (Nor are most European systems: I’m looking at you, United Kingdom, with Labour’s 172 Seat-Majority with 34% of the vote!!).
Hold Off On The Oven Mitts
Even as the Kamala-mania goes overdrive (that's a Charli XCX song right??), the underlying trend towards a Trump victory still seems baked in. But then again, our polarized electorate means small developments can have big implications, and the traditional mantra of an October Surprise may be relevant despite the many twists already occurring just 100 days out. Harris already seems to be performing considerably better on the campaign trail than she did four years ago.
The extent of a Trump victory could also say a lot about how he governs. I humorously remember his budget deal with Pelosi and Schumer early in his administration. Sure, this was quickly canceled by Republican leadership, and that bureaucracy is more robustly involved with the 2024 campaign than previously. But it is Trump after all; he is the dominant personality in the party, and his voters will go where he goes. Counter that with newer (and much weaker) Republican leadership under Speaker Johnson and whoever succeeds Mitch McConnell, and we could find Trump's fickleness having an even greater impact than last time.
But one thing remains for sure about the Trumps: Melania will attend the bare minimum of political activities, just enough to dispel claims of aloofness and disregard for the political process (especially as it pertains to her husband). On behalf of all Americans who will be affected to some extent by this electoral outcome, let me just say this, Melania: Same.
Comments