Harris’ momentum in context

OPINION:

Is Vice President Kamala Harris’ bump real? If so, will it last? Will it be enough?

Today’s polling hinges on these questions. Almost all the answers undercut the momentum that the establishment media is trying to give Ms. Harris.

There has undoubtedly been a polling bump for Ms. Harris and Democrats. On July 21, when President Biden withdrew from the race, he trailed former President Donald Trump across the board in Real Clear Politics’ averages of national polling by 3.1 percentage points in a two-way race, by 4.2 points in a five-way race and by 4.4 points in seven battleground states.

Mr. Biden’s party was split over him, with many calling for his withdrawal. Ms. Harris was also viewed unfavorably — more so than Mr. Biden or Mr. Trump. Many had regarded her as an ineffective vice president, and there had been talk of replacing her on the ticket.

Then the Democrats hit the reset button.

On Aug. 2, when the Democratic National Committee nominated Ms. Harris virtually, Mr. Trump’s advantage had fallen to 1 point in a two-way race, two-tenths of a point in a five-way race and 1.6 points in the battleground states. On Aug. 22, the night Ms. Harris made her acceptance speech at the Democratic convention, Mr. Trump trailed by 1.5 points in a two-way race and 1.6 points in a five-way race, and he led by just two-tenths of a point in battleground states.

What had been an apparently uncompetitive race is now a seemingly competitive one. Yet it is important to look at what the polls are really telling us.

First, Mr. Trump is in the best position he has been in any of his three presidential races. According to RCP’s archives, on Aug. 23, in head-to-head matchups, Mr. Trump trailed Mr. Biden by 7.8 points in 2020 and Hillary Clinton by 5.5 points in 2016. Put into context: Mr. Trump had trailed Mr. Biden and Mrs. Clinton by more than Mr. Biden had trailed Mr. Trump in 2024. In 2016 and 2020, He was not considered competitive, but he was.

Mr. Trump’s past election showings make looking more closely at today’s polling imperative.

First, while this is a national election, national results matter only as electoral votes. This means that the state-by-state popular votes matter, not the overall popular vote. To understand the difference, look back at 2016 and 2020.

In 2016, Mrs. Clinton won by 2.1 points in the popular vote and in 2020 Mr. Biden won by 4.3 points in the popular vote — roughly 3 million more votes for Mrs. Clinton and 7 million more for Mr. Biden. But Mrs. Clinton in 2016 ran a 6.1 million-vote surplus (4.5% of the popular vote) in California and New York; in 2020, Mr. Biden ran a 7 million-vote surplus (4.5% of the popular vote) there.

In both 2016 and 2020, due to California and New York’s large populations and Democratic majorities, Mrs. Clinton and Mr. Biden ran up margins of 4.5% of the popular vote that had no bearing on the election’s outcome. There is every reason to believe that Ms. Harris’ polling numbers are capturing the same. Considering Democrats’ euphoria upon being rid of Mr. Biden and that Ms. Harris is from California, her “meaningless” margin may be higher still.

Thus, the battleground states are everything: They were in 2016, they were in 2020 and they will be in 2024. On Aug. 24, RCP’s average of results showed Mr. Trump holding a razor-thin lead of one-tenth of a point here. But even this is not indicative of the outcome. It is individual state contests that count.

Mr. Trump needs only 35 electoral votes from Mr. Biden’s 2020 column to win in November. According to RCP Aug. 24 battleground averages, Mr. Trump holds leads of two-tenths of a point in Arizona, 1.4 points in Nevada, two-tenths of a point in Pennsylvania, nine-tenths of a point in North Carolina and 1 point in Georgia. If those states all held for Mr. Trump, he would pick up 52 electoral votes, more than enough to win. Are these margins small? Yes, but these states were also decided by small margins in the last two elections.

It’s also valid to ask if Ms. Harris’ momentum will last. It rests on overwhelmingly favorable media coverage (a recent Media Research Center study showed Ms. Harris’ coverage by the three major news networks had been 84% favorable, while Mr. Trump’s had been 89% negative) and overwhelming media avoidance by Ms. Harris. While the former may continue, it is hard to see how the latter can.

It’s also worth remembering that despite the media’s best efforts and the Biden campaign’s determined avoidance, Democrats were unable to keep him under wraps.

Further, Ms. Harris’ biggest bumps are likely behind her — as Robert F. Kennedy Jr.’s Aug. 23 backing of Mr. Trump shows. Her track record also plays against her: She has performed poorly as vice president, she failed miserably in her first presidential run and she has won elections only in deepest-blue California. It is worth asking whether Ms. Harris’ momentum will last.

Finally, even if Ms. Harris’ current poll performances are real and they last, will they be enough? Based on 2016 and 2020, they wouldn’t be after discounting likely California and New York surpluses.

As Mr. Trump showed in 2016 and 2020, he closes strong. Democrats must ask themselves whether they think that Ms. Harris will do better down the stretch than Mrs. Clinton and Mr. Biden did. If Mr. Trump presses Ms. Harris on issues over attributes, he will force Ms. Harris to come before the public to defend her, and her administration’s, positions. Before the public is where Mr. Trump performs best and where his past Democratic opponents have performed worst — and Ms. Harris likely worst of all.

• J.T. Young was a professional staffer in the House and Senate from 1987 to 2000, served in the Department of Treasury and Office of Management and Budget from 2001 to 2004 and was director of government relations for a Fortune 20 company from 2004 to 2023.