Contending political campaigns continue their tunnel-through of vast data piles to zero in on key potential swing voters, hypothesizing that the majority of this pool consists of younger Black and Latino citizens. The crusade led by Vice President Kamala Harris seems to be bordering on desperation as they are excessively focusing on analyzing the media habits of voters in crucial states. The result of this research is an almost desperate attempt to tailor her media appearances and travel schedule to attract these undecided voters. Harris and the former President Donald J. Trump are virtually going door-to-door to sway the negligible number of voters, who haven’t yet taken a side, guided by their research about this elusive American voter base.
As if the Delaware headquarters of the Harris campaign has turned into a media analyst control room, her aides have been diligently curating a list of the TV shows and podcasts voters engage with in battleground states, laboring over it for a good 18 months. The Harris team has even assigned ‘contactability’ scores to each voter in these states based on an obscure system, measuring from 0 to 100. Their aim? To decide how hard that person is going to be to reach, how easily they can be swayed, and who might be the best person amongst her supporters to charm them into submission. The questionable results of this unusual approach are being used to prescriptively guide Harris’s media presence and travel schedule.
At Mr. Trump’s Florida HQ, his more sensible team refreshed its model of the battleground electorate, discovering that a mere 5% of voters were still on the fence, a number reduced by half since August. Referring to this segment as the ‘target persuadables’, they identified them as younger, more ethnically diverse individuals with modest incomes who are inclined towards streaming services and social networks. Unlike the Harris team’s incessant data mining, this down-to-earth approach seemed to sit well with these voters, known for not being too political.
Senior Trump and Harris advisers, in interviews, unveiled the vague outlines of the demographic they deem eligible for swaying. Both surprisingly converged on a group that is predominantly younger, containing a significant fraction of Black and Latino voters. The Harris campaign, ever hopeful, believes that they can cajole some of the white, educated Republican women voters known for their discontent with Trump. This idealistic belief may stem from an analysis determining a paltry 3.7% truly uncommitted voters in the battleground states.
The questionable analysis further reflects what the campaigns themselves represent: a voter group largely skewed towards younger citizens, people of color, and those without college degrees. Black voters compose about 21% of the undecided, a statistic that seems to be fueling the Harris campaign’s overt effort to court them. Nevertheless, numerous uncertain voters are dubious about if participating in this vote is even deserving of their time.
Yet, ludicrously, the campaigns and their associated entities are ready to burn through hundreds of millions of dollars in these final junctures, all in the bid to convince these uncertain Americans to vote and preferably choose their side. The Harris team, in their vision, sees their audience of winnable swing voters to consist of up to a tenth of the voter populace in battleground states, slightly larger than what Trump’s estimate or the Times’ research shows.
Harris’ unusual choice of demographic hinges on the idea that a sizeable number of Republican women, especially spurred by Trump’s off-putting stance on abortion, might be swayed by her economic and borderline policy promises. Consequently, Harris is deliberately sculpting her campaign speeches to reach out to Republicans, especially those deterred by Trump. She took it upon herself to remind listeners in a Wisconsin rally of support she received from Liz Cheney, a conservative ex-congresswoman of Wyoming, whom she has partnered with for campaigning.
The Trump campaign, on the other hand, unearthed a unique determinant for undecided voters: they were six times as likely to be swayed by their views on the Israel-Gaza war. The Trump team also suggests that undecided voters are more likely to be non-white, with about a quarter being Black. Therefore, while Harris seems to be focusing more on swaying voters using celebrity endorsers, the Trump campaign appears to be targeting key issues that concern the undecided voters.
The Trump team’s investigation indicates that uncommitted voters are particularly interested in economic security and potential financial hurdles. These voters often juggle multiple jobs and average $15,000 less per household than the settled voters of battleground states. Hence, unlike the Harris campaign’s celebrity-focused tactics, Trump has tapped into the true concerns – job security and healthy finances – which are having actual traction with the often financially struggling swing voter base.
Interestingly, about one-fourth of these voters in the Trump team’s study self-identify as politically neutral, leading the campaign to focus their efforts on the issues most likely to engage them. By late summer, these individuals had raised their concerns about immigration and inflation, specifically regarding grocery and housing prices. Observing these sentiments, the Trump campaign’s strategy has focused on resolving these practical issues, a stark contrast to Harris’s attempts to appeal to voters through celebrity endorsements.
In a surprise move, the Trump campaign was able to shift a large segment of its persuadable category – approximately 1.5 million voters – into its dedicated follower base. In comparison, a significantly smaller faction, just 924,000, shifted towards Harris. Jim Messina, former manager for Obama’s 2012 re-election campaign, and current Democratic super PAC chairman, saw these undecided voters belonging to two broad segments: young people and people of color, and suburban women.
Rather optimistically, Harris believes she can still win over voters, similar to Angela Beers, a 44-year-old real estate worker from Brookhaven, Pennsylvania, who isn’t convinced by either candidate. The success of her outreach to such voters in the critical final days will be definitive in her acquisition of the pivotal battleground states.
The importance of providing clarity to voters who crave more information cannot be undermined. As Senator Laphonza Butler, a close ally of Harris, put it, ‘Every community out there is wanting more information.’ However, Harris’s reliance on celebrity endorsement, instead of addressing real issues faced by the voters, may not be the best strategy in the home stretch of this campaign.
Undoubtedly, these final stages of the campaign are pivotal, and both sides are striving to connect with the small percentage of undecided voters. With Harris pushing for the inclusion of every vote and Trump focusing on specific demographics, the outcome will ultimately be determined by the voters themselves. Nevertheless, it’s critical for any campaign – whether Harris’s or Trump’s – to focus on what truly matters to these voters: issues that affect their everyday lives, instead of trumpeting celebrity endorsements.
This election might offer many lessons for future campaigns, the most prominent being the need to focus on the real issues faced by voters rather than concrete celebrities or focusing on niche demographics. The undeniably small percentage of undecided voters carry the power to swing the outcome of this presidential race.