It could. But there isn’t much to be done, so it is what it is. As Johanna correctly noted Harris is already trying to thread the needle as delicately as she can. Her campaign managers surely realize the problem. But the U.S. has less leverage than people seem to think it has, Biden currently runs the circus not Harris and any attempt to go hard on Israel will likely start bleeding pro-Israeli votes as fast as she gains pro-Palestinian votes. Faster, very likely. People respond to negative messaging faster and sharper than positive.
Harris should continue to campaign in Michigan and be as upbeat and positive as she can while she does so. But this late in the campaign there is not much more to argue. If folks want to vote Stein (or Trump, for some unfathomable reason), or just not vote at all as a protest…well…they’re foolish IMO. But there is no stopping them.
Bad news hurts the incumbent, and Harris is unavoidably associated with the incumbent. If Sandy was the exception where bad news had a neutral effect, it is because Chris Christie played nicely with Obama in order to help his state. Can the same be expected regarding Milton and De Santis? As already seen with Helene, no.
The same bad-news-hurts-the-incumbent dynamic is seen with Israel. No matter what the administration does, some group of voters will be both focused on the current war and unhappy with the Biden-Harris approach.
This isn’t saying Harris will not win, or even that all the important events are going against her. Economic news is good. And some bad news is inevitable.
Milton is already one of the most powerful hurricanes the Gulf has seen, and it’s barreling right at central Florida. I’d feel a bit icky trying to predict the political implications given the potential devastation, but I think there’s a good chance that we’ll get to have the first test run for the revamped “failed election” provision referenced upthread.
I agree with what you are saying. And emphatically agree Harris must continue to campaign in MI. I don’t see it as being lost but it is tricky at this point.
Harris and Walz just appeared on 60 minutes for interviews.
I wasn’t a fan of Harris’ interview; at points, they overlayed the interviewers’ summary over her answers. It wasn’t soft by any means, and I don’t think she had any moments where she especially shined.
Walz, on the other hand, sounded really good to me. He was articulate and polished.
(And Trump didn’t show up, naturally. Chickenshit)
Again though, if the poll that I linked to is accurate, the Arab protest vote (be it stay home, vote Stein, or even Trump) is already baked in into her modest lead there. If true then this, her having a modest polling lead, is as bad as it gets. And IF the usual occurs (many who say they are going to vote third party coming home by Election Day) then it only gets better from here.
Yeah she’s threaded it as well as can be done, possibly especially so because I don’t think she is only saying what is politically most expedient, but what she honestly believes.
Can you imagine Harris losing PA and not only winning the EC by pulling out FL but doing it with an extended voting period because of natural disaster?
I think that Harris will be quite good. But Trump is more bad than Harris is good. It’s a much easier argument to make that way around.
And the hurricanes aren’t just “bad news”. They might directly impact the election, by rendering many people incapable of voting, for one reason or another. Which leads to the question of which voters they’ll impact more.
Who gets to make the call of “extraordinary and catastrophic” events and when? Does it have to apply across a complete state or can a governor cherry pick counties to give extra time and support to and declare others (which lean the other way) not impacted enough to warrant implementation of the provisions?
Huh. Page 6. Extending voting section. States the federal law is intended for crises that strike on, or immediately before Election Day, not weeks before.
It feels like 2012 but not even that precarious. Back then, the eve of the election’s polls showed Obama and Romney tied 48-48%. So far, every sign still points to a convincing Kamala win, especially if she handles Milton well.
There isn’t any precedent yet under the revised language on “failed elections,” which was only passed in 2022. As discussed above, the current statute makes clear that the only permissible modification would be for a state, “as necessitated by force majeure events that are extraordinary and catastrophic,” to extend voting beyond election day as provided for under pre-existing state law. Ultimately, Congress could decide whether Florida acted properly in interpreting the law by accepting or rejecting a challenge to their electors on January 6.
Amazing that a candidate for President doesn’t know how that Office works-
Stein has also been an outspoken critic of U.S. foreign policy, particularly regarding the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. Following the October 2023 Hamas attack, she condemned Israel’s military actions in the Gaza Strip and criticized President Joe Biden for what she described as a failure to intervene against what she termed Israel’s "genocidal rampage
I mean, I guess Biden could send in the Marines, but only for a very brief time and it would only makes things worse.
Exactly how is Biden supposed to end the war in Gaza? Marines? Nukes? What?
So, they are blaming The Office of the President for the actions of the GOP led House?
Not particularly so. Three Atlantic hurricanes have reached Category 5 even later in October, in the past 26 years (and bear in mind that “major hurricane” is defined as a Category 3 or higher):
Michael (2018) was briefly a Category 5 on October 10
Wilma (2005) was a Category 5 for eighteen hours on October 19
Mitch (1998) was a Category 5 for 42 hours on October 26-28
I watched the “60 Minutes” show with Harris and Walz, and I agree with your remarks.
I was expecting an interview. Not cherry-picked questions and answers from an interview, interspersed with asides. From what I did see of the interviews, Harris did adequately and Walz did well.
What I found really interesting was the second half of the show, where they spoke with the Arizona election official who received a number of threats, and the woman who leads a PAC that continues to deny that Trump lost in 2020. But a discussion of those people and topics does not belong in this thread.
At any rate, I’m glad I tuned into “60 Minutes” tonight, even if there wasn’t as much of the Harris and Walz interviews as I would have liked. Thanks for the heads-up. (I guess I’m in a different time zone, where I got “60 Minutes” later than you.)
Also, good economic news obviously only benefits the incumbent if people hear about it.
If no one knows about, say, a plan to pay back student loans, then it doesn’t benefit them. The information channels are so different now than in times past that getting out the good news is harder.