Kamala Harris wins 51% to 47%, with 292 or more electoral votes. All three forecast models, 538, Economist and Nate Silver, show a 50/50 election. That does not belie my prediction. Two weeks ago all three gave Trump a small edge. Trend lines matter.
Another poll is seminal. The well respected Selzer poll shows Harris up 3 points in Iowa. That is an outlier, and inconsistent with each campaign's internal polling, or the candidates would be in the state. But it shows a 7 point move since September in the same poll. Trend lines matter. Iowa bodes well for blue wall states.
Early voting has an anomaly. Polling cross tabs, which admittedly have a large margin of error, all show Kamala ahead with early voters. But unlike 2020, virtually as many Republicans as Democrats have early voted. Reconciliation means that either a good number of Republicans are voting for Kamala, and/or she is killing it with independents.
Typically women out vote men 52/48. Early voting is running 53/44, with larger margins in the seven battleground states except for Nevada and Arizona. Harris has a substantial polling lead with women, as Trump does with men. Same day voting may revert to the mean, but if we end up with anything like 54/46, Harris will prevail.
On the less quantitative front, Trump's closing message is muddled with an island of garbage and a firing squad for Liz Cheney. Trump has ceded middle ground and Harris has jumped in calling for common sense solutions and an end to divisive politics.
Finally, Republicans have always accused Democrats of throwing money at problems. That is just what Trump has done with Musk throwing millions at an untested ground game. Criticism is anecdotal, but wide spread.
In contrast, Harris has a wide net of field offices throughout the battle ground states. Turn out and micro targeting are run by two of the best, David Plouffe and Jen O'Malley Dillion. Ground game should give Harris a plus one throughout the magnificent seven states.
Be still thy heart, and chill the champagne.
Brilliantly said!
ReplyDeleteFantastic..looking forward to it!
ReplyDeleteI always look forward to your study of polls, trends, etc. I desperately want to believe your take, but it's those magnificent seven that worry me. The atheist in me won't allow praying, so I'll put my faith in your optimism for now!
ReplyDeleteFirst hint that I am right may be a closer race in Florida than expected.
DeleteAstutely presented analysis, Larry. That Selzer number in Iowa caught my eye when I saw it, too. I found your take on the early voting dynamic pretty compelling as well - early voting is more bipartisan now than in 2020 and thus stands to pose less of a blue mirage, so it really means something if ballots cast before Election Day appear to be breaking for Harris. But the superstitious part of me is almost afraid to embrace any of this just yet.
ReplyDelete