A crack in Kamala's blue wall?

We’re two weeks from Election Day, and it feels like the range of possible outcomes has become limited to a narrow win by Kamala Harris or a narrow win by Donald Trump. The coast-to-coast Republican comeuppance for the sins of the Trump era that Democrats so desperately want is not going to arrive.

Could all seven swing states break in favor of the same candidate? Sure, but it’s not particularly likely. I can hear someone saying right now, “Last cycle Biden won Georgia, Arizona, and Wisconsin by less than 1 percent; Pennsylvania by less than 2 percent; and Nevada by less than 2.4 percent!” Yes, but last cycle Trump won North Carolina by 1.3 percent and Florida by about 3 percent. (It’s always easier to remember the close ones that slipped away.) A 6-1 split or a 5-2 split among the seven key swing states feels more plausible than a 7-0 sweep.

This morning, NBC News reports that the high command of the Harris campaign sees the same numbers the rest of us do, and is increasingly worried about “a possible crack in the blue wall”:

With just 14 days until the Nov. 5 election, there are concerns within Kamala Harris’ campaign about whether the vice president can claim all three states.

Recent discussions have centered on the possibility of an anomaly happening this year with just part of the blue wall breaking its way. The conversations have focused on whether Michigan or Wisconsin “fall” to former President Donald Trump while the two other states go blue, according to three sources with knowledge of the campaign’s strategy. . . .

“There has been a thought that maybe Michigan or Wisconsin will fall off,” said a senior Harris campaign official, who stressed that the bigger concern is over Michigan. Two other people with knowledge of campaign strategy — who, like others in this article, were granted anonymity to speak candidly — also underscored deep concern about Michigan. Those people still believe that all the states are close and that there are alternative routes to victory.

NBC reports the Harris campaign is also quietly lowering expectations for one of the non-blue-wall swing states:

While North Carolina is still in the campaign’s sights and Democrats maintain strong organization and leadership there, the Harris team is far less bullish about victory, four people with knowledge of the dynamics said.

“Of all of the seven [states], that one seems to be a little bit slipping away,” the Harris campaign official said of North Carolina.

Note that Hurricane Helene probably won’t be a major factor in turnout in the western portion of the state.

As of this writing, Trump is currently ahead in all the swing states in the RealClearPolitics average, but his largest leads are in Arizona and Georgia, both at 1.8 percentage points. His smallest lead is in Wisconsin, at four-tenths of a percentage point.

You don’t have to look far to find Democrats who believe polling averages are being skewed by Republican polling firms that are putting out numbers that overestimate GOP turnout, and that there’s a concerted effort by GOP-aligned pollsters to “flood the zone” and improve Republican morale and depress Democrats.

Writing at Nate Silver’s Silver Bulletin newsletter, Eli McKown-Dawson is skeptical of that theory:

The polling averages say pretty much the same thing, regardless of which polls they choose to include or exclude. Nationally and in the battleground states, the biggest difference in Harris-Trump margin between the Silver Bulletin average and averages from 538, Split Ticket, The New York Times, and VoteHub is 0.5 points. In Pennsylvania — the likeliest tipping point state — our average is Harris +0.6. Split Ticket has the race as Harris +1, 538 has it as Harris +0.7, VoteHub has it as Harris +0.7, and The New York Times has Harris up by less than 1 point. . . .

Because we’re all weighting and adjusting the polls in reasonable ways, we all end up in about the same place.

You don’t like the RCP numbers? As of this morning, over in the 538 poll averages, Trump leads Arizona by 1.9 percentage points, Georgia by 1.5 percentage points, North Carolina by three-tenths of a percentage point, and Pennsylvania by three-tenths of a percentage point. Harris leads Michigan by two-tenths of a percentage point, Nevada by three-tenths of a percentage point, and Wisconsin by three-tenths of a percentage point,

Okay, you don’t like the 538 numbers? Over on VoteHub, they put together the polls for the last 28 days. Over there, Harris leads Wisconsin by eight-tenths of a percentage point and Pennsylvania by five-tenths of a percentage point. Trump leads Michigan by one-tenth of a percentage point, Nevada by two-tenths of a percentage point, North Carolina by three-tenths of a percentage point, Georgia by seven-tenths of a percentage point, and Arizona by what’s a comparative “landslide” at 1.4 percentage point.

Any way you slice it, any way you look at it, you almost never see either Trump or Harris with a lead outside of the margin of error in one of these seven swing states. (Emphasis on almost, see below.) There is not a vast conspiracy to persuade you that this race is close; the race, at least at this moment, is actually close.

This morning, the Atlanta Journal-Constitution released its latest poll of likely voters, and found “the Republican nominee has a lead of 47 percent to 43 percent over Harris, just outside the poll’s margin of error of 3.1 percentage points. But with 8 percent of likely voters indicating they’re still undecided, the race could break either way as early voting enters its second week.” Note 1 percent answered, “other candidate.”

Sure, the race in Georgia could break either way, but let’s assume the electorate of the Peach State really is currently split in favor of Trump, 47 percent to 43 percent. To emerge on top, Harris would need all of that remaining 8 percent to show up and vote, and to split six-to-two, or 75-25, in her favor. That’s a really tall order.

The smaller your pool of undecided voters gets, the more heavily that pool must break in favor of the underdog candidate in order to overcome the established lead.

If you’re reading this blog, you’re likely into politics or follow the news closely, which means you and the typical remaining undecided voter have exceptionally little in common (at least in this aspect of your life). This autumn, you’ve heard a lot of jokes about the remaining undecided voters and what more they could possibly need to see. The remaining undecided voters are extremely detached from politics, the news, and the government. Last month, the Annenberg Center at the University of Pennsylvania released an extremely depressing update to its annual survey:

The 2024 edition of the Annenberg Constitution Day Civics Survey, released annually to celebrate Constitution Day on September 17, finds that:

Nearly two-thirds of Americans (65%) can name all three branches of government.

Asked what specific rights are guaranteed by the First Amendment, nearly three-quarters of respondents (74%) name freedom of speech. The other four rights are recalled by far fewer people: the second most-often cited, freedom of religion, is named by just 39%.

A little over half of U.S. adults know which party controls the Senate and which controls the House of Representatives.

The remaining undecided voters barely think about politics or government unless it’s very close to Election Day. And they may well not vote at all.

The race has been roughly tied since mid August, but I suspect to many Democrats, that feels like a loss. They had their hearts set on a sweeping defeat that would defenestrate Trumpism once and for all.