How can Donald Trump win at this point?

Talking heads always talk about tacking to the center and appealing to some sort of generic “average American”. That’s how they get to stay on TV.

Politicians who actually do shift to the middle or suddenly appear to change personalities lose the support of the rabid part of their fan base. It’s not like those folks will switch votes but it will turn them off from voting at all.

I guess the theory goes that there’s this massive lump of undecided or barely decided voters that will make up for the loss in enthusiasm and the significant parts of the base choosing simply not to vote.

After 2020 and turnout not seen in decades, that sort of thinking should have been thoroughly debunked, but I guess that’s why they’re on TV as election “experts”, and we’re the hoi polloi.

That was two days ago. It bottomed out yesterday at 55%, and, sure enough is at 56% now.
Just FYI. It means nothing! (And, I said I wouldn’t post on such minutiae again. I won’t, anymore. This was just to wrap up a minor technical question from bordelond.)

The people who are “undecided” often know who they would vote for. They are “undecided” whether to vote at all. Some never have.

For a large part they are “undecided” because they either do not want to talk to anyone with a different opinion, or they want to pretend to be “fence sitters”…although they tend to pretend that both sides are equally bad, yet still spend shitloads of time criticizing one side and occasionally saying “the other side is bad, too…I guess” when prodded a couple of times.

Harris’s primary strength is that she doesn’t appear to be senile and at risk of imminent death, like Joe Biden (and that’s why she’s polling better than he did) or utterly fucking nuts, like Donald Trump (and that’s why she’s slightly ahead.)

Her campaign’s unwillingness to have her talk freely to the media, and her clear discomfort when she does it, is disadvantageous but it’s also consistent with just appearing to be a sane, competent human being.

Harris has often looked sharp as a tack, speaking smartly and effectively, in other situations, like Senate hearings. I’m not sure why she seems to be struggling with translating that into this campaign. But then, people are like that. Hell, by all accounts Trump often appears to be substantially more sane when people are just talking to him in normal life.

I often think such people just don’t like being asked who they want to vote for but are too polite to just say “I don’t want to tell you, that’s my business.”

I don’t see this “discomfort” you mention. In my opinion, she seems very good when she interacts with the media.

Which makes me wonder why sometimes an undecided responds to a poll to begin with. Much easier just to turn it down, one would think.

I don’t see the unwillingness, either. She did a big event with Oprah, and a long interview on MSNBC.

To a large extent, yep. Many listen to kremlin propaganda- “both sides are just as bad, why bother to vote?”- this same meme can be couched in many different ways.

She has done so.

I concur.

Yeah, I dont get it. Maybe reading NYT editorials, in that if you are not giving them an exclusive interview, you arent doing interviews at all?

Who would she be telling this to-the people that aren’t listening directly to her now because of their media choices?

The right wing will attack Harris on any perceived strength. So if she is in fact personable when being interviewed, they will attack her as being selective in her interviews.

Even those who don’t directly consume that news will still hear it filtered to them: Harris isn’t willing to conduct interviews. Never mind the subtext: she’s not open to interviews with people who are openly hostile to her, or looking to catch her saying something that can be used against her.

Surely there are many people eligible to vote who can’t be bothered or assume (with some reason) their vote doesn’t matter. It’s not like the US has obligatory voting like Australia. In 2020, record high turnouts meant 68% of eligible women and 65% of eligible men cast votes.

Mobilizing this third of voters may make a bigger difference than the few who claim to be undecided. At least in certain states where polls are too close to call.

She just recently (last week) did both of those, and hasn’t been making the rounds with news media interviews.

While the Oprah gig probably got a lot of eyeballs and reached a different audience than political news shows, it was not by any means a difficult interview. In fact, the snippet I saw had Oprah doing a lot of the heavy lifting.

Similarly, I just watched the MSNBC interview, and it was very lenient. Sure, some directs questions were asked, but she was allowed to skate around some of them with repeats about tax credits and home ownership.

I mean, the question of tariffs came up, and if course the impact of Trump’s proposed blanket tariffs. But then the difficult question was asked about Biden backing and even increasing some tariffs, what’s the difference? Her answer was very weak. She mentioned blanket tariffs were bad, then diverted to the tax credits and home building and whatnot. She totally didn’t answer what the difference was.

And that should have been a slam dunk answer. Specific tariffs in specific instances are important when the target of tariffs is unfair trade practices by foreign countries. Tariffs on certain Chinese goods are necessary when China is trying to undercut the market to sink American manufacturers and destabilize our economic production. Limited tariffs address specific unfair trade issues.

It’s not just the New York Times. Jake Tapper on CNN has been calling her out for not giving more substantive interviews to political interviewers, people who know the issues and ask tough questions. Maybe it’s This Week on ABC Sunday mornings, or a prime time with David Muir, or something else.

But she hasn’t been doing those, and Oprah is a pop culture venue, not a pointed political interview.

It’s fine if you want to argue she’s reaching a down audience or creative campaigning, but you can’t brush off the recognized fact she’s not doing a lot of mainstream political interviews.

And on that MSNBC interview, she addressed the union issue fairly well. Point out how Trump has made promises he broke to them, point out manufacturing that left under Trump and coming back under Biden.

She has material to work with.

Another question was “What do you say to those communities that have been taking in legal immigrants but are beginning to be overwhelmed, have resources stretched too far?” Answer was about the border security bill. Eventually she did say we need comprehensive immigration reform like path to citizenship, but that still doesn’t address the question asked.

I agree. both because of the sheer numbers and because anyone who is “undecided” at this point is either being dishonest or so detached from politics & national affairs that reaching them is basically impossible anyway. If somebody managed to miss all 4 years of the Trump presidency and his behavior afterwards (or approves of them), a mere political campaign won’t touch them.

(Sorry, can’t gift link):

"The race between Kamala Harris and Donald Trump has tightened in two of the Northern battlegrounds, New York Times/Siena College polls found.

With less than 40 days until Election Day, the race is essentially tied in Michigan, with Ms. Harris receiving 48 percent support among likely voters and Mr. Trump garnering 47 percent — well within the poll’s margin of error. In Wisconsin, a state where polls have a history of overstating support for Democrats, Ms. Harris holds 49 percent to Mr. Trump’s 47 percent."

Just for fun – I predict 538’s model will now dip down to “54% of model runs favor Harris” around Monday evening, based largely on this poll. That will beat its previous low of 55%, four days ago (it’s currently at 57%).

It is not just the base. Voters often want a politician who stubbornly stands for something, even if they do not like what they stand for.

Trump seems to be so strongly a conviction politician that when he wobbles to the center – on abortion, or Project 2025, or abolishing the Affordable Care Act, or foreign policy – many voters fail to see he morphed into a flip-flopper. He needs to keep with the obnoxious, overly sure of his beliefs, personality to avoid being recognized as standing for nothing except himself.

A related reason Trump can win is that some of the same positions he takes to appeal to the far right, especially isolationism, also appeal to the center.

That’s not even true in this case, much less for other politicians.

A good deal of Trump’s voter support doesn’t seem to really care that Trump doesn’t stand for particular positions. The only consistent thing they do seem to like (or at least is not a turnoff) is his support for nativism and/or racism.

Otherwise, there are entire threads detailing the contradictory stances he takes on pretty much every topic, often within the same speech or even within the same rambling sentence.

To the extent he “stubbornly” stands for anything, it seems to be his own aggrandizement and enrichment. Admittedly, his fans do seem to love this about him.

Many people right here have mused that “every time the border is mentioned, Harris should remind voters about Trump killing the border bill.” And she’s taking our advice.

More to the point, though, giving interviews, having policy positions, having a good economy, none of those things matter to the voters she’s trying to reach. People who are not going to vote for her (and the media who like to be important) will complain about her lack of media interviews. People who will vote for her might wish she was handling things differently. But it doesn’t move the needle. You won’t hear anyone honestly saying “I’d like to vote for her, but I can’t because she hasn’t given enough interviews or expressed the details of her policies well enough.” That’s madness. This is a good vs. evil election, and it only matters which side you’re on.

The question asked was an extremely poisoned well and did not deserve an answer, if anything avoiding it is the smart thing to do.