Electoral College – The Wrongologist

The Youth Vote Is Reached By Influencers

The Daily Escape:

Wrongo’s writing about how to Resist the Trump administration has focused on how in 2024 we didn’t target our messaging at the family or at workers. Those lessons give insight into how to persuade voters in 2026 and beyond when Trump promises to be deeply unpopular. A third lesson is how Harris failed to hold on to the youth vote after a promising start.

One of the biggest stories of the 2024 election was Trump’s gains with young voters, particularly young men. To understand the youth vote, we turn to John Della Volpe (JDV), the director of polling at Harvard’s Kennedy School of Government, and one of the leading experts on the youth vote in America.

From JDV in the NYT: (emphasis by Wrongo)

“Democratic Party leaders did not listen deeply to and earn the trust of young voters, who could have helped her prevail in Michigan and other swing states. As a pollster who focuses on the hopes and worries of these Americans, losing to Donald Trump — not once but twice — represents a profound failure. Ms. Harris’s campaign needed to shift about one percentage point of voters across Pennsylvania, Michigan, and Wisconsin to secure the presidency, but instead struggled in college towns like Ann Arbor, Mich., and other blue places. Think about that: Flipping just one in every hundred voters would have stopped the likelihood of mass deportations, tax cuts for the wealthy, rollbacks of L.G.B.T.Q. protections and the reversal of climate regulations.”

The story from the last six presidential elections is simple: When Democrats capture 60% of the youth vote, like Biden did in 2020 and Obama in 2008 and 2012, they win the White House. Harris garnered just 54%. Looking at CNN’s exit polls, Biden’s 24-point average margin among young voters in the seven battleground states collapsed to just 13 points under Harris, failing to hold 2020 margins among both young men and women.

The most dramatic shift came among the youngest voters (18-24), who swung 22 points to the Right from 2020, while their slightly older peers (25-29) showed more stability.

Wrongo has written before about how to reach the young voter. Reaching them required using different media than reaching the older generations. The young are largely on social media.

From NBC:

“…a new Pew Research Center survey reveals just how impactful so-called news influencers are in the current information ecosystem. About 21% of U.S. adults are turning to news influencers for information, with most saying creators “helped them better understand current events and civic issues,…”

Here’s a chart that breaks down how many people get news from influencers:

The number was highest among young adults, with 37% of people ages 18 to 29 saying they turn to influencers for news.

(Pew surveyed 10,000 adults and analyzed 500 news influencers, which it defined as individuals who regularly post about current events and have over 100,000 followers on Facebook, Instagram, TikTok, X or YouTube).

The gap in Harris’s youth strategy was a failure to address the 37% where they get their news. And to provide persuasive messaging that resonated with their interests.

At the end of the 2024 campaign, nearly all of Trump’s media interactions were with Right-leaning podcasters with massive social media followings. The GOP has actively tried to support their influencers with interviews and attention. While Kamala Harris did appear on the popular Call Her Daddy podcast, most Democrats kept podcasters and news influencers at arm’s length.

From JDV:

“The youth vote that emerged in 2024 defied every partisan prediction and stereotype – it was something entirely new. Generation Z maintained progressive positions on social issues while showing deep skepticism of foreign intervention. They combined concerns about economic inequality with support for free trade. They rated Trump higher on pure leadership while backing Harris overall.”

The vote shift from blue to red in college towns like Ann Arbor was staggering; in some University of Michigan precincts, the vote shifted 20 points toward Mr. Trump in just four years.

From Dan Peiffer:

“Democrats must radically reshape how we think about reaching the public. During the careers of powerful Democratic Party members (especially President Biden and some folks in the Senate), the press was the best way to reach the public….That world is gone, but too many folks in our party still run to CNN or the New York Times when they have news to make.’

More: (emphasis by Wrongo)

“We need to widen the aperture when we think of the media. We must include folks who don’t have a White House press pass. We must learn to reach the voters who don’t pay attention to traditional news. We have to aggressively support the nascent progressive media ecosystem. Most importantly, we have to recognize that politics in 2024 is information warfare, and we are getting our asses kicked.”

In the campaign’s final weeks, Trump pulled out of interviews with CNBC and NBC News. He turned down a prime-time CNN town hall. In fact, Trump didn’t do a single interview with a traditional news outlet in the campaign’s final stretch. No national broadcast interviews, no sit-downs with local TV anchors or newspapers journalists.

The winning candidate ignored the traditional media, focusing instead on partisan media outlets and politics-adjacent podcasts. While this change isn’t new, it seems clear that 2024 was a pivot point for the role of the legacy media in politics.

The biggest lesson is that the youth vote is reached by influencers. Our older-than-dirt politicians need to give way to the younger pols who can survive on social media. We need a generational shift in who communicates. A younger generation of elected Democrats who prefer to fight back instead of curling into a ball and hope Republicans leave them alone.

Think Josh Shapiro, AOC, Fetterman, Katie Porter, Gretchen Whitmer, Abigail Spanberger and Chris Murphy. There are a hundred others but Harris wasn’t one of them.

Women Hold The Key To The Future

The Daily Escape:

If you’re looking for some hope going into the weekend, The Bulwark’s Dan McGraw has an incisive piece about how important the gender gap is for the 2024 election. He thinks as in 2022, there’s a strong case that women could give Harris a significant turnout advantage:

“More women than men have voted in every presidential election going back to 1964 and the current gap between them (between 5 million and 10 million votes per election) has been stable since 2004.”

Here’s a chart demonstrating the difference:

Trump has not historically done well with women voters. In 2016, Trump was -15 with women. He gained ground in 2020, losing women by -11. These losses were partially offset by his poorer margins with men: He was +11 in 2016 and +2 in 2020.

So that’s his baseline. Here’s one big question about 2024: Will the difference in turnout between women and men be higher, lower, or the same as it was in 2016 and 2020?

From McGraw:

“If I had to bet, I’d guess that the delta increases. Why? Because the vote gap has been fairly stable going back to 2004 and Trump has intentionally antagonized women this cycle. Negative polarity is currently the greatest motivating force in our politics… I do not expect increases in men’s turnout to keep pace with increases in women’s turnout.”

In 2016 Trump only got 39% of the women’s vote. It is not inconceivable that he could go lower. Indeed, for the last few days it’s looked like he’s trying to go lower. Starting in October, Trump thought it’d be a good idea to present himself as a “protector” who would save women from fear and unhappiness. As October ends, he said the following which probably won’t do his campaign any favors. From NBC News : (emphasis by Wrongo)

“Former President Donald Trump said Wednesday that he would “protect” women “whether the women like it or not,” a comment the Harris campaign immediately pounced on. Trump said at his rally in Green Bay, Wisconsin, that his “people” previously told him they did not think he should say that he wanted to “protect the women of our country,” comments he has previously made on the campaign trail.”

That’s some creepy paternalism right there.

This election looks very close, making either outcome relatively high-probability. It’s possible that everything will be too close to call and we’ll end the week with six different states at Florida’s 2000 contested level:

And there are signs in the polling that Harris has more support among women than Trump has among men this cycle. A recent ABC News/Ipsos poll has Trump winning men by 51-45%, (+6) while Harris is at 56-42% (+14) with women (all likely voters).

And the Harris margin is being repeated in swing states:

“A CNN poll released showed similar trends. It had Harris +8 with women and running even with men in Michigan. It had her running +19 with women with Trump +12 with men in Wisconsin. In Pennsylvania a Quinnipiac University poll of the commonwealth released the same day showed men backing Trump by 57-37%, while women backed Harris 55-39%.”

Off topic, but Trump seems to also be having issues with Seniors (+65) in PA. According to a Fox News poll of Pennsylvania, Trump is running 5 percentage points behind Harris among voters ages 65 and over, down from the previous month, when he and Harris were tied with Seniors. It’s a major shift from 2020, when Trump carried 53 percent of the senior vote in Pennsylvania and lost the state.

This could be big since the senior vote is particularly important in five of the seven battleground states — Pennsylvania, Arizona, Michigan, Wisconsin, and North Carolina. According to US Census data, these states have more residents over the age of 65 than the national average. According to modeling data across the Blue Wall states, Democratic voters over the age of 65 are running 10 to 20% ahead of their Republican counterparts with respect to registered turnout.

The conclusion? Nothing is definitive:

If women are more likely to vote than men, and if women are more supportive of Harris than men are of Trump—especially in key swing states—then Harris should win.
It’s possible that Harris will underperform, Trump will overperform, and he’ll get a solid, clean Electoral College win.
But it is also possible that Harris blows the doors off with women voters. That she both (1) increases that 10-million-vote advantage in women’s turnout and (2) explodes the gender gap. If that happens, she wins comfortably. Maybe even comfortably enough that we know it by late Tuesday night.

One way this could go is that Harris picks up a handful of points with white women, the single largest demographic group in the election. She could also boost the overall turnout of black and Hispanic women.

Try to get into a relaxing head space for the weekend. This may be Wrongo’s last column before Tuesday, so the battle is on hold until we see results.

Give any spare change to your local Congressional candidate. That’s where the hope is. It’s not quite a heat wave in Connecticut, but sitting outdoors and watching the leaves fall while listening to the Telemann’s “Concerto for 4 Violins No.2 in D Major” performed live by Hoing Kim in 2023 will tie the hopium for Harris together with the beautiful weather:

Red, Wavy And Ridiculous

The Daily Escape:

Time is short, and we have little reason to think that we know who will win the presidency, or which Party will carry the House or the Senate. All we are working with now are “vibes”: We either grasp at the latest poll or reject it if it doesn’t conform to our thinking.

From Robert Hubbell:

“The MAGA disinformation machine is dropping low-quality polls at a hectic pace, Elon Musk is offering cash incentives to Pennsylvanians who have registered to vote (probably illegal), a Musk-funded PAC is sending texts claiming to be from the Harris-Walz campaign, Trump is staging mock campaign events that media outlets are reporting as real, and Trump is telling vulgar stories…that would terminate the bid of any other candidate.”

From Simon Rosenberg:

“As of last Wednesday 538’s national poll average was actually higher than for Harris than it been a week earlier. There were no signs of slippage or erosion…”

Then came the red wave of polls. More from Rosenberg:

“Then, last Wednesday, the Rs turned a switch on and dumped a lot of polls into the national polling averages. We saw polls form Emerson, Fox News, Quantas, RMG, and the right-wing firm TIPP launched a daily tracker, adding 4 more polls. Senate Republicans even joined the party, dropping a favorable national poll, as did ActiVote and Atlas….538 moved from 2.6 Harris on Wednesday to 1.8 Harris this morning, and many polling averages and forecasters tipped to Trump over the weekend.”

This has lots of Dems worried about a Trump victory despite all of our money and efforts to elect Harris. However, this should be seen as another “Red Wave” like in 2022 rather than an authentic movement in the race. As Rosenberg says, “Welcome to red wave 2024”.

Rosenberg provides some details. The red wave 2024 campaign is far bigger this time, and has started far earlier:

They’ve released 70+ polls into the averages, with 31 Republican-aligned groups having released polls since August. These polls are consistently 1-5 points more Republican than the independent polls, as was the case in 2022.
A majority of recent polls in NC and PA are Right-aligned.
While their focus has been on the states, last week they really leaned into the national polling average and moved it and other forecasts this weekend
The launching of a new daily national tracking poll by TIPP, a far right institution, is an escalation that will be putting downward pressure on the national average every day until the election.

TIPP is notable. It’s corporate slogan is “talent loaned from God” – Rush Limbaugh’s catchphrase. It offers a steady stream of commentary that would be at home at Fox News or the RNC site. Some recent examples:

Harris’s Fiery Campaign of Rage Exposes Her Unpresidential Temperament
The Left Is Still Obsessed With 2020 Election Deniers
S. Government Pushing Climate Lies On Schoolchildren
Night And Day: Trump’s Command Of Economy Exposes Harris’s Novice Approach

Clearly impartial, no?

Contrast that with the WaPo poll released yesterday that tends to support where the non-Red Wave polls had the race last week – Harris leading, and more likely to win. It was done in conjunction with the Schar School of George Mason University:

From the WaPo:

“Among these key-state voters, Harris runs strongest in Georgia, where she has an advantage of six percentage points among registered voters and four points among likely voters, which is within the margin of error of plus or minus 4.5 percentage points. Harris also is slightly stronger than Trump in the three most contested northern states — Michigan, Pennsylvania and Wisconsin — but by percentages within the margin of error.

The seventh battleground state, Nevada, is tied among likely voters though Harris is three points stronger than Trump among registered voters.”

Looking at North Carolina, Harris needs help with rural voters. She hired Rural Organizing to help with that. From their substack:

“In one of the biggest developments this week, the Harris/Walz campaign unveiled their Plan for Rural Communities….the plan “marks a concerted effort by the Democratic campaign to make a dent in the historically Trump-leaning voting bloc in the closing three weeks before Election Day. Trump carried rural voters by a nearly two-to-one margin in 2020, according to AP VoteCast. In the closely contested race, both Democrats and Republicans are reaching out beyond their historic bases in hopes of winning over a sliver of voters that could ultimately prove decisive.”

Rural America is more diverse than the MAGA stereotype, and shaving GOP margins there can be margins of victory both for local and statewide candidates. “We are bigger than just agriculture issues….“Reverse coattails” or “closing the margins” or “lose less:” However it’s described, it’s an important strategy for Harris to be pushing right now.

The 2024 election is just a little over two weeks away, and most Democrats are down to chewing their last fingernail with worry. This is nothing new, of course. That’s just the way Dems roll.

Republicans meanwhile are ready to open the champagne saying they have no need to worry. That’s how they roll. Both of these phenomena are indicative of a certain kind of temperament but they are also real political strategies.

Bottom line: don’t overthink the polls. Just go and vote, and get your reluctant friends out to vote too.

The Times That Try Men’s Souls

The Daily Escape:

“THESE are the times that try men’s souls. The summer soldier and the sunshine patriot will, in this crisis, shrink from the service of their country; but he that stands by it now, deserves the love and thanks of man and woman.” – From The Crisis by Thomas Payne.

Everyone knows the bolded part of the comment above, but the rest is where we have to get to with 18± days left until Election Day. The pollster’s narrative is that the race has shifted and Trump has gotten stronger over the last few weeks. That Harris is lagging, not surging. At least some of that is caused by Republican Pollsters. Simon Rosenberg wrote: (emphasis and brackets by Wrongo)

“The red wavers [pollsters] stepped up their activity this past week, releasing at least 20 polls across the battlegrounds. It’s a sign that they are worried about the public polling in both the Presidential and the Senate, and have dramatically escalated their efforts to push the polling averages to the right and make the election look redder than it is.”

But this all has Democrats in disarray, thinking some or all of the following:

The polls are right and we’re doomed.
The polls are wrong. Some of them are skewed by these “Red Wave” polls.
Early voter data show that Harris is in good shape.
Harris going on Fox is a sign of strength or maybe weakness.

There’s a nub of truth in each of these. But on the whole, it’s whistling past the graveyard. The cake is pretty much baked. What we need in last18± days before Election Day: Vote. Donate. Pick a local candidate and support them with your money and time.

Let’s go from the macro in politics to the micro. The Intercept reported on a December 2022 drug bust in that bastion of democracy, Jackson, MS:

“It was a tip that brought a drug sniffing dog to the main post office in downtown Jackson, Mississippi. An employee there had reported seeing someone in the lobby putting pills into hot pink envelopes:

“…a police officer from the small city of Richland, just south of Jackson, walked into a back room at the post office where one of the envelopes had been set aside. Steed, a K-9 handler, arrived with Rip, his narcotics sniffer dog. Rip got to the pink envelope, sat down. According to records obtained through a Freedom of Information Act request, Steed said this meant the dog had smelled narcotics….This…was no ordinary drug bust. As it turned out, there were pills inside the package, but they were not the kind that Rip or other police K-9s are trained to detect. The envelope contained five pills labeled “AntiPreg Kit…their medical purpose is to induce abortion. Dwayne Martin, at the time the head of the U.S. Postal Inspection Service in Jackson, told me this was exactly what the initial tipster had suspected.”

It turns out that they were acting under a USPS procedure called mail cover: a little-known Postal Service method for collecting data about people suspected of committing crimes. From the WaPo:

“The US Postal Service has shared information from thousands of Americans’ letters and packages with law enforcement every year for the past decade, conveying the names, addresses and other details from the outside of boxes and envelopes without requiring a court order.”

More: (brackets by Wrongo)

“…postal inspectors, federal agencies, and state and local police forces made an average of about 6,700 requests [of the USPS] a year, and that inspectors additionally recorded data from about another 35,000 pieces of mail a year, on average.

Using an enormous database of images of the outside of envelopes and packages, postal inspectors can digitally compare names, addresses, and other information on one item to others. And the findings can be freely shared with almost any law enforcement agency that requests them.

This is bad enough: Imagine what could happen to abortion-pills-by-mail and the people who use them if Trump is elected? Since the accounts of the regional USPS head and The Intercept’s FOIA documents show a piecemeal crackdown is already underway during a Democratic administration?

Regardless of whomever is in power, the incident in Jackson provides a potential window into the future — one in which freelancing local Postal Service employees and officials call on the local cops who share their ideology to halt women from accessing reproductive care and potentially charge and arrest those providing or using abortion medication.

In the meantime, thanks to a Jackson-based postal worker, Rip the dog, and a federal agency that says it has no desire to police abortion, nearly 100 pregnant women did not receive little pink packages containing the medicine they requested.

Finally, Harris vs. Fox: She sat for the most confrontational interview of her campaign as she answered — and parried — questions from Fox News’ Bret Baier. The idea was to unmoor any loosely-affiliated Republican voters and show them she isn’t as scary as Trump and Fox News have portrayed her.

Baier thought he was prepared with enough “gotcha” questions. He showed a clip from a Fox town hall that conveniently edited out the section showing him saying “the enemy within”. But it was Harris who pounced:

“Bret, I’m sorry and with all due respect, that clip was not what he has been saying about ‘the enemy within’ that he has repeated when he is speaking about the American people. That’s not what you just showed…”

Baier insisted the clip was Trump’s response to a question about those statements, and Harris countered:

“You didn’t show that, and here’s the bottom line: He has repeated it many times, and you and I both know that. And you and I both know that he has talked about turning the American military on the American people.”

Baier absolutely knows that. Trump used the phrase on Maria Bartiromo’s Sunday morning program and at his rally in Aurora, CO., on Friday. Baier discussed and tried to sane-wash Trump’s usage of the phrase on his Oct. 15 show.

Go grab a napkin, Bret. You got served.

Political Advertising: How Effective Is It?

The Daily Escape:

Wrongo’s calendar says there’s just 29 days to go until Election Day. The campaigns are in high gear, but what are they saying? And is what they’re saying getting through to both their base voters as well as to those who are “persuadable” enough for them to get out to the polls and vote? Time is running out.

Timing is a point raised in this NBC story, which describes that, after having taken the last 76 days to introduce the Vice President to voters, the campaign now plans to ratchet up negative advertising about how unfit Trump is to be President (emphasis by Wrongo).

“Leaning more heavily into negative campaigning is a strategic shift for Harris. While she has routinely been critical of Trump since becoming a candidate in July….Harris campaign officials said they intend to continue laying out her policy positions, background and plans…But emphasizing what Harris campaign officials view as Trump’s major vulnerabilities is seen as possibly one of the only ways to finally win over some voters who haven’t made up their mind in a static race that Democrats want to push in their direction.”

A recent poll by the Associated Press-NORC Center for Public Affairs suggests that Harris’ attacks on Trump’s brand of hyper-masculinity appear to be working. As the Daily Beast summarized the findings, respondents:

“…chose Harris 59% over Trump’s 57% when it came to which candidate they felt was tough enough to be president…and favored Harris 55 to 46 % on “which candidate would change the country for the better,” and by 54 to 43% on who “was more likely to fight for them.”

Harris also is micro targeting the message of Trump’s weakness. From the WaPo:

“For the millions of football fans who tuned in from home for Saturday night’s much anticipated matchup between the University of Georgia and the University of Alabama, she also ran a new ad nationally on ABC that hammers home her point.”

The ad says:

“’Winners never back down from a challenge. Champions know it’s anytime, anyplace. But losers, they whine and waffle and take their ball home,’ the narrator says at the start of the spot, over images of a football game and washed-out footage of Trump missing a golf putt. The 30-second ad ends with footage of Harris challenging him to another debate, with the words “When we fight, we win” hanging on a sign in the background.”

The money quote:

“Well, Donald, I do hope you’ll reconsider to meet me on the debate stage. If you’ve got something to say, say it to my face,…

Harris also posted the ad on Trump’s Truth Social media platform.

Marcy Wheeler quotes CNN’s David Wright who tracks political spending by the candidates about where the money is headed in this final month as the ad wars intensify:

“You can see how each side is placing bets on their best path to 270 electoral votes. In the first week of October, the Harris campaign is spending the most in the critical trio of “Blue Wall” states – they’ve got more than $5 million booked in Pennsylvania, about $4 million booked in Michigan, plus about $2.7 million booked in Wisconsin. And that makes sense – if Harris wins all three of those states, plus Nebraska’s up-for-grabs electoral vote in the swingy second congressional district (where the campaign also has more than $300,000 in ad time this week), she’s the next president.”

Turning to Trump:

“…he’ s looking to the Sun Belt. This week, Trump’s campaign is spending the most on ads in Pennsylvania, $3.8 million – it’s really the linchpin to both sides’ strategies. But in addition to that, the campaign is also spending $3.4 million in North Carolina and nearly $3 million in Georgia, its other top targets, and if he wins those two states plus Pennsylvania, he’s heading back to the White House.”

The Electoral College will come down to which of the two campaigns potential voters consider more trustable, probably mostly on their personal economic situation and where that’s heading with each potential president. From the WaPo:

“Americans are finally starting to feel better about the economy, invigorating Vice President Kamala Harris’s pitch for the presidency as she narrows her Republican opponent’s longtime lead on an issue that is foremost on voters’ minds.”

“Although voters still favor former president Trump over Harris on handling the economy, his advantage has dropped dramatically in recent weeks. Trump now averages a six-percentage-point edge on the economy…”

But Trump’s only answers for the economy are lower taxes on the rich and more tariffs. Yet, like everything else, Trump has no idea what tariffs actually do.

However, a new survey by Data For Progress’s top line finds Harris leading Trump by 3 points among likely voters nationwide. Nearly half of voters (49%), including a plurality of Independents (46%), choose Harris, while 46% choose Trump.

On the all-important economy, Harris has a trust advantage on most of the economic measures tested, including: supporting small businesses (+10 points), taxes on middle class Americans (+9), increasing wages (+5), lowering housing costs (+5), handling labor union policy (5%), improving our infrastructure (+3), lowering grocery costs (+2), creating jobs (+1), and protecting domestic manufacturing jobs (+1).

That says her campaign messaging is getting through.

Also the survey finds Trump with just a +1-point trust advantage over Harris on “reducing inflation,” an issue that voters have consistently ranked as their most important when deciding whom to vote for. Here’s their chart:

They also surveyed candidate favorability, which now tilts towards Harris. Harris’ rating is +2, while Trump’s is -12:

Is this poll on the money? Difficult to tell. A shorter election season makes it harder for campaigns to assess where to place their bets. And which of their cohorts in the electorate demand the most attention. We’ve focused on Gen Z and younger voters as being primarily swayed by economics. Messaging to women is another important element. Harris can run ads attacking Trump’s hyper-masculinity, (which will help with women).

From The Economist: (emphasis by Wrongo)

“And Harris needs to focus there. In the Obama years the gap between young men and women identifying as liberals was just five percentage points, during the Trump-Biden years this has tripled to 15 points, according to Gallup. This change has been caused almost entirely by young women moving to the left, rather than young men tacking to the right. The fact that this generation’s formative years were during the #MeToo movement, the Trump years and the decision to overturn Roe v Wade helps explain it.”

In 2020 a majority of white women voted for Trump. He will be in the minority in 2024. Leading among women is a real advantage. Since the 1980s a greater share of women than men has turned out to vote. In 2020 women made up 54% of the electorate. A final indicator that Democrats might be winning this battle of the sexes: in battleground states, according to Target Smart, a data firm, between July and September, twice as many young Democratic women registered to vote than young Republican men.

Trump’s bet is that Harris is the one with the turnout problem. They think their base is more committed to their candidate than is Harris’s. But Marcy Wheeler points to Harris’s investment in the Dem ground game:

“The Harris campaign claimed in late September to have 330 offices and more than 2,400 staff. They completed 25,000 weekend volunteer shifts on the final weekend of last month, contacting over 1 million voters over three days and completed the 100,000th event of the campaign.”

BTW: Ms. Oh So Right got a postcard from Harris to vote early this week.

Cartoons of the Week Plus Commentary – October 6, 2024

Cartoons this week were mostly about Vance failing to answer the “Who Won?” question. Here’s one Wrongo liked:

There’s always something in October:

Wrongo wants to update his last column about why Harris needs to speak with more empathy to Gen Z and younger voters. Friend of the Blog John S. left this comment:

“I believe Harris is speaking but perhaps not loud enough or Gen Z isn’t listening. Her plans do include downpayment money for new housing, tax incentives for builders to sell to first time home buyers, 3 million new homes constructed, business startup credits, earned income credits for low wage earners, newborn tax credits, food price regulations, and reduction of medical debt. Maybe you can say it won’t be enough or that some of these things can’t be implemented but nonetheless they are in “the plan”. Perhaps if her message was stronger on social media, as you mentioned in another column, the “Z’ers” would listen.”

He’ s right but Harris like most Dem politicians, isn’t offering sufficient “feel your pain” context to get people to listen. Obama was one of the few Democrats to place policy in a human context, but most of the time, the Democrats are relying on a laundry list of policies that may or may not ever be enacted.

America had good economic news yesterday, but no Republican was willing to cede that to Biden or the Democrats. Sen. Rubio (R-FL) claimed in a post on Twitter/X that the great jobs numbers were “fake” because past months had to be revised (most jobs reports are revised in subsequent months).

It’s true that the economy added jobs. But most were low-income service jobs. Meanwhile, the pathways to the middle class, manufacturing and white collar jobs, actually shrank. The Gen Z and younger workers suspect that the American Dream is fading because middle class jobs are going away, and they’re precisely correct in that intuition.

The GenZ’ers can’t square their lived reality with the commentary that comes from on high, particularly regarding the economy. Over time, they’ve come to distrust institutions. That’s true at a social level—levels of trust have cratered over time. And this is a key reason why this gulf between what young people live, experience, feel, and the skin-deep recitation of the miracle of the “Booming Economy”. It doesn’t reach deeply enough into their lives.

Harris shouldn’t cede any of this ground to Trump. Wrongo quoted Vance during the VP debate:

People are struggling to pay the bills. Times are tough.
The American Dream is fading, and feels unattainable.
We should stop shipping jobs offshore.

And Republicans understand the task at hand is to peel younger voters in swing states away from Harris. FWIW reports that a constellation of Right-wing groups are spending millions online to get their messaging in front of swing state voters. Probably the biggest line of attack being used against Harris has to do with inflation and the state of the economy: (brackets by Wrongo)

“For example, Duty to America is specifically targeting Gen Z and Millennial men in battleground states with ads bemoaning the state of the economy, saying: ‘According to…Harris, the economy is fixed [repaired]…at our age, our parents owned a home, had kids, saved for retirement, and we can barely buy groceries, gas, or pay our rent.’”

“This ad is running across platforms like Facebook, Instagram, and Google, but also on Roku devices and streaming services where young people actually watch TV shows. Duty to America has spent the majority of its ad dollars targeting Michigan, Pennsylvania, Georgia and North Carolina.”

“Similarly, Preserve America is running direct-to-camera video ads on Facebook and Instagram from a trio of white women who are complaining about high inflation and grocery prices, sometimes tying the issue to illegal immigration. You can browse through some of those ads here.”

FWIW adds a chart about ad spending: (note that the red and blue here are 100% pro-Trump spending)

A few other groups have also emphasized economic attacks among younger members of the electorate. One from Our American Century says “Kamala Harris thinks young people are stupid” when it comes to the economy, and Right for America is also running with the “stupid” line.

FWIW notes that Harris is outspending Trump on Facebook and Instagram: Harris spent $8.1 million to Trump’s $1.1 million between September 21 to 28. Meanwhile, political campaigns spent $40.3 million on Google and YouTube ads last week, with Harris and affiliates spent $10.8 million to Trump’s $2.8 million.

Here’s a recap of spending by both campaigns:

The Democrats instead should invest more money where the young people are. They should challenge the Republicans by admitting that things look pretty dire for Gen Z and younger people. That over time, the American Dream’s faded. That times are rough. That people are struggling.

They should use exactly those words like Vance did, because they’re the ones that count. They resonate. You have to hope that the Harris brain trust will match Trump’s initiative by spending some of this money targeting Gen Z and younger voters with empathetic messaging like the Republicans are already doing.

The policy details can come once they’re listening.

More Data That Supports A Harris Win

The Daily Escape:

Wrongologist readers know that Wrongo thinks the presidential election isn’t quite as close or scary for Democrats as the polls would have you believe. They show Harris with a narrow lead, with some showing the battleground states as tied. Well, most polls aren’t truly reliable these days. And the pollsters, who make arbitrary weightings after the questions are asked, seem to travel in packs. They’re terrified of underestimating Trump support (as they have in the past). So maybe this time they have a thumb on the scales just like they did in 2022.

Wrongo has been saying that it’s possible to make a vibes-and-momentum argument that Harris has sprinted ahead of Trump who seems to be shrinking right before the public’s eyes whenever he speaks. By any normal standard, Trump has lost it mentally and emotionally. His speeches at rallies consist of rambling, often apocalyptic, hate-filled rhetoric and lies.

In order to get attention he’s saying crazier and crazier things, but it’s hard to see that any of that is winning over more voters. His efforts seem to be to directed at keeping his most fervent supporters energized while extracting as many dollars as he can from their wallets.

Harris on the other hand has effectively undermined the image of Trump as some sort of inevitable strongman. Instead has cast him as a failed rich-kid with no plan beyond turning Americans against each other.

There are some interesting survey data points that are encouraging for Harris: A new survey suggests that pollsters may be underestimating Harris’s support with young people. The large Harvard IOP youth poll suggests there is now a serious youth surge towards Harris.

She is up 61%-30% with likely 18-29 year-old voters. In 2020 Biden won 18-29 year-olds by just 24 points.

The Harvard IOP youth poll is a very large sample poll of a narrow slice of the electorate, and thus far, more reliable than 70-person sub-samples of groups in national polls. We’re also seeing surges in young people registering to vote.

And this Harris margin hasn’t been getting captured in most polling so far.

Compare the Harvard poll to this week’s Quinnipiac poll, that had Trump up a point. Quinnipiac’s 18-34 year old vote was Harris 48, Trump 45. But if Harvard’s poll is closer to correct, that number probably should be more like Harris +25 to +27. Adjusting for the youth surge in the Harvard poll to the Quinnipiac poll would put Harris up by a lot, not behind.

Another point is that many young people register as unaffiliated, not as Democrats. So analysts may not be seeing a youth surge towards Harris.

Howard University just completed a large sample poll of black voters in the battleground states. It showed that likely Black American voters in battleground states show strong support for Harris over Trump. Harris leads Trump, 82% to 12% among this population. The same voters report having supported President Biden over Trump 81% to 9% in the 2020 election. Support for Harris was even higher among voters who say they are “almost certain” to vote 85% to 10%.

The Howard poll has a ±3.1 margin of error, and 96% of the sample indicate they are likely to vote in the 2024 presidential election.

Finally, some readers wanted Wrongo to keep them updated on Thomas Miller’s model that forecasts the Electoral College vote based on investor closing prices in the PredictIt market for the Party that will win the 2024 presidential election. For September 26, the closing prices indicated that Harris wins the Electoral College 312- 226.

Remember that political polls are snapshots of the recent past and have limited predictive power.

Prediction markets, OTOH, are forward-looking. Investors anticipate what will happen on election day and place their bets accordingly. Just as the stock market is a leading indicator of what is expected to happen with the economy, a political prediction market is a leading indicator of what will happen with an election.

Time for a Saturday Soother. Just forget about the election for a few moments while you watch and listen to Luigi Boccherini’s (1743-1805) “String Quintet in E major” (1st Movement) performed in 2015 at the Chester Music Festival and played by the Ensemble Diva:

Boccherini was a virtuoso cellist who is credited with modifying Hayden’s model of the string quartet by bringing the cello to prominence.

New Methodology In Presidential Polling

The Daily Escape:

Today let’s take a look at an election prediction technology that may help explain the Harris/Trump polling disparities better than conventional polling. Wrongo, and he’s sure very few of you have ever heard of Thomas Miller, a data scientist at Northwestern University and his innovative election forecasting model. From Northwestern Now:

“For the second U.S. presidential election in a row, a Northwestern University data scientist is running a novel forecasting platform that updates the odds of a win by former President Donald Trump or Vice President Kamala Harris each day.

With this level of precision, followers can see how single events — such as a debate, campaign activities or legal rulings — might affect the potential outcome of the U.S. presidential election.”

Miller’s system uses data from PredictIt, the largest private political betting exchange in which users bet real money in real time on political races. He then uses that betting data as input to his models for how the Electoral College will vote. Fortune Magazine picked up on Miller’s work:

“I was intrigued by the highly original methodology Miller deployed in calling the trends, and outcomes, first in the presidential race, then for the two Georgia senatorial contests, where the surprise twin victories gave Democrats control of the upper chamber.”

“In all three 2020 contests, Miller beat virtually every pollster, and modeler parsing multiple voter surveys. He missed the size of Biden’s win in the electoral college by just 12 votes, tagging every state for the correct column save Georgia.”

Here’s Miller’s innovative methodology: (brackets and emphasis by Wrongo)

“For the 2020 Biden-Trump face-off, Miller deployed the pricing posted on the largest US political betting site, Predictit. He took the Predictit odds in…56 individual voting jurisdictions, tracked the hourly changes, and used his proprietary model to roll the data into daily odds that were extremely current given that folks were posting bets for one candidate or the other 24-7 on the site.

For the [Georgia] Senate races, Miller took a different tack. He assembled a group of about 1,200 Georgians whom he lured by agreeing to pay them a few dollars to participate, and extra dollars if they named the contender most likely to win—not the necessarily one they planned to vote for, as well as predict the margin for victory. The method he developed, called a “prediction survey” taking the best parts of the polling and the betting market guided Miller to a near-perfect reading of the voting shares.”

Now you know who Miller is and maybe why we should listen to him.

Miller doesn’t rely on polls he primarily uses the betting markets. He points out that the right question isn’t “who are you voting for” but “who do you expect to win.” He says that while polls tell you about the past, the odds on the betting sites map the future. The traditional method builds in a four to five day lag in data. It also focuses on an opinion today that can be changed by tomorrow.

And while the pollsters don’t pose that query, it’s exactly how the participating bettors are making the presidential election into a market. This kind of analysis is dismissed by mainstream outlets.

But think about it: Miller relies on prediction markets that have tens of thousands of investors, with thousands of shares traded each day. Typical opinion polls involve between one and two thousand respondents.

As of the article, (9/16/24) Predictit is showing a price of 55 cents for Harris, and 45 cents for Trump. Once again, those odds translate in 55% of the popular vote for the Democrat according to Miller’s model. Miller then maps the votes to the Electoral College. So if the “market” situation persists, Trump faces an absolute rout.

From Miller:

“It would be somewhere between the defeats of Barry Goldwater by Lyndon Johnson in 1964, and Bob Dole by Bill Clinton in 1996….We’re talking about a blowout where Harris gets over 400 electoral votes and wins Michigan, Pennsylvania, North Carolina and every other swing state.”

From his lips.

Of course there are caveats. America’s never witnessed a reversal of fortune remotely as dramatic as this one:

“It’s gone from a drastic landslide in Trump’s direction to a drastic landslide for Harris,”

Before the debate, the numbers were reversed with Trump holding 400 Electoral College votes.

What does it all mean? Time is short. Early voting has started in several states. The distance between Harris and Trump is now so great that only another epic swing would bring Trump back into contention. So Miller predicts that as of right now, it Harris will win big on November 5.

Is this bullshit soothsaying? Maybe. A polling phenom emerges with very election cycle by being the most accurate. We should also remember wild swings can happen. We know the late swing against Clinton in 2016 from the Comey letter precipitated her loss.

Who knows what might happen in the next month and a half? Whatever the outcome Trump will say it was stolen. There’s no scenario in which he won’t.

And there will no doubt be post-election shenanigans with the electoral vote and the courts, and maybe even violence. But if Miller’s work holds up, it would really be hard to see another protracted slow rolling coup attempt.

Some upbeat music for a Saturday. Watch and listen to Telemann’s “Recorder Concerto in C major, TWV 51:C1, II. Allegro” played in 2020 by the Bremer Barockorchester:

Telemann is always a joy.

Will The Protagonist Win?

The Daily Escape:

Let’s start with some definitions. According to Proofed, a writing tips blog:

“The protagonist is often (though not necessarily) referred to as the story’s “hero” or central character. At the other end of the spectrum is the antagonist, the character responsible for opposing the protagonist’s objectives.”

Marcy Wheeler, who writes as Emptywheel, had one of the most perceptive columns of the election cycle last week. Speaking about the debate and its aftermath Wheeler said: (brackets by Wrongo)

“…[what] the Vice President did with her animated, often mocking facial expressions….She kept the camera on her the entire time. And more often than not, even her facial expressions conveyed far more than Trump’s rants did.”

The media were surprised, since they had conceived of the debate almost exclusively about how Harris would react to whatever Trump would do. That’s the way they’ve treated Trump since 2015: As the protagonist in a global political drama.

But since the debate, something important happened to the media. Back to Wheeler: (brackets by Wrongo)

“And they left [ the debate] with the certainty that Vice President Kamala Harris was the protagonist of that story.”

Harris the protagonist. Harris, the main character, who’s actions drive the story forward. It wasn’t Trump giving the orders that got the press scurrying. They were marveling at Harris’s crowds, at her command of the issues, at her looking and sounding presidential. At the big energy in the big crowds at her rallies.

But a second possible assassination attempt could have delivered the role of protagonist up for grabs again. Does Wrongo have this right? The guy who was apprehended never had a line of sight on Trump and never shot his weapon. But somehow, Trump has become the victim of another assassination in the Mainstream Media.

It’s most probable that the second assassin is just another mentally ill person looking to give his life meaning. But regardless, Trump worked hard to get the protagonist role back. He tried to use the second attempt to return to being the protagonist. He’s alleged that Democrats have inspired the recent up tick of political violence by characterizing him as a risk to American democracy, as truthfully, he is.

There’s zero evidence that the would-be assassins were motivated or radicalized by Democrats.

The Springfield story is Trump’s second effort to return to being the protagonist. Since it’s predicated on a lie, he can run with it. If the tale of Haitian immigrants stealing people’s pets and eating them were true, then it would only have been a one-day affair. We’d see the police reports. Local and state governments would take some sort of action. The Harris campaign would formulate a response. The story would have a beginning, a middle, and an end.

But then? We’d be back to talking about Harris.

But because it’s a lie, the story doesn’t end. It swirls and gathers strength. The media and local governments try to debunk it. Lots of people believe it anyway. The narrative progresses, trying to get Trump and Vance to admit that they’re lying. They refuse; or equivocate.

And there is no advantageous angle for the Harris campaign to take. If she engages, then it gets even better for Trump, because she becomes a supporting character in his story. And we go from having a conflict between Trump and objective truth to a conflict between Trump and Harris.

And Harris would be no longer talking about the future. She’d be stuck litigating the (obvious) lies of a madman. Just like everyone else has for the last nine years.

But a big lie doesn’t have to change things, no matter how many times Trump plays that card.

Since becoming the protagonist, Harris has leaped in the polls. The New Yorker’s Philip Gourevitch reported on the Morning Consult’s polling of 11,022 likely voters with a margin of error of +/-1 percentage point, taken Sept. 13-15 2024. They summarize:

“Harris leads Trump by a record-high 6 percentage points among likely voters, 51% to 45%, up from a 3-point advantage before their debate last week. Her 51% of support among likely voters, which is also at a record high, is driven largely by her best figures to date among Democrats, Biden 2020 voters, liberals, women, 18- to 34-year-olds and millennials.”

Here’s their chart:

And her image is better than ever: 53% of likely voters have a favorable view of Harris, the largest share they’ve measured this cycle. By comparison, just 44% of voters view Trump favorably.

So one big challenge is for Harris to hold on as the protagonist in the political brawl of 2024. Something that Biden never did, nor have large groups of Trump wanna-be’s over the past nine years.

State Of The Race: What Polling Tells Us And What It Does Not

(Welcome to another of Wrongo’s occasional thoughts about the election. He wants to thank you for your concern as he travels through Chemo land.)

The Daily Escape:

Polling isn’t all that we want it to be or think it can be. But the recent trends support growing confidence that Harris is succeeding Biden. For example, a recent USA TODAY/Suffolk University poll (highly rated in the 538’s curation of polls), shows an eight or nine-point swing in favor of Harris, relative to the survey it took at the end of June, after the disastrous Biden debate:

“Democrat Kamala Harris has surged ahead of Republican Donald Trump, 48%-43%, a new USA TODAY/Suffolk University Poll found….The findings reflect an eight-point turnaround in the presidential race from late June, when Trump had led President Joe Biden in the survey by nearly four points.

The vice president’s small lead was fueled by big shifts among some key demographic groups traditionally crucial for Democrats, including Hispanic and Black voters and young people. Among those with annual incomes of less than $20,000, in the biggest change, a three-point Trump edge over Biden in June has become a 23-point Harris advantage over Trump in August.”

The poll of 1,000 likely voters, taken by landline and cell phone Sunday through Wednesday, has a margin of error of plus or minus 3.1 percentage points. With the election approaching, the survey is now measuring likely voters; previous polls were of registered voters.”

It’s a tiny sample that needs more supportive data. Sunday’s ABC News/Ipsos poll showed Harris leading 52%-46% among likely voters, a six-point lead. But the race is much closer in swing states. This means that the whole ball game is going to come down to turnout and enthusiasm. There are very few real swing voters left in America today, because the kind of person who has trouble choosing between the Democrats and the Republicans is somebody who probably couldn’t decide which country is directly north of the USA.

Two factors in turnout are the changes in voter enthusiasm and spending by the Parties. Here’s Gallup on changes in enthusiasm:

We should remember that enthusiasm for Harris is driven by hope, while enthusiasm for Trump is driven by fear. One is easier to stoke than the other.

Second, Ad Impact Politics, a firm that tracks political spending, says that between Labor Day and Election Day, 96 different markets are set to see at least $1M in political ad spending on TV. Twenty- eight markets are set to see over $20M, and Philadelphia, Phoenix, and Las Vegas are all set to see over $110M! Here’s how that breaks down by TV time slot reservations:

The Trump campaign is only going to be competitive in Pennsylvania and Georgia. The other swing states are apparently being left to their own devices. Their strategy seems to be if they can hold all their 2020 states they can put all their money on picking up those two states which will bring them to exactly 270. If they lose either one (or NC) that’s the ballgame.

A subtext is that their real strategy is the coming post-election legal challenge in any or all of those states, claiming that the Democrats stole the election. They’re clearly doing that in Pennsylvania and Georgia where they are already plotting with local officials.

Overall, Harris is now in a far better position than Biden was in late July. Harris, by contrast, has probably become a slight favorite.

Second, Harris’s improved position has essentially nothing to do with peeling off persuadable Trump voters. What has changed is that people who would vote for the Democrat if they were to vote at all are now much more likely to vote than they were when Biden was the candidate. This is reflected in the responses of potential voters in key Democratic constituencies — especially young people, and blacks and Latinos — to Harris’s entry into the race.

Third, motivating supporters to actually vote is going to be far more important than persuading swing voters. Swing voters remain important because the race is so close, and likely to remain so. Such voters might represent only one or two percent of the electorate in the seven states that will almost certainly decide the election — Arizona, Georgia, Michigan, Nevada, North Carolina, Pennsylvania, and Wisconsin — and one or two percent could easily be the decisive margin in all of these places. This is where the enthusiasm for Harris in the Democratic base has proven to be so critical to this point.

Pundits say “It all comes down to PA”. That may be true if your only concern is the presidential race. But control of the Senate and the House are just as important. That means hacking a path to at least 50 Senate seats in a world where MT and OH could both flip to the GOP. It means flipping the House. Neither path runs through PA. And reproductive liberty is on the ballot in 11 states and indirectly on the ballot in all fifty states via Project 2025’s plan to ban abortion nationally. How does that factor into polling? It doesn’t.

Another example: the Boston Globe published a leaked email from a top Trump volunteer with the Trump campaign telling other volunteers that the Trump campaign “no longer thinks New Hampshire is winnable” and is “pulling back”.

Not all is bright. Dan Pfeiffer notes Harris isn’t doing well with GEN Z men:

Peiffer notes that what’s alarming is that Harris’s entry into race excited young women, but not men. When Biden was the nominee, Trump was up with young men by 11. In national polling, the gap still exists, but Trump does less well with men under 30. Trump’s campaign is targeting these younger men. That’s why his convention featured a wife beating MMA fighter introducing him and he entered the stage to the tune of “It’s a man’s world.”

Peiffer says that if Trump maintains these numbers with Gen Z men, he might win the election:

“To put a finer point on it, Biden won voters under 30 by 24 points. According to the NBC News poll, Harris is up only 16 points with this cohort.”

So many bros…so few brains!

To deal with the rapid changes, polling organization 538 has changed its presidential prediction model from one based on “fundamentals” to one based on changes to polls. Which acknowledges that the old “fundamentals” no longer work.

The Wrongologist

Geopolitics, Power and Political Economy

Category: Electoral College

The Times That Try Men’s Souls

More Data That Supports A Harris Win

State Of The Race: What Polling Tells Us And What It Does Not