About Vice President Kamala Harris's run for the Presidency, The Wall Street Journal writes: "In a poll released this week, Blueprint found that messages centered on bringing down the cost of groceries and protecting Social Security and Medicare are most likely to persuade undecided voters.
"But the Harris campaign’s focus on what it sees as Trump’s threat to democracy isn’t necessarily a waste of time. Roth Smith [Blueprint analyst] said the message energizes Harris’s base and potentially draws in Republican or Republican-leaning voters who are skeptical of Trump. Blueprint estimates that 5% to 10% of the Republican coalition could be persuaded to vote for Harris."
That last sentence seems to say that calling Trump a fascist will peel off up to a tenth of Republicans. It is clearly an editor's error. Blueprint actually said this: "Plurality of swing state voters say Hitler comparison is good reason to vote against Trump, policy still better.....
"Harris cannot win with a message that is only about Trump's threat, as our swing state poll indicates that it is even more important for Harris to highlight her economic policies and Democratic home runs on Social Security and Medicare while letting the media focus on the danger of another Trump presidency."
Harris' decision to run on the Kelly quote, then, may backfire. It enables Trump to paint her as a wild-eyed radical liberal, as he did at Madison Square Gardens. I say this although I agree that Trump is a fascist, at least by the historical definition of someone who seeks to destroy political opponents with illegal or violent means.
Blueprint defined the "swing voter" as someone who was undecided about the Presidential candidates; or who had switched from one party to the other since 2020; or was an independent who either split votes between Democrats and Republicans or was favorable or unfavorable towards both candidates.
In the seven swing states, it interviewed 3,623 voters, 757 of whom were swing voters. "57% of all swing state voters have heard about Kelly's comments regarding Trump's admiration for dictators, with 47% considering it a good reason to vote against Trump--36% of whom say it is 'a very good reason to vote against Trump'....33% of all voters say it is a bad reason to vote against Trump, and 20% don't know." [ https://blueprint2024.com ]
Games and gains
Note that although 47% of respondents think Kelly's remarks a good reason to vote against Trump, 33% say it is a bad reason. It is possible that by running on the remarks, Harris will drive towards Trump almost as many votes as she gains.
The maximum net gain is 14% (47% - 33%), about one of seven undecided voters. But the respondents valued policy more than the Kelly remarks. So the maximum net gain due to the Kelly remarks is no more than 6%. Moreover, not all undecided voters will vote. Perhaps half will. The maximum net gain from campaigning on Kelly's remarks is down to 3% of undecided voters in swing states. And my calculations assume no strategic response by Trump. So Harris might well lose votes on net if she emphasizes the "fascist" remarks.
And I have not even taken into account the margin of error. That 47% of the sample considered a vote against Trump need not mean that 47% of all undecided voters will. Blueprint said the margin of error was +/- 1.9%. It did not explain how it came up with the same margin of error for subsamples of various sizes. As a rule, the margin of error is larger for smaller samples because they contain less information. Running against Adolph has its complications. -- Leon Taylor, Seymour, Indiana USA tayloralmaty@gmail.com
Notes
For useful comments, I thank but do not implicate Annabel Benson.
References
No comments:
Post a Comment