Kamala Harris Is Running Hard, So Why Isn't She Getting Anywhere? | Opinion

 

For Democrats, the 2024 campaign is starting to feel like that pivotal moment in *Star Wars* when the heroes are trapped by the Death Star’s tractor beam—no matter how hard they try, they can't seem to break free. Despite a relentless push, they seem to be stuck in place, even though their campaign engines are running at full throttle.

Consider how much effort the Democrats are pouring into the race. On digital platforms, Vice President Kamala Harris enjoys a massive communication advantage over former President Donald Trump, with ratios ranging from 3:1 to an astounding 16:1. Additionally, Democrats are dominating TV ads, airing 117,000 more ads than Republicans in September alone.

Harris’ campaign is checking all the traditional boxes for electoral success. She’s raised a staggering $1 billion since entering the race, allowing her to flood every swing state with campaign materials. The sheer scale of her operation—three times the size of Trump’s—is powered by an army of volunteers making phone calls, sending postcards, and distributing campaign swag. This has left Republicans worried about how outmatched they are.

So, is Harris pulling ahead in the polls with all this momentum? Surprisingly, no. Despite an early six-point boost following President Joe Biden’s withdrawal and a well-received convention, her numbers have flatlined since September 1st. Even during her biggest advertising push, the polls have remained largely unchanged. It’s like running as fast as you can in a dream but getting nowhere—a frustrating scenario for Democrats.

Why isn’t Harris gaining ground? Three potential explanations stand out.

First, ads might not work as effectively as they used to. Studies, like the one by Joshua Kalla and David Broockman, suggest that campaign ads have little to no impact on voter choice in general elections. While some down-ballot races may see marginal effects, at the presidential level, voters are either overwhelmed by information or simply ignoring the ads altogether. This theory played out in 2016, when Hillary Clinton’s ad blitz didn’t prevent her from losing, and again in 2020, when Democrats aired significantly more ads than Republicans in key swing states with no apparent effect.

Second, there could be movement in the electorate that polls aren’t picking up yet. Pollsters rely on educated guesses about voter turnout, and sometimes they get it wrong, as seen in 2020. Some pollsters are now adjusting their methods to account for the possibility of undercounting Trump supporters. If these adjustments miss the mark, or if unexpected factors alter the electorate, Harris’ gains might not be visible until Election Day. Additionally, undecided voters, who broke for Trump in previous elections, could swing toward Harris, particularly given her aggressive communication strategy.

Third, it’s possible the race is simply too polarized for significant movement. Trump’s appeal, which many liberal elites struggle to understand, might keep his base solid. Meanwhile, media coverage often downplays his more extreme behaviors, leaving many voters unaware of key issues like his felony indictments. The result is a stalemate, with voters entrenched in their positions, no matter how forcefully the campaigns push.

Which explanation is correct? The answer might be a combination of all three. The electorate has limited room to shift—while polls suggest up to 15% of voters could change their minds, the true swing vote is likely much smaller. Polls may also be misreading the electorate, particularly Trump’s low-turnout supporters. And the effectiveness of ads appears to be waning.

For those hoping for a more dynamic political environment, this stasis likely won’t last forever. Trump is a uniquely polarizing figure, and once he exits the political stage, there’s a chance the parties and voters will realign, creating a more fluid landscape. But we won’t know if that shift will come until after Election Day.