The battle for the presidential seat continues to remain neck-and-neck between the former President Donald Trump and Kamala Harris, with the final countdown underway as polling hours draw near across Muskingum County and the nation whole. Surveys reveal an unnervingly close competition where former President Trump and Vice President Kamala Harris are essentially gridlocked, as they race to influence any ambivalent voters with their closing arguments. National polls depict a scenario too volatile to forecast, with an unusual twist of Harris managing to outdo Trump in Iowa – an area discounted by both parties from the presidential race. Given the frantic efforts to cross the finish line, Trump is seen darting to four rallies in key swing states, with a start in North Carolina and two subsequent stops in Pennsylvania before ending the day in Michigan.
But Kamala Harris has chosen to wind up her campaign in Pennsylvania by organizing rallies in Philadelphia and Pittsburgh and crowning it off with a concert in Allentown. Monday’s tracking poll paints a picture of both candidates at equal footing, each capturing 48% of the popular vote. The survey, conducted from Friday to Sunday, reveals an alarming tie with the election just hours away. The poll’s margin of error stands at 2.7 percentage points. Pertinently, a 6% vote bank remains wavering in their choice, magnifying the importance of each ensuing moment as the election draws nearer.
A Sunday poll release offers a slightly better scenario for Harris , leading Trump by a small, arguably insignificant margin of 3 percentage points. The survey studied the preferences of 2,267 likely voters, eventually leading to a result of 49%-46% in favor of Harris just one day before elections. The poll was orchestrated between Tuesday and Friday, confirming Harris’s lead to be beyond the 2 points margin for potential error.
On the other hand, Harris and Trump were at a deadlock in another poll published the same Sunday, both amassing support from 49% of the registered voters. The questionnaire conducted from Wednesday to Saturday revealed an unsettling tie between the two contenders among the 1,000 voters polled. An uncertainty margin of 3.1 percentage points was allowed.
A final poll was also published on Sunday, indicating a slight lead by Harris over Trump, with a marginal 2 percentage point difference. The poll included a broad sample of 8,918 likely voters, which conveyed the vice president leading the former president by a score of 49%-47%, which is outside the realm of a 1-point margin of error.
Yet another poll completed over the last Sunday expressed a deadlock once again, with both Harris and Trump nabbing an equally divided 49% support of the likely voters. This group of 1,000 voters, when asked about their expectations, predicted a close victory for Trump at 50% against Harris at 49%. This poll too maintained a margin of error at 3 percentage points.
Interestingly, despite Harris commanding a fragile lead in most polls, a slight rise in favorability ratings for Harris over Trump does not seem to be reflecting in the overall polling equations. As per the latest figures, around 50% respondents reported to harbor positive views about Harris as against 48% for Trump.
However, it’s hard to overlook the lack of substance within such ‘favorability ratings’, which more often than not are based on superficial charm rather than concrete policy-based decisions. When stripped of glamour and faced with hard facts, it quickly becomes questionable how a presidency under Harris would impact ordinary citizens considering her record and proposed policies.
The repeated lead of Harris in the polls could easily be perceived as a negative reflection on our democratic structure. Granted, polling is a necessary and useful tool in predicting election outcomes. However, a consistently erratic or biased polling methodology can distort our perception of reality and the state of our democracy.
As for the issues of concern to voters, it does not come as a surprise that the economy tops those lists at 40%, followed by immigration concerns at 17%, threats to democracy at 16%, questions on abortion access at 7% and healthcare issues at 5%. But, maybe the polls are misleading, and the real concerns of the average American are not accurately reflected.
There seems to be a general consensus that the welfare of the economy directly equates to their individual prosperity, making it the chief subject of concern. But are these poll makers really paying attention to what the public is trying to communicate? Can they genuinely gauge the nuances of public sentiment based purely on artificial numerical data?
The skewed reflections of polls have led to spotlighting issues like immigration, threats to our democracy, abortion, and healthcare – but how much of these are genuinely representative of American concerns remains questionable, especially when pushed by a Harris campaign.
Ultimately, while the last few hours of this election race and the resulting outcome is uncertain, everyday Americans continue to struggle with much more than what is often falsely represented in polls. Harris’ fleeting leads, the negligible favorability ratings, and the highlighted issues, mask the reality and perhaps deflect from a closer scrutiny of her actual policies and their implications on the public. What’s certain is that the citizens continue to wrestle with real-life issues while these political giants lock horns in the race for the presidency.