A Rebooted Race II

A fresh choice provides room for movement.

Yesterday, I argued that President Biden withdrawing and Vice President Harris taking his place as the presumptive Democratic nominee has resulted in a rebooted race. Not only because Biden’s age been removed as a central campaign issue but because, unlike Biden or Trump, Harris still has the ability to change public perception.

Looking at the early polling, not much has changed on the surface. There are now several polls conducted since Biden quit the race and Trump still has a modest lead:

Domenico Montanaro‘s deeper dive into the NPR/Marist poll (“Presidential race hits a reset with Harris vs. Trump“) though, shows the effect I was expecting.

The 2024 presidential campaign has hit a reset with more voters moving into the undecided camp now that Kamala Harris is potentially the Democratic nominee, a new NPR/PBS News/Marist poll finds.[emphasis mine]

Harris and former President Donald Trump are statistically tied, but 1 in 5 independents, including almost 3 in 10 independent women, now say they are undecided. So these next few weeks will be vital for Harris to reintroduce herself before views solidify.

The survey also found that Democrats are feeling better about their chances now, and Black voters, in particular, say they are more fired up to vote.

Democrats are more energized, which you’d expect after weeks of doom and gloom from party elders about Biden’s inability to win. Independents haven’t yet moved her way. But here’s the key:

In a head-to-head matchup, Trump gets 46%, while Harris is at 45%, with 9% undecided. In Marist’s survey earlier this month, just 2% were undecided between Trump and Biden. [emphasis mine]

and, it thus follows

With more folks undecided, there’s an opportunity for Harris that Biden did not seem to have. It’s another key indication of just how much of a restart this move is for the campaign.

Even deeper:

There’s no guarantee that these people will overwhelmingly move to Harris’ camp, of course. But they’ve had eight years of exposure to Trump and clearly don’t like what they see. And they now have a new option that isn’t the 81-year-old they also didn’t like.

FILED UNDER: 2024 Election, Public Opinion Polls, US Politics, , , ,
James Joyner
About James Joyner
James Joyner is a Professor of Security Studies. He's a former Army officer and Desert Storm veteran. Views expressed here are his own. Follow James on Twitter @DrJJoyner.

Comments

  1. Jen says:

    It depends heavily on who comprises the “Independent/undecideds” bloc.

    Harris will get a bump, both from the change and from the convention. She’ll experience a dip when the negative campaigning via surrogates and Trump start landing in earnest. She needs to secure many of the type of headlines we saw comparing her fundraising totals to Trump’s post conviction numbers (meaning, she needs to leave him in the dust, early and often).

    The more she looks like the “winner” of the routine, the better her chances.

    9
  2. Not the IT Dept. says:

    The campaign will turn out to be a battle between Harris and Vance, with Trump on the sidelines being ignored as last week’s news. Whatever else you can say about either of them, both Harris and Vance have energy that comes across on camera. Trump won’t matter anymore as long as Vance keeps saying the things MAGA-cans want to hear without all the me-me-me stuff Trump throws in.

    This campaign is going to be gladiatorial. For better and for worse.

    1
  3. One thing that occurs to me as we look at these numbers: Trump should be getting a convention bounce, so either that was killed by this announcement or it is in there already and Harris may be in better shape in a week or so (of course, it is hard to disaggregate all these variables).

    Still, with all this drama: an assassination attempt, the RNC, and a candidate change it is pretty amazing that the basic polling narrative is not all that different than where it was pre-debate.

    Granted: it is early yet for all of this to shake out.

    7
  4. Jen says:

    @Not the IT Dept.: Her campaign shouldn’t allow that to happen. The contest is between Harris and Trump. Positioning her against the VP candidate reinforces the notion that Trump is above her, not her equal.

    The more I think about it, the more I believe that she needs to generate headlines like “Harris visits 10 states in 5 day, Trump attempts 2” etc. Turn everything into contests, that she wins.

    He hates losing, even dumb stuff, so it’s a good strategy.

    9
  5. wr says:

    @Not the IT Dept.: “The campaign will turn out to be a battle between Harris and Vance, with Trump on the sidelines being ignored as last week’s news. ”

    Not a chance. There’s just no way Trump will allow this to happen. If he starts to feel ignored, he’s going to start doing and saying things that simply can’t be ignored. Not, I suspect, that these will be things that are going to help his campaign…

    8
  6. Lounsbury says:

    @Jen: Indeed, Trump is easily baited: so this angle is useful to highlight: He hates losing, even dumb stuff, so it’s a good strategy
    @Jen: The Free Float to use a capital markets term in the key electoral geographies… It is what needs to be moved. I am personally quite stuck on the mirage that is National, the sour lesson of 2016 relative to USA.

    4
  7. Tony W says:

    I have been very impressed with how President Biden has planned this transition.

    They started by waiting until after the RNC convention which wasted a ton of time and energy on the current president and squandered an opportunity to go after Harris.

    Then the Biden endorsement was quickly followed by a big bang of mid-level endorsements and immediately got the convention delegates on board to secure her nomination.

    Then they started rolling out senior-level endorsements – but only a couple per day, each with higher and higher gravitas both inside and outside the party.

    They are riding this wave of owning every news cycle, shutting out any coverage of the other guy.

    Meanwhile, any mention of a VP candidate is under wraps while the press furiously speculates who she might choose – which is the best possible coverage because it solidifies that she’s the nominee who gets to choose a VP.

    She’ll make that nomination next week before the virtual nominating convention and get a big bump in the news coverage from that. Then she’ll get another bump after the virtual convention when officially nominated. Then, the official convention will give another bump in news coverage when she gives her first widely seen speech as the candidate.

    All of this has been exceptionally well played, and typical of President Biden’s excellent management and political skills.

    16
  8. Not the IT Dept. says:

    @Jen:

    Well, I can see the press covering Harris and Vance on the road, and ignoring Trump. Vance says and believes awful things but he’ll have a professional team which will be a relief to reporters. Trump’s team will be seething about it, because of course Trump will scream that they pushed Vance on him, not his first choice, etc. etc. blah blah blah.

    3
  9. Not the IT Dept. says:

    @wr:

    He’ll turn on Vance. There are already rumors that he’s regretting his choice; if Vance gets better coverage or more attention – as he will since he’s finally on a national stage and looks better in a suit – then Trump will take it out on him, or his team will shut down the Vance’s tour and allow him to speak only where Trump says he can. Going to be a fun four months. Buy popcorn shares now!

    6
  10. mattbernius says:

    @Tony W:

    I have been very impressed with how President Biden has planned this transition.

    At the risk of sounding contratian, while I credit Biden with stepping down with public grace, I didn’t know how much credit he should get for the planning of this. This was a team effort the he played a role in. Harris most likely played a key role as well. And I suspect that when the insider accounts are published, Pelosi will have played an outsized role in things.

    13
  11. Grumpy realist says:

    @Not the IT Dept.: is there any possibility that Trump will try to yank the VP slot away from Vance and go find someone else? For this to stick, someone behind the scene would have to coax Vance to leave the race “to spend more time with my family.”

    Yeah. Like that’s going to happen. I can see Trump whining about Vance and shoving the job of “get him out of here!” off on some poor flunky, however.

  12. Andy says:

    The polling data doesn’t surprise me for many of the reasons cited.

    However, Harris is still an unknown to most Americans, so we’ll have to see how things shake out in the coming weeks, especially after the convention.

    So far it looks to me like Harris has been playing it pretty smart and she’s lucky that there is a lot of talent and advice she can draw on from people who want her to succeed.

    5
  13. charontwo says:

    Here is a great read:

    T_Snyder

    2
  14. Beth says:

    @Not the IT Dept.:
    @Jen:

    I agree with Jen that Harris needs to keep the focus on her vs Trump. But I think an interesting play to make is to create as much chaos between Trump and Vance. Make it a contest between the two of them as well.

    That would be awesome. Play up how old and slow Trump looks compared to Vance. Play up how handsome (barf) Vance is compared (super barf). How Vance’s wife is hotter (true). I don’t think either of those two idiots are secure enough to handle that sort of ratfucking.

    1
  15. JKB says:

    The Harris ascension has ripped the thin veneer Joe Biden gave of the old Democratic party off. The theme is now full monty “How Dare You?” in contrast to the Republican (under Trump) of “Welcome to the Party”

    Here is Joel Kotkin on how Harris signals a full lefty Left move of the Democrat party without so much as a by your leave to the historic Democratic party base constituencies

    With the ascension of Kamala Harris, the Democrats have made a full break from their historic roots as the party of workers and have gravitated towards the decidedly post-industrial politics of California-style progressives. Rather than worrying primarily about lifting up living standards, the party’s emphasis will now be on issues like climate change, abortion, reparations and trans advocacy.
    […]
    Yet this trajectory also makes Harris a far better fit to the emerging, progressive-dominated Democratic Party than the sclerotic Biden. Lunch-bucket Joe from Scranton, Pennsylvania was never a natural fit in a party dominated by the professional classes, the federal bureaucracy and dependent voters. He was something of an anachronism in an era where the white working class, the supposed homebase of the Bidens, has been shifting inexorably away from the Democrats towards the GOP. This shift began even before Donald Trump, particularly under Richard Nixon and Ronald Reagan.

    Now some of the same dynamic is occurring among other ethnic groups, notably Latinos. Minorities make up over 40 per cent of the US working class and by 2032 will constitute its majority. Yet this should not be too comforting to Democrats. Trump was even or ahead of Biden with Latinos long before the debate debacle sealed the president’s fate. That represents a dramatic change.

    Prognostication is going to be hard this election. We’ll know more after Democrats roll out their MAD strategy at their convention [MAD-Make America Decline] Now without a throwback like Scranton Joe to try to keep the paycheck to paycheck voters in the party. Biden said it best in 2020, “I don’t work for you”

    Few who wears a hard hat are going to be deluded to think Kamala Harris has anything but contempt for them

  16. Jen says:

    @JKB: Well, they don’t appear to appreciate the amount of contempt Trump holds for them, so I wouldn’t take that particular angle to the bank.

    11
  17. Kathy says:

    @Not the IT Dept.:

    He doesn’t even know who Vance is.

    3
  18. Kylopod says:

    @JKB:

    With the ascension of Kamala Harris, the Democrats have made a full break from their historic roots as the party of workers and have gravitated towards the decidedly post-industrial politics of California-style progressives. Rather than worrying primarily about lifting up living standards, the party’s emphasis will now be on issues like climate change, abortion, reparations and trans advocacy.

    The GOP’s war against reproductive rights is, at its core, an attempt to turn back the clock to when society viewed women as nothing more than baby-making machines. So yes, protecting reproductive rights is part of the fight for workers’ rights.

    The Dems’ “historic roots as the party of workers” has long clashed with who gets to be counted as a worker worthy of protection. Part of the reason FDR was able to keep the South in his column was by crafting the New Deal to exclude much of the black work force from his programs. After his death, that coalition almost immediately began falling apart–starting with Truman’s inability to get universal health care passed in part because the South feared it would undermine the Jim Crow system. And that’s how the party of tax cuts for rich people and corporations was eventually able to regain its foothold–convincing certain voters that the Dems were abandoning workers by trying to protect the rights of “other” groups, as if workers are workers as long as they’re white, male, cis, straight, etc.

    6
  19. Mimai says:

    I hesitate to even comment on this — I’ve got zero experience and very low interest in this area — but here we go.

    I’m having trouble reconciling several threads in the stories of D politicking.

    It’s a common lament around here that the Ds are inept at messaging. So inept that they ignore the blindingly obvious messaging strategies of XYZ.

    There was also a seemingly shared perspective that the recent in-fighting was doing severe and potentially lasting damage to D prospects in the upcoming elections. Further evidence of their incompetence.

    And now a story has emerged that the Ds have played this very well (I deleted “perfectly”). That they purposely stretched out the timing of the Biden bow-out etc so that it achieved ABC.

    To be sure, these are not necessarily incompatible. It’s just difficult for me to see past their (what I perceive to be) inherent tensions.

    2
  20. Jen says:

    @Mimai:Multiple things can be true at once. Biden’s delay could have been caused by intractibility, or research and support-building. If multiple people had started pushing for xyz candidates not named Kamala, we’d be in a mess of a different kind. The rapidity of leadership coalescing around Harris does suggest that considerable work was going on, and that there were no leaks is kind of astonishing.

    Democrats have been horrible at messaging about the strength of the economy, so they aren’t currently applying this same discipline across the board.

    7
  21. Scott F. says:

    @Lounsbury:

    @Jen: Indeed, Trump is easily baited: so this angle is useful to highlight

    Trump is also losing it cognitively. He’s more incoherent than he was in 2020 which is saying something. All the stuff he’s dealing with has to weigh on him. The triumphalism on display at his convention last week signaled he thought he had the election in the bag based on Joe’s debate performance and his heroic turn as survivor of an assassination attempt. With the Democrat’s switch, it’s clear he’s going to have to work harder than he wanted to.

    His psyche is cut above the eye. Early indications are that Harris is going to work the eye in a way that Biden wasn’t really willing or able to.

    4
  22. Kathy says:

    @Mimai:
    @Jen:

    There’s a lot that happens behind the scenes, away from the view of the public. Some of it can be assumed, some is hinted at, some leaks, some doesn’t get known for decades.

    My take, thus far, is that Biden knew the debate was a disaster, but didn’t intend to drop out. Remember he tried to do interviews and made other appearances, including the NATO summit and subsequent press conference. He worked to quiet the calls for his removal off the ticket.

    This didn’t work, since 1) more prominent Democrats added their voices to the chorus, and 2) every misstep, gaffe, and even moment of hesitation was interpreted as advanced and irreversible decline (at that, using Mad Vlad’s name for introducing Zelenskyy was like giving the GQP free attack ads).

    Meantime, there’s what I kept saying: the dispute over Biden was only helping the Convicted Felon on several levels. Also: changing one person’s mind, though not easy, is a far more plausible endeavor than changing many minds.

    Therefore, at some point between the debate and last Sunday, Biden decided to drop out. IMO, possibly days after the NATO summit. In the meantime the Convicted Felon took some shard of glass to the ear, and then held some overblown event in Milwaukee. Not to mention Biden also caught the trump virus.

    Even if he decided to withdraw on the 12th, the day after the summit, he would have waited until after the GQP convention (let them waste their ammo on him, right?). Or he might have made the decision later. Maybe on the day he announced it.

    What is clear, IMO, is that there was a parallel move to get everyone behind Harris. The Congressional Delegation, governors, donors, allied organizations, etc. There have been few calls for an open convention or a mini-primary (whatever the hell that is), plus many of the major possible candidates (Whitmer, Newsom, Shapiro, etc.) quickly endorsed Harris.

    This is what really impressed me. I expected a weeks long game of “who will be the candidate?” Complete with infighting, mud-slinging, appeals for compromise, etc.

    Maybe it was the realization that only Harris could take over the Biden-Harris campaign organization* and funds, or maybe Pelosi, Jeffries, Schummer, Biden, etc. spent a great dela of time getting people in line.

    The burst of enthusiasm and over $100 million in raised funds might be a surprise.

    *I recall reading Biden’s campaign had booked inordinate amounts of ad time in several swing states for late in the campaign season, practically monopolizing it. If true, that was a very valuable asset to protect.

    5
  23. DK says:

    @Jen:

    Democrats have been horrible at messaging about the strength of the economy, so they aren’t currently applying this same discipline across the board.

    Democrats aren’t doing anything differently with their messaging on the transition to Kamala vs. their messaging on the Biden economy. The difference is the tone of the media coverage.

    If the pundit class agrees with and is excited by what Democrats are doing, the press will provide positive coverage. If not, or if they’re bored with what Democrats are offering, they’ll run rightwing narratives instead.

    12
  24. wr says:

    @JKB: “Few who wears a hard hat are going to be deluded to think Kamala Harris has anything but contempt for them”

    Except maybe for the ones she was walking the picket lines with last year…

    Oh, and the members of all the unions who have endorsed her because she’s promising to follow through on Biden’s pro-labor actions.

    And pretty much anyone who has ever actually met another human being.

    12
  25. Lounsbury says:

    @Jen:

    Democrats have been horrible at messaging about the strength of the economy, so they aren’t currently applying this same discipline across the board.

    Not really.
    The fundamental problem you have is that, as Andy has noted, macro-economic averages poorly describe experience, and secondarily the human structural cognitive bias to overweight losses to gains.
    The econometrics data coming out has begun to show – in a way not surprising to those of us who are proper economists – that inflation has indeed had an overweight up-front pain effect on lower-middle income to lower-income working labour class fractions of the populations (not only in USA land).
    As such the selling of Bidenomics (a foolish copy catting of Reagonomics slogan, like the nerds trying to copy the cool kids) and general BoBo Left – rooted in the comparatively economically comfortable professional classes – inflation denialism has been a rather foolish autistic discourse.

    Some better taioring to the economic experience of the lower middle income labouring class segments (which Democrats have lost ground in the statistics say), would be wise.

    Probably – although against my general class interest – some economic populism is needed in electoral posturing.

    1
  26. Gustopher says:

    @JKB:

    With the ascension of Kamala Harris, the Democrats have made a full break from their historic roots as the party of…

    I’m shocked you didn’t find a quote that goes back to slavery. Genuinely shocked. Are you ok?

    5
  27. DK says:

    @Kathy:

    There have been few calls for an open convention

    A big relief. But watch the polls.

    If in two weeks Kamala v Trump polls look like Biden v Trump polls, or God forbid worse, expect some “Biden can’t win” (wrong) people to become “Kamala can’t win” (wrong) people. Anti-Trumpers lusting for the false security of good polls calling for a brokered convention, searching for the candidate Democrats needed most: a younger Joe Biden.

    There is none. Biden had unique strengths: incumbency, runs better than generic Dems with older voters, the rare white guy beloved by Dems’ black voter base, liked by both moderates and major progressive leaders.

    But we are an ageist and unintelligent people, who believe you can be too old for a job you’re already doing a job better than anyone younger has done in 50 years. So Biden’s signs of aging were dispositive, and he had to go. It is what it is. History will treat him kindly.

    Kamala stands to generate more enthusiasm with younger voters and liberals, and increase black voter turnout. That’s a BFD. But compared to Biden, she may slip with white, male, and older voters — a potential problem when Democrats’ most plausible path to 270 runs through the Rust Belt. Folks hope her VP pick may help (they usually don’t, still worth a try).

    The generic white guys preferred by the future “Kamala can’t win” crowd will have their own strengths and stretches. You could endlessly swap candidates whose relative benefits and drawbacks would cancel each other, leaving polling fundamentally unchanged: Trump slightly ahead, Democrats needing to persuade undecideds.

    Hopefully Democrats are done rearranging deck chairs in search of a super special magic bullet to satisfy poll fetishizers, so we can unite and focus on Trump. But do watch the polls, since that’s what’s most important to Donorcrats these days.

    12
  28. DK says:

    @Scott F.:

    His psyche is cut above the eye.

    Bullet, or shards of Teleprompter glass?

    1
  29. steve says:

    I am Chautauqua again this year. The speakers have been the usual mix of liberal and from the right, but with the audience clearly mostly on the left. Every time Harris mentioned it generates enthusiasm. As one of the speakers from the left, Margaret Sullivan phrased it, she doesnt know yet either she should be optimistic but she is definitely hopeful.

    Steve

    2
  30. Jen says:

    @DK: This is a fair point, but from a communications/PR perspective, messaging is about framing an issue so that it resonates with key audiences, and that includes the media. When I say they aren’t successfully messaging, I specifically mean that they are failing to capture the issues in a way that clicks with the media.

    @Lounsbury: I get your point, but ultimately that’s not what I am talking about.

    Inflation has fallen to 3%, unemployment is the lowest in 50 years, and the stock market is hitting record highs. These are all facts. Dems need to hammer on this in a way that lands.

    2
  31. DK says:

    @Jen: There’s lots of smart and dedicated people in the Democratic Party. If it were possible for them to end-around the media’s But Her Emails or But His Age or But Inflation nonsense and remain Democrats, true to their values, surely they would have done it already.

    It’s hard for all of us to accept the things we cannot control. And the things Democrats cannot control. “They need better messaging” is just a vague platitude. If anyone knows of any specific and concrete series of actions Democrats should be taking that they’re not taking, I’m sure they’d be all ears.

    I have an idea or two, but the past month indicates there’s no appetite for my style of street brawling in most of the modern Democratic coalition. I and most black voters believe if someone comes for your family (Hillary, Biden) you cut the attackers’ heart out and eat it, you do not cede ground and abandon your people.

    But most of our allies do not agree; they not like us. They subscribe to old Oliver P. Smith adage, “We’re not retreating, we’re advancing in a different direction.” Okay, but the enemy still learned how to get you to run.

    6
  32. Jen says:

    @DK: Yep, agreed, on all points.

    Messaging is HARD. I am certain that they are and have been message testing. Your point about staying true to values might be key. If they hit on a message that appeals to the media, but runs counter to ethos, it will be discarded.

    5
  33. gVOR10 says:

    @DK:

    If the pundit class agrees with and is excited by what Democrats are doing, the press will provide positive coverage. If not, or if they’re bored with what Democrats are offering, they’ll run rightwing narratives instead.

    What you said. Ds aren’t great at messaging, but they have two inherent disadvantages compared to GOPs. The first is that Ds are a big tent. Some commenters here would cheerfully throw the defund types out of the party, the party has to consider the effect on the Black vote. It can get complicated and muddy the message. The second is that Ds don’t have a captive media. MSNBC and Mother Jones are a pale shadow of FOX, WSJ, the NY Post, and the thousand weird websites. Ds have to rely on the supposedly liberal MSM. (No, Ds can’t stand up a comparable partisan media. It’s been tried, it mostly doesn’t work. Liberals don’t have a need to attend services and hear a sermon to reinforce their beliefs.)

    ETA – Just saw @Lounsbury: above. Another problem for D messaging is that populism is a lot harder if you actually mean it. Ds have done many things to actually help the “working class”, however you define it. GOPs can promise anything, since they have no intention of actually doing it.

    8
  34. Lounsbury says:

    @Jen:

    Inflation has fallen to 3%, unemployment is the lowest in 50 years, and the stock market is hitting record highs. These are all facts. Dems need to hammer on this in a way that lands

    These are all repetition of the tone deaf Bohemian Bourgeoisie argumentaire that précisely mistakes macroeconomic averages at national for lived specific sub natational class experience. Microeconomic econometrics are showing (they always lag) that lower middle incomes in middle states did not experience Mr Biden’ s policies they way macro aggregate averages would lead you to understand.

    Autistically insisting otherwise is unlikely to be a winning sales pitch.

    @gVOR10: you lot rather should learn lessons in salesmanship. Nerd-like explaining and earnest sincerity is not sales.

    @DK: data is data, however much it brings uncomfortable truth to light. The proper thing to focus on however is the sub natational as national is generally useless at these tight margins for the electoral chances. Of course innumeracy in probability analysis runs deep, it is a deep general cognitive flaw amongst all Beni Adam.

  35. Lounsbury says:

    @Jen:

    Inflation has fallen to 3%, unemployment is the lowest in 50 years, and the stock market is hitting record highs. These are all facts. Dems need to hammer on this in a way that lands

    These are all repetition of the tone deaf Bohemian Bourgeoisie argumentaire that précisely mistakes macroeconomic averages at national for lived specific sub natational class experience. Microeconomic econometrics are showing (they always lag) that lower middle incomes in middle states did not experience Mr Biden’ s policies they way macro aggregate averages would lead you to understand.

    Autistically insisting otherwise is unlikely to be a winning sales pitch.

    @gVOR10: you lot rather should learn lessons in salesmanship. Nerd-like explaining and earnest sincerity is not sales.

    @DK: data is data, however much it brings uncomfortable truth to light. The proper thing to focus on however is the sub natational as national is generally useless at these tight margins for the electoral chances. Of course innumeracy in probability analysis runs deep, it is a deep general cognitive flaw amongst all Beni Adam.

  36. Kathy says:

    @DK:

    A big relief. But watch the polls.

    Yeah.

    I’m worried overall about the many men who would gladly vote for a woman running for president, just not that woman.

    6
  37. Jen says:

    @Lounsbury: Repetition works. Each voter should be contacted around 8+ times with the same message. Republicans are going to use “tough on crime,” despite crime numbers being down, under a Democratic administration.

    3
  38. DK says:

    @Kathy:

    I’m worried overall about the many men who would gladly vote for a woman running for president, just not that woman.

    Valid. For example, a friend of mine (initials JG) with Ohio roots, now living in Florida. JG is an independent who dislikes Trump but likes Biden. After Kamala’s “coronation” he posted on Instagram, “Trump 2024, I guess?”

    I immediately called JR to read him the riot act, reminding him that while he is a white man, he is still a gay man whose rights are threatened by the extremists Trump-Vance Project 2025 agenda. I made him promise to protect the legacy of the president he claims to admire by supporting the Democratic nominee.

    Will he keep his promise? I hope so, but I don’t trust him now either. This is what Kamala Harris is up against. Liberals are on a pro-Kamala high right now, but they should remember that what excites Seattle, San Francisco, Chicago, and New York may play differently elsewhere.

    I saw here where blacks skeptical of Kamala’s chances were called “defeatist.” It’s not defeatist that they don’t trust most white voters (and male voters of every ethnicity) on this. They have no reason to. I would love for the disproportionately white and gray electorates of the Upper Midwest and Arizona to show they are worthy of that trust. Watch the polls, and be mindful of a Bradley effect too.

    5
  39. Mimai says:

    @Jen:
    Yes, you are correct, multiple things can be true at once. Indeed, they often are.

    I just can’t shake the feeling that these are stories (interpretations) we apply. And that they are more beholden to the emotional climate (internal and shared) of the moment than to reality.

    Then again, I suppose that is one of the things that can be true alongside the others. Maybe.

    2
  40. Beth says:

    @Lounsbury:

    At least have the courage to call us all retards, since that what you clearly want to say. Demeaning autistic people in search of your high minded bullshit sucks and makes you look like an asshole. I stop reading your comments because for every nugget of useful thought/idea/argument I have to wade through fatuous nonsense.

    These are all repetition of the tone deaf Bohemian Bourgeoisie argumentaire that précisely mistakes macroeconomic averages at national for lived specific sub natational class experience. Microeconomic econometrics are showing (they always lag) that lower middle incomes in middle states did not experience Mr Biden’ s policies they way macro aggregate averages would lead you to understand.

    I am 46 years old. For a long as I can remember, since at least Regan, the GOP has been DEATH SHRIEKING about how inflation was going to kill us all. As far as I know, the US is vastly more wealthy than it was 46 years ago. It is next to impossible to fight that message since it’s absolute bullshit. You can dress up this argument any way you want, but it’s just lipstick on the GOP’s “inflation is going to kill us alll waaaaaaaaa we’re exactltly the same as Argentina!!!!!!!!”

    It’s so much easier to just lie and say, “Biden spent a dollar and that means inflation is out of control” than it is to discuss the issues of inflation realistically and honestly.

    8
  41. Beth says:

    @Mimai:

    I think it’s an absolute fallacy that emotion doesn’t play a part in everything humans do. I know that a lot of people have lied to themselves that they aren’t governed by emotions, but it’s true.

    5
  42. DK says:

    @Beth: He admitted yesterday he’s most here for lulz (aka trolling). He’s also not only not American and but barely spent any time in the US. In short, misinformed and not worth extra energy.

    4
  43. steve says:

    ” are showing (they always lag) that lower middle incomes in middle states did not experience Mr Biden’ s policies they way macro aggregate averages would lead you to understand.”

    Yes, but those people are largely not going to be convinced even if the numbers were good for them also. As noted above, they all believe crime is much worse even though it has improved a lot. For everyone else, some disaffected Dems for example, it’s important that they hear the truth.

    There was a nice study out just looking at inflation by geographic areas. It noted that inflation was mildly worse in core Trump states but it also noted that the impact of inflation was much worse in those states because income had not risen as fast in those states. There ought to be targeted messaging in those states noting that GOP policies that keep wages down are responsible for most fo the economic pain they are feeling. Probably too nuanced for a lot of people but maybe it hits with enough to make a difference.

    Steve

    2
  44. Just nutha ignint cracker says:

    @DK:

    If anyone knows of any specific and concrete series of actions Democrats should be taking that they’re not taking, I’m sure they’d be all ears.

    This!

    I and most black voters believe if someone comes for your family (Hillary, Biden) you cut the attackers’ heart out and eat it, you do not cede ground and abandon your people.

    And this, too! But I will note that “Fuck taking the high road” is not necessarily the same thing. Being king of the bottom feeders, head chrul, whatever, does not protect the ground or your people.

    Focus people!

    2
  45. Just nutha ignint cracker says:

    @Lounsbury:

    These are all repetition of the tone deaf Bohemian Bourgeoisie argumentaire that précisely mistakes macroeconomic averages at national for lived specific sub natational class experience. Microeconomic econometrics are showing (they always lag) that lower middle incomes in middle states did not experience Mr Biden’ s policies they way macro aggregate averages would lead you to understand.

    You get a “This!” too! But I will note that it’s not just the BoBos who repeat this argument. Conservatives make the same argument when they are in power.

    While I was in Korea, the spokesperson for Lee Myung-bak’s administration (the right-wing leader before Park Geun-hye tanked the right-wing party so badly that it had to change its name), used the same sort of economic growth argument, noting that it was unfortunate that the rising economic tide had not managed to raise the fortunes of those at the bottom of the economic ladder. It’s an old song and both sides sing it.

    2
  46. Just nutha ignint cracker says:

    @Beth:

    At least have the courage to call us all retards, since that what you clearly want to say. Demeaning autistic people in search of your high minded bullshit sucks and makes you look like an asshole. I stop reading your comments because for every nugget of useful thought/idea/argument I have to wade through fatuous nonsense.

    This! Especially this! WA!!! People are saying a lot of important, pointed things today. Good discussion, folks!

    6
  47. Just nutha ignint cracker says:

    @DK:

    He admitted yesterday he’s most here for lulz (aka trolling).

    Yes, that’s how I interpreted his statement to me yesterday, too. But since I, myself, was sort of trolling at the time, it seemed inappropriate to mention it. 😉 Thanks!

    1
  48. Just nutha ignint cracker says:

    [Caution: Grammar Alert!!!]

    Yes, but those people are largely not going to be convinced even if the numbers were good for them also.

    Because of the shift out of present tense in the second (subordinated by “even if”) clause, it’s possible to read this statement in the subjunctive mood rather than the indicative mood. This is important because subjunctive mood is used in statements considered contrary to fact. In this case, the contrary fact would be that the numbers are not good for them also. This is an important element in this statement because it relegates the first statement, “those people are not going to be convinced” [emphasis added] to hypothetical status. (Additionally, “those people” carries a pejorative tone in this type of conversation, but that’s a style/intent question.)

    The impact is that while it is true that those people (whoever they may be, and I may not be clear about who the writer means) are not going to be convinced, it’s also true that there is no reason for them to be convinced because the evidence doesn’t apply to their situation. A truly perplexing conundrum.

    I don’t know what the writer’s intention was (and am not particularly concerned for that matter), but I wanted to note the possibility of a very interesting Freudian slip (or Kinsley gaffe?). Grammar matters!

    I know that you think you understood what I said, but what you don’t realize is that what you heard is not what I meant. [emphasis added]

    2
  49. charontwo says:

    @DK:

    I would love for the disproportionately white and gray electorates of the Upper Midwest and Arizona to show they are worthy of that trust.

    Lots of 55+ developments like the Sun Cities that typically hold about twice as many Republicans as Democrats. But there is also a large and rapidly growing Mexican-American population that votes about like that of CA – heavily Democratic (unlike TX).

    The Navaho Nation votes well over 90% Democratic.- the Democrats won the Navaho’s in 2020 by about as many votes as they won the entire state of AZ.

    1
  50. Beth says:

    @DK:

    Yes. And he managed to hit, basically, two soft spots for me and I wasn’t going to let the first one pass. It was unnecessary and reflects poorly on him. I’m also with you that sometimes you just need to punch people in the face, physically or otherwise. I wish we could milkshake people over here, but there are way too many guns for that to be safe.

    The other soft spot for me is inflation. I have an almost irrational hatred of how inflation is used as some sort of boogyman to get out of doing things other than massive tax cuts for the rich. There always seems to be money for tax cuts and bombs, but nothing else. Also the absolute lying about it for at least the last 40 years has me on my last nerve. It’s way to easy to scare people, or outright lie to them about inflation and way to hard to explain the truth of either inflation or what’s actually happening.

    My partner does the shopping. A family sized box of cereal cost $9 this week. There is no way in hell that inflation alone is responsible for that.

    5
  51. DK says:

    @Beth: Agreed. I can’t stand the pretense inflation is magic — all due to ephemeral forces outside of corporate control — when it’s literally people deciding to raise prices, often when they’re already raking in profits.

    It also irritates me it took Americans until this year to figure out some corporations would lower some of their exhortatitant prices when we finally decided to stop paying them.

    We could force some prices down if we’d give up ourconsumerism, materialism, and overconsumption. Most will not.

    6
  52. reid says:

    @Beth: And the issue of inflation, like other things, is just a hammer to beat up Democrats with. Will it help Republicans win? Then conservatives will say it over and over until it’s accepted truth. Never mind the details, and never mind that voting for Trump is likely to only make that and everything else worse. Keep ’em in the bubble, keep ’em angry, and keep ’em voting R.

    1
  53. Michael Reynolds says:

    The vast majority of humans are not capable of much abstract thought. They are parochial in the extreme, generally indifferent to anything beyond their immediate family and friend group. What Republican media have been so effective at is convincing these same people that they are directly affected by things that have nothing to do with them or their lives. It’s easy when you can just lie to the credulous. So, people who live 500 miles from the Mexican border are convinced they’re being overrun by migrants. People who’ve never met a trans person are terrified of what they may do in a bathroom.

    Our response should not be to mimic that brainwashing approach, but to repeatedly lay out facts while not coming off like know-it-alls. @Lounsbury is right to point to our tendency to lecture, to condescend. Part of what I do for a living is explaining complex stuff like just war theory to nine year-olds. Or the need to understand and even empathize with an enemy. Or the way good people can be religious or non-religious, or move between those camps. Don’t play teacher. Don’t sound like some college sophomore who thinks he’s got all of human history down because he read half of a Will Durant book. When you explain, come from a place of humility.*

    It would also be helpful if we could empathize. “I can’t believe the price of bread, WTF, that’s gotta be tough when you have three growing kids. But it looks like that’s easing up a bit, and we’ll get through it.” Or even, “To tell you the truth some of the books kids get are not great for them at too young an age**, but we also have to be careful not to throw out the baby with the bathwater, because we all want our kids to read.”

    A great many people are a busted muffler away from losing their jobs. They have real fears, and they have Fox News fears. Acknowledge the real fears. Even low-info people know whether or not they can afford to pay the electric bill. That’s not something they just made up.

    Democrats have a hard time being humble or empathizing because we are defined by college. We are the snooty college kids talking down to the common clay. Humility and empathy*** are not what people learn at Harvard.

    *No, I don’t follow that advice here, this isn’t my job, I’m not getting paid to be humble.
    ** But it’s okay when I write them.
    *** Again, am I being paid to be empathetic here?

    4
  54. Kathy says:

    @Beth:
    @DK:

    I lived through inflation that peaked at around 150% in the mid-late 80s. It was quite bad, but not as bad as other economic crises, like the 1976, 1982, and 1994 peso devaluations. Two things that I recall the government did during the high inflation period was 1) indexed the minimum wage to the monthly inflation, and increased it every month. As all wages were related to the minimum wage, all wages rose that much monthly (I did payroll at the time. I saw it). 2) Pressed businesses to discount prices.

    But then, the Mexican government has more control over the economy than the US government (legacy of a mixed economy). And back then the PRI held absolute majorities. I forget the exact numbers, but the Congress pretty much was the president’s rubber stamp and cheering squad. The opinions, and actions, of cabinet heads mattered a lot more than the Congress.

    Now, when you get to the kind of inflation seen in Brazil or Argentina, among others, during the same period, measured in several hundreds %, things really get very bad.

    As far as I know, that has never been the case in the US. Here’s a table. What jumps out at me is the deflation during the Great Depression.

    There is no way in hell that inflation alone is responsible for that.

    Oh, no. there’s greed, too. Prices seldom come down, unless there’s 1) open competition, and 2) price volatility (these are my observations, not cosmic law). So, for instance, produce does fluctuate in price through the year. Partly because there are many producers (and produce can travel a lot farther than we assume), and partly because there are seasonal variations in availability throughout the year (volatility). Even so, the overall trend is upwards.

    Packaged goods and other processed items, tend to stay at whatever high water mark price inflation pushes them to, even if the production costs come down. there’s also the tactic of reducing the package amount, with or without an increase in nominal price. This is absolutely real and we’ve all seen it.

    But in the end, given moderate rates of inflation, what matters most is not how high prices are, but what one’s purchasing power is.

    2
  55. Jim Brown 32 says:

    @Jen: Messaging is only hard when you lack delivery to your target base. Large Democrat whale donors need to stop wasting money on national TV ads and BUY local media and billboard companies. They need to energize red counties with counter Messaging that makes rural residents question the value and competence of Republican governance monopolies.

    These people can’t stand their own politicians. However, if you trick them into believing their Putz is better than a lefty lunatic–the Putz wins.

    Dems use WW1 tactics in a WW2 fight. How’d that go for the French?

    1
  56. Beth says:

    That table makes me angrier about all this inflation bs. For the last 46 years, with what, 3 exceptions it’s been remarkably stable and just about on target. The rest of it is just BS and lies.

    I’m sure there is some number between 18.1% our highest and 150% that is actually bad. I’ll admit that I don’t know what that number is. But, let’s be honest, based on the vibes that the GOP has been putting out for the last 46 years (high was 13% in 1979) you’d have thought the inflation rate was like 30-40%

    Also, that you for this, I’m going to send it to my crypto idiot friend that I was fighting with about this yesterday.

    2
  57. Kathy says:

    @Beth:

    People suck at estimates, especially if you show them a BIG number.

    For instance, NASA receives about 0.5% of the US budget, which comes to around $20-25 billion. A huge number. but the military takes 13% of the budget, or over $600 billion. A much huger number.

    If NASA got a trillion dollars a year, we’d have five stars hotels on Mars, and luxury cruises to the rings of Saturn. That would be approx 25%, which is what apparently many people believe is NASA’s share of the budget.

    The very big downside of inflation is that the central bank, the Fed in the US, tends to raise interest rates to tighten the money supply by making borrowing more expensive. This sounds very abstract, until you see your credit card bill and check the interest on the balance due. A lot of people have credit card debt for various reasons. It might also affect mortgages and other loans as well, if the interest isn’t fixed.

    I wonder we don’t hear much about this. Paying more in interest does hit one’s purchasing power. Between this and price inflation, it can eat up any gains in wages and other earnings.

    2
  58. Mimai says:

    @Beth:
    Hard agree! My soft rule is that emotions should always be attended to and sometimes believed.

    1
  59. Beth says:

    I get a strong sense that this article was held back until after Biden dropped out. Mostly just vibes, but check it out.

    https://slate.com/news-and-politics/2024/07/biden-economy-employment-inflation.html

    1
  60. just nutha says:

    @Beth: I get why the author wants to believe his thesis. Alas, even with full employment, many people in many places are still not making enough to make rent and groceries. Not a majority by any means, but too many to write them off as outliers.

    1
  61. Gustopher says:

    @Beth: from the linky:

    Biden’s labor market has more than compensated for rising household costs.

    I can guarantee that wages have not risen uniformly for everyone, even if the average or median wage is up more than inflation.

    There are a lot of winners and losers when there’s rapid changes.

    Quickly checked and the 2023 inflation rate was 4.1%, SS COLA for 2024 was 3.2% and Medicare premiums up 6%. So, that’s a pretty big group of losers right there.

    Toss in people with bigger rent increases (this varies widely by area), and that’s a lot more people doing worse.

    And wages aren’t indexed to inflation, so some people haven’t gotten raises that match inflation, but also haven’t fallen behind so far that they feel they have to get a different job.

    And, to the people losing out, the statements that the economy is doing great ring hollow, and even seem like complete lies.

    My nuance-loving brain would like the Harris campaign to be stressing that the economy in general is doing well, but unevenly, and that a major focus of her administration would be to lift up the people who have fallen behind through X, Y and Z.

    I doubt that my nuance loving brain is great at messaging to people who don’t have time or patience for nuance. But, there needs to be a message that doesn’t sound like gaslighting.

    1
  62. anjin-san says:

    @Beth:

    A woman I’ve know since 1967 blocked me on Facebook because I would not agree with her that inflation in the US has been running at 20%.