The Republican vice-presidential candidate, Senator J.D. Vance, has called upon President Biden to relinquish his presidential duties given significant whispers among Democrats regarding Biden’s cognitive aptitude prompting him to halt his reelection campaign. Vance, who gained his vice-presidential nominee status from former President Trump in the initial days of the Republican National Convention recently, proposes a perspective drawn from the current political predicament. Arguing on a common public platform, ‘X’, Vance deliberates that should Biden’s competency be in question for running for presidency, it should also naturally bring his current position as the president under similar scrutiny. ‘Any call towards Biden terminating his run without the demand of his immediate resignation mirrors immense cynicism’, Vance expressed on the ‘X’ platform.
Backing his stance further, Vance asserts, ‘If one’s fitness to run for presidency is questioned, then the ability to serve should also face equal doubts. A timely resignation from Biden seems to be the wise path here.’ Contrary to this, President Biden, in an address made in July, plans to honor his presidential term until its end on January 20, 2025. The unfolding political drama grows with former President Trump gaining an endorsement for the presidential race from Robert F. Kennedy Jr., a move that creates a challenging predicament for Vice President Kamala Harris.
Kennedy Jr., though an independent contender, possessed an approximate 5% national support. In an intense competition between the two primary opponents, this modest percentage could turn out to be the decisive factor for the presidency. ‘Supporters of Kennedy, predominantly leaning to the left, have majorly shifted their allegiances to Harris’, opines Dave Wasserman from the Cook Political Report in a conversation with The Post. ‘This unexpected turn of events could potentially facilitate Trump with a beneficial advantage.’, he noted.
The situation might not seem significant at a macro level, but Wasserman suggests otherwise. ‘Our polls conducted in August depict a fractional incline towards Trump in battleground states’, he adds. He argues that it’s possible for this slight percentage change to sway the election given the close margins at stake, particularly in states like Arizona and Georgia. He stresses, ‘Given the narrow margins, campaigns tend to expend millions in effort to capture such fractional point differences.’
Although Kennedy’s endorsement to Trump might seem beneficial, it’s improbable all of Kennedy’s support would swing to Trump. ‘The current political climate is extremely fickle and the same is expected to continue till elections’, he said. Chris Lane, a pollster at Cygnal, weighs in on the situation stating, ‘A substantial 16% swing voters initially expressed their support Kennedy. Given the paper-thin margins in battleground states, this percentage could very well prove to be the difference between a victory and a loss.’
He further explained, ‘If Kennedy puts his weight behind Trump and encourages his supporters to follow suit, it could create a significant impact, altering election strategies for both Trump and Harris, especially in crucial states.’ Lane added, ‘The inclination of these 16% voters seems to be more towards the center-right, favoring Trump’s share in the ballots.’ According to Cygnal data, these swing voters were four times as likely to identify themselves as conservatives over liberals.
Frank Luntz, known for his unfavorable views towards Trump, surprisingly acknowledged the potential impact of RFK’s endorsement. He believes it could play a pivotal role in deciding the election outcome. He said, ‘This endorsement could easily result in an additional 1% swing towards Trump, which could be monumental, especially in swing states. The reason Kennedy had gained an upwards of 10% support was, primarily, due to votes diverted from Biden. Now, with Biden out of the race and Harris stepping in, the support for Kennedy has plunged to just about 4 to 5%. What is left now is largely a pro-Trump vote.’
Luntz, during his appearance on NewsNation post the endorsement, further commented, ‘Few of Kennedy’s supporters might choose to remain passive in November. However, in a ratio of two to one, the active ones are likely to choose Trump over Harris, adding to the 1% swing towards Trump. This slight margin could very well alter the outcome in important states like Pennsylvania, Michigan, and Wisconsin.’
Luntz also went on to criticize the media’s reaction to the Kennedy endorsement. He inferred, ‘Had the endorsement gone towards Harris, Kennedy would have been hailed as a hero. However, because he endorsed Trump, the reporters are downplaying his decision. It’s essential for us to be cautious in such a critical time of the election period as personal bias might sway the motivations of the information providers.’
Scott Rasmussen, the founder of Rasmussen Reports, reflected that the recent poll data shows a minor advantage swinging towards the former President. ‘The recent RMG Research polls for the Napolitan Institute showed that Harris leads by a margin of 2%, with a 48% to 46% division and with RFK taking simple 3% share. Yet, when RFK voters were pushed to choose, the race ended up tied at 49% each’, he stated.
While this suggests a minor edge for Trump, Rasmussen cautioned that factors such as debate performance and economic trends could carry a greater impact on the final race outcome. He proposed, ‘In recent times, it’s become common to see the Electoral College winner emerging from just a smattering of votes from a handful of swing states.’ According to him, ‘If the same scenario repeats this time around, even a slight shift in RFK voters could prove highly influential.’