A DISTANT LAND: "How Could the Election Be This Close?"

TUESDAY, OCTOBER 15, 2024

Bret Stephens tries to explain: Will Candidate Harris win next month's election?

At this point, there's no way to know. 

Is she even ahead at this point? That's unknowable also!

On this morning's Morning Joe, the usual pundits began pushing back against the recent appearance that Harris's numbers have slid a bit in the nationwide polling.

Late in the 6 o'clock hour, an indignant John Heilemann insisted that "the race is tied, statistically." But in the limited sense that Heilemann's statement is true, that doesn't mean that the race is tied out there in reality—or in the electoral college. 

It's widely assumed that, under current arrangements, a tie election in the nationwide vote goes to the Republican candidate in the electoral college. It's widely assumed that Candidate Harris may have to win the nationwide vote by as much as four points to be able to win in the college.

That's one possible source of gloom for those of us in Blue America. This morning, in his weekly conversation with Gail Collins, Bret Stephens—he won't be voting for Candidate Trump—cites a second possible problem:

Three Weeks to Go, and That’s All Anyone Is Sure Of

[...]

I sense she isn’t closing the sale. At this point, we should assume that Donald Trump has a secret three- or even four-percentage-point advantage in the states that the polls are missing, just as they did when he ran in 2016 and 2020.

At least as things appear at this point, a certain limited number of states will end up deciding the electoral college. Is it possible that Candidate Trump will outperform his current polling numbers in those battleground states?

Will there be a hidden vote for Candidate Trump—a hidden vote the polls are missing? We don't have the slightest idea! There's zero way to know such things—and there' no way to know, with absolute certainty, that the race is currently "tied."

Either candidate could end up winning—and ten of millions of neighbors and friends are going to vote for Candidate Trump. For many of us in Blue America, those tens of millions of fellow citizens seem to live "in a distant land." 

As we laid it out yesterday, we're making a play on Thoreau's turn of phrase. But we'll be employing that evocative turn of phrase in several ways this week.

Fuller disclosure! In last week's Conversation,  Stephens and Collins started by pondering a familiar type of question. It's a type of question those of us in Blue America have been asking at least since 1988, when Saturday Night Live's version of Candidate Dukakis couldn't believe that he was "losing to this guy."

Below, you see the start of last week's Conversation. In our view, the headline speaks to a certain shortcoming which exists right here in Blue America, where the smartest and best people live:

How Could the Election Be This Close?

Bret Stephens: Gail, why isn’t Kamala Harris running away with the election? The race in the battleground states is basically a tie, despite Harris spending three times as much money as Donald Trump and having a much bigger ground game—and despite Trump putting in a terrible debate performance and generally making a spectacle of himself, or worse, every time he opens his mouth.

Gail Collins: Hmm. I guess I should refrain from pointing out that I’m being asked that question by a person who has yet to commit to voting for Harris himself.

Bret: Much as I love to inflate my importance, I think I’m more of a symptom of Harris’s problems than the cause.

How can the election be this close, that plaintive headline asked. Stephens began to answer that question last week—but in this morning's Conversation, he lays it right on the line in a fuller discussion of what may be holding Candidate Harris back.

Warning! We don't exactly think Stephens is wrong in the critique he offers today! In a bit of foreshadowing, this week's rumination on the election starts with this:

Three Weeks to Go, and That’s All Anyone Is Sure Of

[...]

Bret: Switching topics: Gail, any thoughts on Harris’s media tour?

Gail: Seemed to go pretty well. No signs that she’s going to be a sensational presidential conversationalist, but she seemed pleasant, well prepared and not nuts, like some candidates I could mention.

What did you think?

No signs that she’s going to be a sensational presidential conversationalist? In that slightly snarky disclaimer, even Collins seems to suggest that last week's "media tour" wasn't a giant success.

As the exchange continues, Collins keeps putting the best face on things. Eventually, Stephens makes a simple, direct assessment—and we can't exactly say that he's just totally wrong:

Bret (continuing directly): I’m glad she put herself out in front of at least one real journalist, Bill Whitaker of “60 Minutes,” who pitched no softballs and didn’t let her off the hook when she tried to evade certain questions, as she so often does.

Gail: Well, sometimes does.

Bret: On the other hand, I can’t believe she had no real answer to a question about what she’d do differently from President Biden, when he’s one of the most unpopular incumbents in recent history. And she generally gives the impression of someone who is either trying to hide her real views or hide the fact that she doesn’t have real views.

She’s just not a great candidate, which was my worry about her all along. And I sense she isn’t closing the sale. At this point, we should assume that Donald Trump has a secret three- or even four-percentage-point advantage in the states that the polls are missing, just as they did when he ran in 2016 and 2020. 

"She’s just not a great candidate," Stephens says.  With that, a full disclosure:

In our view, Candidate Trump is, by far, the worst general election candidate in modern American history. But we can't say that Stephens is totally wrong about Candidate Harris, whether in that initial assessment or in what follows

Gail (continuing directly): Have to admit I’m worried about the apparent lack of enthusiasm among Black and Hispanic men. Barack Obama did a good job tackling that problem in a recent speech, but we need a lot more politicians and celebrities to speak out. Enthusiastically.

Bret: Maybe Harris should do more to help herself. She has two big problems: A lot of voters, including me, fear she isn’t really up to the job, which could be the reason she’s mostly avoided tough interviews.

Gail: Hey, she’s getting better at that.

Bret: If you say so. She also hasn’t really articulated why she wants the job or what she means to do as president, other than to be a kind of consensus seeker. My advice—and I realize she’s not asking for my advice—is a town-hall event in front of an audience of undecided voters that dispels this impression and offers her vision for the country. That would be a good place to start, assuming that vision is more than just a list of wan liberal talking points and vague references to “my plan.”

So said Stephens, whenever this piece was composed. For ourselves, we would offer this:

From the beginning, we've stressed the fact that Candidate Harris has faced a major disadvantage, given the way she had to enter the race very late in the game, from a standing start.

That would have been a major challenge for any presidential candidate, but we have to admit that we agree with much of what Stephens has said. To some extent, we'd say that Collins may also agree, if only in secret, based on that original statement.

In our view, Candidate Harris delivers a sensational speech. That said, among major politicians on the national stage, she has proven to be remarkably limited when it comes to answering even the most basic questions.

Stephens is right! She didn't serve herself well last week with her answers to questions about how she differs from President Biden, or with her refusal to answer Whitaker's thrice-told question about the southern border. 

That doesn't mean that Harris couldn't turn out to be the best president we ever had. But if we're wondering why her numbers seemed to go sideways last week, that may be part of the answer.

In our view, Candidate Trump is almost surely the worst candidate who ever sought the office. That said, tens of millions of neighbors and friends don't see things that way.

It doesn't help when we the people of Blue America put our tribal blinders on and refuse to see the possible reasons why some people won't be voting our way this year. In our view, there are quite a few possible reasons for such a vote.

We ourselves don't agree with such assessments. But we're talking about possible reasons which are neither crazy nor strange.

We inhabitants of Blue America are frequently quick to say that the people who are voting for Trump have chosen to block out reality. In many instances, that may be true—but it doesn't help our tribe, or the nation or the world, when we refuse to see the reasons which may be driving some Red American voters.

For many of us in Blue America, people who are voting for Trump seem to live in "a distant land." We then turn to our most unflattering Storylines to explain why those otherized people would decide to do such a thing.

In fact, there are quite a few "distant lands" operating in this year's election landscape as our faltering nation continues to slide toward the sea. We'll be exploring several of those "distant lands" as the week proceeds. 

As of Sunday night, it looks like Candidate Harris has decided to come out swinging much harder. We think that's a very good decision, and we hope she succeeds.

"I sense she isn't closing the sale," Stephens says in today's Conversation. In that same Conversation, he trashes Kari Lake and Ted Cruz and also Bernie Moreno. He expresses his admiration for Sherrod Brown and for Ruben Gallego. He says how much we as a nation gain from Haitian immigrants.

He takes Blue America's side in all those matters. That said, we can't say that his short-term assessments of Candidate Harris are just totally wrong. 

Her problems will of course only begin when she actually wins this race. Given our view of Candidate Trump, we can only hope that she succeeds, in a major way, over the next three weeks.

Tomorrow: Exploring another type of "distant land"