Kamala’s job is to execute the full pivot from “too progressive for Democratic primary voters” to winning the center-right voters needed to get over the top in the GOP-skewed electoral college.

Into this context flows $120,000,000 of anti-trans ads.

Will they work?

Bad Track Record

In the midterms, GOP attacks on transgender kids failed to move the needle. As research from Third Way showed, voters had much different priorities. Meanwhile, the GOP candidates who relied heavily on anti-trans ads had a shared result: they lost.

Candidates like Michigan gubernatorial candidate Tudor Dixon, who ran this ad with a scary voiceover focused on kids and drag queens while losing a swing state by eleven points:

That trend continued last year. Recall our conversation with Gov. Andy Beshear’s strategist David Eichebaum after Kentucky’s 2023 gubernatorial race:

We were hammered for months over charges that Andy Beshear favors sex change operations for minors. This is part of a broader attack against Democrats on transgender rights that started with Glenn Youngkin, back in 2021. We countered those attacks exactly one time. Andy said to the camera that all children are children of God.

Why did that work?

The ad worked because it’s what he believes. And it worked because we had set that up already with other ads earlier on, where we had established his faith.

Democrats won that race in a state Trump carried by 36 points. These attacks don’t seem like the most effective use of paid media, although Republicans are still running them in Senate races this year.

Pivot Problems

A deep-dive on these ads in the presidential came out in The Bulwark this week. talked to the Trump campaign for the story, titled “Trump Goes All In on Anti-Trans: It’s not clear if the ads will help Trump, hurt Harris - or just scapegoat trans people.”

According to the Trump campaign, the ads don’t really seem to be about trans issues at the core. The attacks are about interrupting Kamala’s pivot from the far left stances she took five years ago in the presidential primary. They intentionally hit a wide range of salient issues. Just look at the screenshots: visuals of prisoners, quotes from PBS and The New York Times, and using Kamala’s own words pandering to a progressive interest group.

Here’s Caputo:

Trump has so far run three ads that each feature video of Harris in 2019 boasting about her advocacy as California attorney general for the surgeries for the incarcerated. The ads, which have been condemned by trans advocates as transphobic and cruel, are designed to reinforce the Trump campaign’s message that Harris is “dangerously liberal.”

Caputo talked to a Trump campaign pollster, who was explicit that these anti-trans ads aren’t actually about trans policy at all:

Trump pollster John McLaughlin said that viewing the campaign’s emphasis on trans issues as a tradeoff with its focus on the economy represents a shallow understanding of “asymmetrical political warfare.” Presidential races aren’t as much battles over policy plans, he said, as they are character contests.

“In that character contrast, these cultural issues become symbols of those characters,” McLaughlin said. “They don’t have to be the top issue, but they have to make a values-connection with a majority of voters, and this is symbolic of why her character doesn’t connect with a majority of voters.”

These may technically qualify as anti-trans ads, but the character allegation here is far broader. It is about the national discomfort with how far-left the Democratic Party went on a wide range of issues. And swing voter fears that Kamala would go along with all of it.

One ad emphasizes “Kamala supports taxpayer funded sex changes for prisoners and illegal aliens”. In eleven words, this hits three major issues - taxes, crime, and immigration - with gender just being the hook.

Beyond gender, it is Kamala’s own words on video that seem like they could be swapped out for decriminalizing the border or banning fracking: “The power that I had. I used it in a way that was about pushing for the movement frankly and the agenda.“

Will it work? Back to the Third Way research:

Culture war attacks have been the crux of the Republican Party’s strategy for the past few elections. And while some hit their mark this time around—particularly on crime and immigration in races where Democrats failed to rebut them early and forcefully—others fell flat. GOP fearmongering on the “transgender agenda” hit an all-time high this year, with ads targeting transgender children running in at least 25 states totaling at least $50 million. Yet the candidates who made these attacks the centerpiece of their argument to voters failed at the ballot box.

If the ads work, it is more likely to be for the factors listed here - crime, immigration, and a failure to rebut them early - and on the missteps of progressive nonprofits.

Share

Maura’s Model

The first edition of Centrist School, our series on the rise and fall of the far-left, led with a decision by Maura Healey while she was running to become governor of Massachusetts. She kept her well-earned progressive credibility on the campaign trail while rejecting the leftist blob forcing all Democratic candidates to get on-the-record in favor of deeply unpopular issues:

In 2018, every mainstream Democrat was looking over their shoulders in fear of the Far Left, egged on by the media and Twitterati.

Five years later, we are back to reality. 

Nowhere is that more evident than in the most liberal state in the country. One year ago this week, a progressive firebrand turned pragmatic consensus builder walked unopposed into the Massachusetts Democratic nomination for governor – after refusing¹ to even fill out the policy questionnaires of those same Far Left groups who had scared incumbents four years prior. The bubble had burst.

In these vile ads, we see what Healey was avoiding - the pain that accrues to the vulnerable when progressive purity tests go too far.

We are back to reality, and it does not look good for the far-left purity test strategy.

Read Chait

In New York magazine, Jonathan Chait outlines this phenomenon that stretches across nearly every progressive issue.

The article, How Progressive Overreach Gave Trump His Favorite Attack Ad, has the perfect subtitle: Harris’s 2019 campaign continues haunting her from the grave. Here’s one excerpt:

The groups in the coalition increasingly tend to define agreement with their cause in maximal terms … Climate activists increasingly use the term “climate denier,” once reserved for those who refuse to accept the theory of anthropogenic global warming, for any skeptic of any element of their preferred remedies. The rampant absolutism makes it difficult to acknowledge even the possibility that there are political risks attached to going too far in agreement with the movement.

Groups dedicated to pushing Democrats to adopt the most expansive pro-trans-rights position don’t admit getting candidates on the record endorsing free transition surgeries for prisoners and detained migrants might have been a mistake.

Avoiding such mistakes in the future will require organizing among moderate Democrats to push back against this litmus test shrinkage:

The incentive for every group to push its own demands to the maximum is almost self-evident. (Imagine trying to raise money and organize for a cause when you concede that cause is the one politicians should put on the slow burner.)

The reason Democrats continue to field these data-impervious demands is that the progressive movement (much like the conservative movement, after which it was modeled) has a culture of affirming rather than questioning the predispositions of its core policy demanders.

This culture involves endlessly recycled evasions, such as — to pick one favorite — the claim that Republicans are going to accuse Democrats of advocating radical positions anyway, so they might as well endorse them. “Shaking ‘you’re for open borders & “transing” school kids’ doesn’t actually happen by ignoring the claims nor offering light support for draconian measures. Accusations will still come & stick,” argues progressive message guru Anat Shenker-Osorio, as if an ad fabricating an extreme position held by a Democratic candidate is no less effective than one using the Democrat’s own words.

There is, of course, a good reason why Trump’s campaign is pouring millions into ads tying Harris to a position she actually advocated rather than making other, even more unpopular positions, and also why those ads cite mainstream news sources vouching for the truth of the claim.

You should read the whole thing, as well as a new Third Way report on The Decline of Far-Left Electoral Organizations.

It helps explain why Maura Healey, the nation’s first lesbian governor, rejected progressive purity tests to become very popular - more popular than her home state Senator Elizabeth Warren. And why the closing ads against Kamala Harris feature her own words responding to the same progressive nonprofit dynamic that Healey eschewed. These groups have horizontally integrated, seeking maximal purity tests across every issue. Kamala’s words in the ad - “The power that I had. I used it in a way that was about pushing for the movement frankly and the agenda.“ - could easily be about the border or energy policy. That’s what voters are hearing. And they aren’t just hearing it because that’s what they hear on Fox News. That’s what progressive nonprofits trained voters to hear. And they built a symbiotic relationship with right-wing media to put pragmatic Democrats in a pincer.

Consider how the maximalist across-the-board approach of progressive nonprofits has shrunk the coalition to the point where their missions may all be worse off. Think about what can arise to counter these problems post-election. And ask yourself, who pays the price for the mistakes these groups won’t admit?

Subscribe now

But while Della Volpe does a great analysis of the “pull” factors drawing men toward Republicans, he doesn’t talk about the “push” factors driving them away from Democrats. 

Here’s an excerpt:

Mr. Trump has tapped these anxieties by weaving a hypermasculine message of strength and defiance into his broader narrative that undermines confidence in democratic institutions. And it’s working. Aware that boasting about “killing” Roe v. Wade drove away young women, Mr. Trump zeroed in on capturing a larger share of the young male vote. In four years, he cut what was once a 19-percentage point Democratic margin among registered young male voters (50 percent Mr. Biden, 31 percent Mr. Trump) roughly in half (48 percent Ms. Harris, 38 percent Mr. Trump) in our poll.

His playbook? A master class in bro-whispering: championing crypto, securing the endorsement of Dave Portnoy — the unapologetically offensive founder of Barstool Sports — and giving U.F.C. President Dana White, who embodies the alpha-male archetype that appeals to many young men, a prime spot at the Republican National Convention. Mr. Trump has also cultivated relationships with simpatico comedians, pranksters, influencers and Silicon Valley billionaires like Elon Musk — all while his team bombards podcasts and social media with misinformation and memes to rally his troops.

This shift in support for Mr. Trump among men is neither organic nor unexpected. It’s what happens when a well-coordinated political operation invests tens of millions of dollars to amplify Mr. Trump’s narrative and weaken confidence in the party in power. Compared with when Mr. Trump ran in 2020, young male voters are now less likely to support government-backed climate change solutions (down 15 points, according to our poll) and affirmative action for qualified candidates (down eight points). They are more likely to question immigration policy (up 12 points), free trade (up 10 points) and whether government stimulus leads to economic growth (up seven points). They are also more likely to believe that religious values should play a more important role in government (up six points).

Della Volpe argues that shifts in men’s views on climate change, affirmative action, immigration, economics, and religion are downstream of the movement toward the Republican Party. Studies show that voters who change their partisan affiliation often shift their views and identities to match their new party's. But voters also change their party to match their pre-existing ideological beliefs better. For example, conservative-leaning nonwhite voters in America and Britain are increasingly abandoning Democrats and Labour in favor of Republicans and the Tories.

Another Playbook

There are places to reverse that trend. As showed in How to win men's votes without backing down on women's rights, the gender gap is not just about gender issues. Men view many issues differently, affording pickup opportunities on issues ranging from cancel culture to nuclear without conceding core progressive issues:

gender gaps in opinion aren’t necessarily driven by gaps in opinions about sex and gender. Across a broad swathe of policy questions, ranging from nuclear energy to the death penalty, men and women have, on average, different opinions. Which means that if you want to try to get male votes without compromising on progressive commitments to gender equality, you can probably pull that off by taking positions men tend to agree with on other issues.

James Carville put things crudely earlier this year in a much-discussed interview with New York Times columnist Maureen Dowd:

“A suspicion of mine is that there are too many preachy females … ‘Don’t drink beer, don’t watch football, don’t eat hamburgers, this is not good for you,'” he said. “The message is too feminine: ‘Everything you’re doing is destroying the planet. You’ve got to eat your peas.'”

The offensive nature of that section obscured Carville’s larger point that, too often, Democratic politicians and strategists seem to discount male voters entirely, preferring to focus on how other demographic groups might impact the election:

“If you listen to Democratic elites — NPR is my go-to place for that — the whole talk is about how women, and women of color, are going to decide this election. I’m like: ‘Well, 48 percent of the people that vote are males. Do you mind if they have some consideration?” Carville said.

When Democrats do try to appeal to men, they face blowback from their left flank. Consider the griping over Kamala Harris telling Oprah that she owns a Glock and that, if someone broke into her home, “they’re gonna get shot.” Read articles like this one in The Nation, arguing that Democrats embracing Tim Walz’s background as a football coach represents “hypermasculinity and violence” that could “repel young voters.” (Yes, that is a real, non-satirical article.)

When people float that Harris should go on the Joe Rogan Experience — the most popular podcast in the world, with a large audience of young men — the response often goes like this:

Can you imagine if someone said the same thing about Harris going on Call Her Daddy, The Shade Room, or The Breakfast Club?

Authenticity Required

Too often, Democratic attempts to appeal to men come off as inauthentic. Just look at a recent video Dave Bautista filmed where he poked fun at Trump’s masculinity. He’s trying too hard to come off as a tough guy, making the whole effort feel like too-obvious pandering.

A better way forward is what Ruben Gallego did: hosting a watch party for the Canelo-Munguía boxing match. Gallego doesn’t need to prove that he’s a tough guy; he’s a combat veteran. He talks about how he’s followed boxing since he was a kid.

Harris should continue leaning into her own authentically compelling story to young men. Pitch the many undecided men who listen to the Joe Rogan Experience, who may find her willingness to use a Glock on an intruder compelling. It is authentic - and a direct rebuttal to those on the litmus test left who derailed her 2020 campaign, and helped lead many men in the middle towards the GOP.

There’s no secret formula for appealing to men. But a good start would be to admit Democrats pushed away young men in the first place. 

Milan Singh founded the Yale Youth Poll and has written about how most young voters aren’t liberal.

Politico reported on the event:

The California liberal and Wyoming conservative agree on little besides their view that former President Donald Trump is a threat to democracy who shouldn’t return to the White House after the Jan. 6 riot at the Capitol. At Ripon College, in a small city where a group of Whigs, Free Soilers and Democrats met in 1854 to form a new party, calling themselves Republicans, Cheney said she would vote for a Democrat for the first time in her life to stop Trump.

“Our republic faces a threat unlike any we have faced before,” said Cheney. “A former president who attempted to stay in power by unraveling the foundations of our republic, by refusing to accept the lawful results confirmed by dozens of courts of the 2020 election.”

At the small-scale event, Harris framed the presidential race as an existential event and sought to draw voters’ attention back to the riot at the Capitol nearly four years ago.

“One of the most fundamental questions that is facing the American people in this election,” Harris said, is “who will abide by the oath to preserve, protect and defend the Constitution of the United States of America?”

Harris acknowledged that she and Cheney “may not see eye to eye on every issue” and even said “we are going to get back to a healthy two-party system” in which they would fiercely debate. But she praised Cheney, who stood behind her during her remarks, as a “true patriot.”

Coverage by CBS added, “The campaign is also hosting ‘Republicans for Harris’ events across the battleground states this week, including an event with former Reps. Denver Riggleman in North Carolina and Adam Kinzinger in Las Vegas.”

The Welcome rally in Ripon and Republicans for Harris events feel like the brainchild of what we’ve been preaching for years. A March 2023 piece we wrote on Biden’s Big Tent noted:

This spirit — empathy, optimism and patriotism in the face of personal and national tragedy — is at the core of the big-tent project.

Big-Tent Leadership Runs to the Top of the Ticket

We think and write a lot about the big-tent leaders who reach out to voters in the middle with empathy, optimism, and patriotism. From Tim Ryan to Reverend Warnock to Abigail Spanberger to Adam Frisch and Sharice Davids, the Democratic Party is full of mainstream candidates and politicians who harness electoral volatility and welcome more voters in.

These depolarizers don’t get the media attention they deserve, but they are out there winning moderate and center-right swing voters, beating back the flames of authoritarianism, and clearing a path for like-minded (lowercase “d”) democrats to follow.

Biden’s lower-key presence in daily life makes it easier to forget that Democrats’ mainstream faction runs right up to the top of the ticket. Few figures in modern politics are as uniquely emblematic of the center-left’s welcoming, empathetic, and pragmatic orientation than President Biden himself.

In the Harris campaign’s efforts to beat Trump this November, it appears that Harris is rightfully following in Joe Biden’s footsteps to grow the big tent he seemed to so seamlessly build in the process of beating Trump in 2020. She’s racked up endorsements from Republicans, the coalition is growing, and she’s high-tailed it to the center on policy issues ranging from fracking to immigration.

Harris and her campaign have rebranded from her 2019 campaign for President, molding the Vice President into a Center Left maven. The top-to-bottom transformation even extends to her 2024 campaign posters: The Boston Globe reported on Harris’ color scheme shift emblematic of a woman on a mission to win over swing voters.

Harris’s revamped color scheme is an illustration — literally — of the difference between trying to gain traction in a crowded Democratic primary and courting an entire country of Democrats, independents, and disaffected Republicans. From a junior California senator looking to gain a foothold with progressive primary voters five years ago, she has quickly become the Democratic party’s standard-bearer; she inherited the campaign of a more centrist president and is now trying to avoid alienating any likely voters.

As Harris grows in her authenticity this cycle, campaigning with Republicans seems like a natural, even requisite, element of her bid for President.

So why does it feel like there’s another elephant in the room?

As Harris follows in Biden’s big tent footsteps, there lies an inescapable concern that she could too closely retrace those steps should she get elected, finding herself shrinking the big tent the two campaigns have worked so hard to build.

Third Way’s Moderate Talent Pipeline has been wildly reassuring when considering how a Harris transition team could staff an Administration. Yet, to be determined is whether Harris would be able to hold her ground as President to keep these largely popular campaign promises and appeals to voters, particularly with a progressive-leaning Vice President in Tim Walz. Who’s to say that if Harris fell for progressives’ leftward lurch in 2019 once that she won’t fall for it again?

After voters’ honeymoon phase with their newly-elected President ended, Biden’s approval rating in August 2021 dropped to below 50% and never recovered. Voters will quickly notice if Harris’ centrism sours.

When it comes to navigating the challenge of intra-party dissent, Harris can look to her co-host from last week’s event for inspiration: Cheney, one of the highest-ranking Republicans in the U.S. House before losing her seat, was one of only two Republicans to serve on the House Select Committee investigating January 6. The symbolism of courage, independence and commitment to protecting American values Cheney brings to the Harris campaign cannot be over-stated.

That said, it would be a shame if last week’s event in Ripon ended up being just for the history books, and not for the policy papers, particularly as many voters currently trust Trump’s solutions for issues like natural security and foreign policy, immigration, and crime over Harris’.

Should Harris win this November, the pomp and circumstance of campaigning shoulder-to-shoulder with Liz Cheney can’t be for naught. The Americans in the middle — conservative-leaning, independent and Center Left — who trusted her with their vote and delivered her the White House can’t be forgotten once it’s time to govern and lead. If Democrats aren’t mindful of this, even a Harris victory in November 2024 is no match for another populist movement in 2028 led by a certain, notably younger, Republican nominee for Vice President.

Recommended Reads

This week, we’re excited to share recommendations for more Center Left reads! Be sure to check out:

The 2 Minute Download: A weekly newsletter from our friends at NewDEAL Leaders highlighting what to know in state and local policy and politics, including the best work and most promising solutions from the NewDEAL network of pragmatic, innovative elected leaders across the country. 

#VIRAL, The Newsletter: The Tuesday newsletter from Girl and the Gov sharing need-to-know content trends and concepts for political social media, digital, and comms professionals to win over eyes, likes, and most importantly -- votes. Now available for free, the newsletter brings the benefits of social media consulting to subscriber's inboxes, making what could've been an email [not a meeting], just that -- an email.

HARRIS TO THE BORDER

The central premise of Kamala is Moderate is to illustrate how Harris navigates the chasm between her true moderate self (which appeals to the persuadable voters needed to win) and the far-left positions she briefly adopted during the 2020 presidential primary (which are unpopular).

This past week, Harris visited the US-Mexico border, contrasting her tough, pragmatic stance on immigration with Trump's scuttling of a border deal earlier this year. We’ve noted Harris’ pivot to the center on immigration is a "True Strength" for the Harris campaign. Over the weekend, NBC’s Sahil Kapur tweeted his story on Harris’ border visit and a notable comment on that pivot:

Immigration is a top concern for swing voters, who overwhelmingly prefer Republicans on the issue. Harris’ first campaign ad focused on the border with many thanks to Senator Chris Murphy, whose courageous leadership on the issue has given Democrats the political (and moral) high ground: Democrats are actually working to solve the immigration problem, while Trump's opposition to bipartisan compromise shows MAGA's inability to solve problems. Leading centrist think tank Third Way has a good rundown of what voters want from Harris on the border (spoiler: it looks a lot like what she's doing).

But Harris hasn't escaped every leftist policy ghost of (2020’s) presidential primary past, and Republicans have a simple message on her 2024 pivot, like this one from Rep. Matt Gaetz:

BIDEN-HARRIS EVENT TO END GUN VIOLENCE

Last Thursday at the White House, President Biden and Vice President Harris co-hosted an event focused on their Administration’s efforts to end gun violence in America. CNN reported:

Harris leaned into the rights and freedom message that’s been a part of her campaign trail rhetoric.

“I believe the right to be safe is a civil right,” Harris told the room. “And that the people of America have a right then to live, work, worship and learn without fear of violence, including gun violence. And yet, our nation is experiencing an epidemic of gun violence.”

The Democratic nominee, who has acknowledged being a gun owner, criticized what she called a “false choice” between preventing further carnage and respecting the Second Amendment.

Harris later added: “I am in favor of the Second Amendment, and I believe we need to reinstate the assault weapons ban, and have universal background checks, safe storage laws and red flag laws.”

Biden touted measures his administration has taken — including 2022’s Bipartisan Safer Communities Act and $15 billion in funding from the American Rescue Plan to surge funding for law enforcement communities — and pointed at Harris.

Yet to be determined is how many gun-toting swing voters in Wisconsin and Pennsylvania Harris will be able to woo by calling for an assault weapons ban.

LAW ENFORCEMENT ORG ENDORSEMENT

Last week, FOX News reported that Police Leaders for Community Safety, a “diverse group of prominent police professionals who have been at the helm of numerous major national law enforcement leadership groups,” announced its endorsement of Harris in this year’s presidential election.

Further:

"This endorsement reflects Vice President Harris’ track record and unwavering commitment to public safety and the rule of law," Sue Riseling, chair of Police Leaders for Community Safety, said.

Police Leaders for Community Safety board member David Mahoney, a former Dane County, Wisconsin, sheriff and past president of the National Sheriffs’ Association, said that Harris "spent her prosecutorial career protecting people, supporting victims and holding accountable those who have harmed others and betrayed the public trust. As a lawmaker, she has fought hard for the critical law enforcement-backed policies needed to fight crime and protect the public."

Additionally, Board Vice Chair Rick Myers, a former police chief in eight communities in multiple states, said that "too many politicians call themselves tough on crime and say they support law enforcement but then don’t have the courage to do what is right to keep us safe…We need a leader who will protect both the 2nd Amendment and our nation from the scourge of gun violence, and that leader is Kamala Harris." 

BLUEPRINT ON SWING, MALE VOTERS (NOT TO BE CONFUSED WITH MALE SWING VOTERS)

Last week, polling firm Blueprint released two significant polls. The first on swing voters, and the second on male voters.

On swing voters, they found:

1. Swing state voters are ideologically eclectic: They hold conservative views on immigration and crime but are pro-choice and favor government action to control corporate excesses, particularly on prices. They reward pragmatic populist positions rather than strict ideological consistency.

1. Swing state voters favor policies that punish corporate bad actors but are skeptical of government overreach and sweeping systemic change rhetoric. They don’t think in terms of the size of government or companies, but judge by effectiveness and actions.

2. Harris’s opportunity lies in balancing fiscal conservatism with populist price-focused economic policies. While swing state voters tend to be deficit hawks, policies like cracking down on price gouging are widely popular. 

Swing state voters represent a mosaic of political views, rewarding candidates who embrace pragmatic populist policies that directly address their daily concerns. A Democratic recipe for success in this electoral environment moderates on immigration and crime and embraces popular pro-choice and anti-price gouging positions while foregrounding  targeted interventions that swing state voters believe might actually improve their lives over sweeping systemic change rhetoric.  

Ideological Heterodoxy in the Swing States

Swing states swing for a reason: their voters hold heterodox political views, blending traditionally conservative positions on issues like immigration and crime with liberal views on reproductive rights and corporate regulation. 

• 55% of swing state voters say immigration should be decreased (including 49% of independents, 35% of Democrats, and 58% of non-college voters). Just 19% say it should be kept at its present level and 14% say it should be increased. 

• 57% of swing state voters say our criminal justice system is not tough enough (including 44% of Democrats and 43% of independents). 21% say it’s about right, and just 10% say it’s too tough. 

• 52% of swing state voters identify as pro-choice, including 46% of independents. 39% identify as pro-life, including 34% of independents. 

• When asked to choose between two approaches to lowering the cost of living, 64% of swing state voters favor cracking down on price gouging by harshly penalizing big businesses that unfairly jack up prices and coordinate to increase costs, while only 23% say “Soviet-style price controls will only make inflation worse” and that the government cut regulations and reduce spending rather than attacking businesses.

And on male voters, they found:

• A significantly higher share of men than women believe that cancel culture is real, but the majority of men do not hold extreme views on culture war issues and gender-related matters, nor do they prioritize those issues.

• The most important issues to male voters are concrete: the economy and prices, Social Security and Medicare, lower taxes on income and capital gains, national security, and affordability; the least important issues to them are more abstract: cryptocurrency, transgender issues, and feminism.

• Men trust Vice President Kamala Harris more on abortion, climate change, the environment, and transgender issues; but men trust former President Donald Trump more on inflation, business regulations, national security, foreign policy, and immigration—with immigration the issue on which men trust Trump the most compared to Harris.

• Men, in general, are less progressive than women and are more likely to believe that Democrats are ideologically extreme, particularly regarding immigration, the economy, and diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI). However, recent political issues often framed as priorities for men are of low salience to them compared to other topics. For instance, cryptocurrency policy and transgender and LGBTQ+ issues are of particularly low importance relative to more traditional political matters. Conventional, longstanding issues in the political arena—such as the economy, Social Security and Medicare, taxes, and the military—are more salient to male voters.

• Men do not agree with the most extreme statements on gender and sexuality, such as the idea that most sexual assault allegations are false or that society has gone too far in accommodating women. The conservative—but not retrograde—views of male voters are most evident in the survey data on their policy priorities, which problems they view as legitimate problems, and their opinions on various celebrities.

• Additionally, Vice President Kamala Harris’s vulnerabilities among men are on immigration, the economy, inflation, national security, and taxes. However, men trust her more than former President Donald Trump on transgender issues and abortion, suggesting that a message focusing on foundational political issues rather than one that engaging with the latest male-dominated debates would be most effective in winning them over.

• While women see the Republican Party as becoming more extreme (42% Republicans more extreme vs. 30% Democrats), men see Democrats as becoming more extreme than Republicans (38% Democrats, 34% Republicans).  Men also agree with the critique that the Democratic Party “Has moved too far to the left” (55%, 31%, +24). 

Democratic presidential nominee Kamala Harris appears to be on defense, wrapping up another week tallying only six press interviews thus far in the 60ish days she’s been a presidential nominee. But apparently that’s about to change: the New York Times reported this past week that the Harris team is “promising a series of appearances across an array of media venues, including local and national outlets, podcasts, radio stations and daytime talk shows.”

We’re looking forward to this since one of our slogans is literally “Democracy on Offense.” Harris must prove to the average American voter that she can deliver on policy and take the heat of the hard questions. Maybe go on Hot Ones?

When Harris goes on offense by engaging voters through interviews, voters like it. The polling firm Blueprint has found that clips from her recent interviews are moving voters:

Every clip from Vice President Harris’s interviews with CNN and 6ABC is viewed positively by at least six in ten voters.The clip voters are most likely to view positively (68%) is Harris’s answer to the6ABCquestion, “If there's something you wish Americans knew about who Kamala Harris is, what would that be?” where she spoke about her love of family, her lifelong friend, and how when she was a prosecutor she never asked a victim their political party. 

Every clip moves support toward Vice President Harris.The best-testing clip, which moves support toward Harris by 2.1 percentage points, is her assertion that she would appoint a Republican to her cabinet. In a close second, a clip that moves support by 1.9 percentage points is one where Harris shares her perspective of President Biden dropping out of the race. 

Voters feel they know more about Harris with every clip they watch. When asked if the clips made voters feel they knew more about Vice President Harris, each clip tested between 56% and 58% in the affirmative.

Now, on to this week’s round-up.

NABJ

Harris sat down with journalists in the National Association of Black Journalists last week in Philadelphia, sticking to the script throughout her interview. This is a very meh approach for a candidate who has still yet to really define herself. One thing worth mentioning was her nod to Black men in this election cycle:

I think it’s very important to not operate from the assumption that black men are in anybody’s pocket. Black men are like any other voting group. You got to earn their vote. So I’m working to earn the vote. Not assuming I’m going to have it because I am black, but because the policies and the perspectives I have understands what we must do to recognize the needs of all communities. And I intend to be a president for all people, specifically as it relates to what we need to do, to your point, around economic opportunity. Yes, I started way before I was the top of the ticket, what I called an economic opportunity tour focused on black men. Understanding that, for example, we have so many entrepreneurs in the community who do not have access to capital, but they’ve got great ideas, an incredible work ethic, the ambition, the aspiration, the dream, but don’t have the relationships necessarily…And so part of my approach is understanding the obstacles that traditionally and currently exist to allow anyone, including black men, be able to achieve economic wealth. And I’m going to tell you, I don’t think it is sufficient to just only talk about economic policy around reducing unemployment. It is an important marker. And I’m proud of the work that we’ve done thus far. But it should be a baseline there, everybody’s working. The point is, do people have an opportunity to build wealth if that’s what they choose to do, if that’s what they want to do. And a lot of my perspective as we go forward is just that. I believe that there are a lot of opportunities that are available to the American people if we just see people, and understand what they want for themselves and their families, and then meet them where they are.

Our friends at HIT Strategies noted the following about Black men:

OPRAH AND THE FEELS

Harris participated in a 90-minute forum, “Unite for America,” hosted by Oprah Winfrey. The New York Times wrote:

Ms. Harris has not often spoken off the cuff or at length about many issues since she catapulted to the top of the ticket after President Biden dropped out of the race. Here she addressed questions from the audience and Ms. Winfrey about issues like immigration and gun violence, and what would happen if her opponent, former President Donald J. Trump, didn’t accept the results of the election should he lose a second time.

Ms. Harris spoke more elaborately than she has before on the effects of illegal immigration — a key issue for voters and a vulnerability in her campaign. She cited the devastating effects of fentanyl, overwhelmed border patrol agents and strained resources for prosecuting transnational criminal organizations. She pointed out that a bill that Mr. Trump had helped kill in Congress would have helped confront these problems, and she vowed to resurrect that bill and sign it.

EVEN THE KIDS WANNA KNOW

Our friend and resident Gen Z expert Rachel Janfaza reported on the sentiments of our nation’s youngest voters. As a reminder, 41 million Gen Zers are eligible to vote this November, and 49% of young voters identify as moderate and believe the Democratic Party is to the left of where they are.

I’ve been in touch with more than three dozen young voters from across the country since Tuesday night. This includes 18-27-year-olds in key states: PA, NC, TX, VA, FL, OH, CA, MA, NY, IL, KY, OK, NJ, IL, OR, and CT.

The vast majority of them thought Kamala “won” the debate (though they said they aren’t sure that’s a productive way of looking at it) and said the debate wasn’t as bad as they thought it could have been (they had a really low bar, and honestly, who can blame them?). But overall, they’re looking to hear more about the candidates’ “plans” for the issues that were addressed.

While I spoke with a cohort of Trump voters, most of the young people I’ve been in touch with are planning to vote for Harris. That said — and this is key for Democrats to hear —they really want to know more about how she will address the topics she says she’s prioritizing. There were certain issues they felt were brushed over (gun violence, climate change) that I’ll get into below. But big picture, they felt that while they mostly understand the issues Harris champions, they want to know more about her concrete proposals to tackle them.

OPPORTUNITY WITH LATINO VOTERS

Deseret News reported last week on how shifting her message with Latino voters may help Harris gain support among an increasingly less Democratic demographic:

Vice President Kamala Harris sits atop the Democratic ticket, and she is taking a different tack when approaching Latino voters: hammering a middle-class message on the economy, while speaking about immigration only sparingly.

Further:

Now, several months later, Harris’ appeal to Latinos has sidestepped discussing immigration almost entirely — a message Palomarez endorses. “Immigration is not the top issue to us,” he said. “It’s important, but it’s not at the top. The economy is.”

THIRD WAY: WHAT VOTERS WANT ON IMMIGRATION

Last week, our friends at Third Way released new data showing Vice President Harris and the Democratic Party have an opportunity this election cycle to prove they’re the party that’s serious about restoring order at the border.

The report found:

When it comes to their perceptions of Vice President Harris on the issue, voters are initially concerned that she’ll be more liberal than President Biden on immigration. In fact, they voice more concern about that possibility than they do about former President Trump killing the bipartisan border bill by four points (49% to 45%). Latino voters were more concerned about Harris being too liberal than about Trump killing the deal by nine points (48% to 39%). Voters want common sense reforms that secure the border and make their communities safe, and they need reassurance that Vice President Harris won’t tack to the left of Biden on immigration.

Further:

After hearing more about Vice President Harris’s approach on the issue, voters shifted in her direction in a major way. Trump started with a 13-point advantage when asked whose approach they favored, but he ended with just a 1-point advantage, within the margin of error and smaller than his margin in the horse race in the survey. Latino voters similarly went from favoring Trump’s approach by 13 points to advantaging him by just 1 point. These messages even shored up confidence among base voters, increasing support for Harris’s approach by 19 points among Democrats. Voters identified as “persuadable” Harris voters went from favoring Trump’s approach on immigration and the border by 32 points to favoring Harris’s by 38 points, a whopping 70-point swing. Throughout the survey, Vice President Harris also gained significant ground on focus and seriousness around these issues. On focus, Trump went from an 18-point advantage to a 4-point advantage. Among Latino voters, Trump started with an 11-point advantage and ended with a 9-point deficit, a 20-point swing. Harris started at a 4 on seriousness and ended at 5.2, with Latino voters giving her a slightly higher 5.6. It is clear that when voters hear what the Vice President has to say, their concerns around these issues can be allayed.  

HALEY VOTERS FOR A MODERATE HARRIS

Haley Voters for Biden announced a $10 million ad buy to “present Harris as a moderate on key policy issues, like the economy and energy, in an effort to convince centrist and center-right voters to back her.”

In a test ad obtained by the Deseret News, a series of voters — labeled as “lifelong conservatives” and “Trump voters” — push back against accusations that Harris is a far-left progressive.

“There’s nothing socialist about Kamala Harris,” one man says in the video ad.

“We’re interested in finding ways to reach the nearly 1 million Haley voters across the seven swing states with messages that we felt the Harris campaign and other organizations aren’t able or willing to say,” Robert Schwartz said.

The group tested over a dozen different ads with thousands of voters. The most successful ad featured a two-time Trump voter in Alabama, who talked about Trump’s and Harris’ strategy on tariffs and the economy. At the end of the 30-second clip, he endorsed Harris’ plan.

Other ads reviewed by the Deseret News featured a series of conservative voters making arguments for supporting Harris, like an acknowledgement that electing her wouldn’t necessarily pave the way for a progressive agenda.

“Conservatives have a supermajority on the Supreme Court,” a voter in one ad says. “With a likely Republican Senate, those checks and balances will keep our country sane.”

PivotPAC hopes to roll out the ads on digital platforms in coming weeks.

The ads come as Harris faces criticism for flip-flopping on key issues, including her past opposition to fracking and constructing a border wall. Harris has repeatedly said her “values haven’t changed,” but many voters want to know what those values are: according to this month’s New York Times/Siena College poll, 28% of likely voters said they still need to know more about Harris, while only 9 percent said the same of Trump.

This past week, the Haley Voters for Harris account also notably tweeted:

BLUEPRINT FOR NON-COLLEGE WOMEN

Blueprint also released polling last week around the sentiments of non-college women in the seven swing states. They note that non-college women will make up roughly a third of the electorate nationally in 2024.

1. Price concerns dominate: 75% of non-college women in swing states say the most important economic improvement they want to see is lower prices on goods, gas, and services. They overwhelmingly support a price-gouging crackdown on groceries (74% support) and reducing prescription drug prices for seniors (90% support).

2. Harris's favorability presents an opportunity: While Biden has a -13 net favorability among swing state non-college women, Harris’s net favorability is +1, suggesting an opportunity for Harris to reset with this key demographic. She has more room to grow than Biden: Harris’s “extremely unfavorable” rating with non-college women in swing states is 33%, while Biden’s is 38%. Trump’s net favorability is 0. Not only that, but Harris has a 7-point trust advantage on abortion. 

3. Skepticism on immigration and border security: Swing state non-college women are particularly doubtful about Harris’s ability to handle immigration. 44% believe she won’t even try to deploy additional border patrol agents, and 53% support decreasing immigration levels. In contrast, Trump holds an 11-point advantage over Harris on trust regarding border issues.

4. The double-edged sword: By focusing on lowering prices, a priority non-college women already associate with Harris, and emphasizing the bipartisan border security bill, Harris can both strengthen support on a key issue and address concerns about her immigration agenda.

5. Campaign like the 1990s: Healthcare, deficits, and crime offer Harris opportunities to make inroads among swing state non-college women. These voters are concerned about high deficits, fentanyl trafficking, and access to healthcare. The most popular policies with non-college women in swing states are reducing prescription drug prices for seniors (net support +88), increasing sentences for fentanyl trafficking (+83)  and reducing the federal deficit (+68).

GAINS WITH INDEPENDENT VOTERS

A national FOX News poll last week had Harris up 12 points with independent voters compared to Aug. 8 — a notable 20 point difference between the two dates.

Last Sunday, a New York Times/Siena poll suggested that Harris’ honeymoon in the race is over: Trump has a slight lead, and, most notably, 44% of voters view Harris as too liberal or progressive. Liam covered this in-depth on Monday, and it appeared that the Harris team understood the assignment: Harris’ sentiments on fracking were:

I made that very clear in 2020. I will not ban fracking. I have not banned fracking as Vice President of the United States. And, in fact, I was the tie-breaking vote on the Inflation Reduction Act, which opened new leases for fracking. My position is that we have got to invest in diverse sources of energy so we reduce our reliance on foreign oil. We have had the largest increase in domestic oil production in history because of an approach that recognizes that we cannot over rely on foreign oil.

This week, we’ll dig into what that 44% in the Times poll may be thinking about and, more importantly, what they want to hear of the Harris-Walz campaign.

Our friends at Galvanize Action and Haley Voters for Harris focus on moderate women and Center Right voters respectively, many of whom are persuadable and considering joining the Harris coalition this November.

What are their audiences looking for as they finalize their decisions for November’s election?

Galvanize Action has found that the following messages are most helpful when trying to reach ideologically-moderate women.

Economy: This is the top concern for moderate white women and will heavily influence their vote in November. Demonstrating support for working families like theirs is an effective strategy with this audience.

Reproductive Freedom: While 75% of moderate white women consider this issue important, it’s not their main voting driver. Galvanize Action increases the saliency of this issue with their audience and motivates them by highlighting the full range of rights that are on the line, like miscarriage care and IVF.

Culture Wars: Moderate white women are often targeted with grievance-based narratives on gender equity, immigration, and crime. Galvanize Action uses values-based messages to counter these negative narratives and shore up their audience's defenses against disinformation.

Democracy: They also aim to tangibly define democracy for their audience, frame what’s at stake, build agency and power for voting this year, and increase trust in our election systems.

Haley Voters for Harris has an actual wishlist of policy priorities, including one that has already been accomplished: Harris committing to nominating a Republican to her Cabinet.

Border Security:  Our working group strongly endorsed the June 4 Biden-Harris Executive Order to secure the border and we are pleased that border crossings have significantly reduced since then.  It was a common-sense policy solution.  We also believe the bipartisan border security bill was critical legislation and are disappointed that former President Trump blocked the bill for political reasons.  We ask that VP Harris fully embrace the Executive Order and commit to prioritizing bipartisan legislation to secure the border once elected.  

Fiscal Responsibility:  Both Republican and Democratic administrations have been fiscally irresponsible. We respectfully ask that Vice President Harris - while fully protecting Social Security and Medicare for those that have paid into the system - express openness to discussing our long-term fiscal health in a way that does not negatively impact the middle-class or anyone who has already entered or retired from the workforce. We respectfully ask for her to release a plan to reduce the national debt without increasing taxes on the middle class or small businesses.

Energy Production:  The Harris campaign should commit to not just being “energy independent” but “energy dominant.” We recognize that this is already happening in reality with all forms of energy production reaching record highs.  We believe that energy dominance makes us stronger at home and abroad. The Biden-Harris campaign told us there was no “EV mandate” so we would appreciate the Harris campaign better explaining its policies on EVs - please tell everyday Americans you will not take away their gas-powered vehicles! Any new international climate agreement should dramatically raise the commitments from India and China.

Reproductive Rights/Religious Freedom: We understand that VP Harris will continue to strongly and publicly fight to preserve the reproductive rights of women and fight against any effort to ban IVF. We welcome efforts to protect the right of women to freely travel in between states. Women should never be fined or punished for their decisions. At the same time, we ask that VP Harris commit to enforce existing laws stating that doctors and nurses receiving government funding should not be forced to perform an abortion if they have religious or ethical exceptions/concerns. We ask VP Harris to commit to maintaining a cultural tolerance for religious freedom and disavow any cultural or legal attempt to reduce the influence of conservative churches.  

Gun Violence: We were appalled by the assassination attempt on former President Trump and the endless cycle of school shootings that have taken place. We applaud reasonable legislation like the Bipartisan Safer Communities Act. We ask, however, that you express your firm commitment to upholding Second Amendment rights.  We encourage you to assure law-abiding gun owners that they have no reason to worry about their guns being taken away. 

Additionally, the ultimate Center Right guru wrote about the Times poll in on Monday:

This poll may have surprised some Democrats and sent them into panic. It shouldn’t have. I’ve conducted nearly a dozen focus groups with swing and persuadable voters since Harris became the nominee and in those conversations it’s been clear that the fact remains that the VP has work to do with these folks. More than that, if you look at the numbers and talk to these people, it’s evident that Harris has room to win them over; Trump far less so. Let me explain.

HARRIS DESERVES REAL CREDIT for the speed and alacrity with which she jumpstarted a disconsolate Democratic coalition. But ultimately this feat simply reverted the election to its mean: Fired up Dems versus fired up Republicans with a margin-making handful of low-information voters and Independents who need to be convinced to make an affirmative decision for one of the two major candidates. 

And those voters don’t feel like they know enough about Kamala Harris to feel comfortable voting for her. (Yet.) Here’s a sampling of thoughts from people who either voted for Trump and then Biden (flippers) or voted for Clinton and Biden, but are still undecided on Harris:

“I feel like I just don’t know enough about her, like, as a candidate. Yes, she’s our VP, but just like, kind of been on the side in my mind, right?” —Jessica, GA flipper

“I cannot tell you one thing that I can be like, ‘Oh yeah, she was a really good vice president.’ [...] “Not to even put any apples in Trump’s cart, but I can at least say that he did something. I mean, it wasn’t the best thing, but he did something.” [...] “If you think about Obama’s wife, I mean, at least she did some things. I mean, this is his wife. At least she was visible.” [...] “It’s scary to put your hope and faith in somebody who hasn't done anything.” —Michele, GA flipper

“I'm kind of like, disappointed, because I don’t see a lot of change in what [Biden] said he was going to do versus where we’re at now.” [...] “I have to dig deep more into Kamala Harris’ background.” —Cristal, undecided Clinton-Biden voter from CA

“I don’t think she was a very strong pick because of the fact that we really haven’t seen a whole lot about her. And in my world, whatever I have heard about her has been negative. Not that I’ve paid attention, you know, either way. I don't think there’s been … she’s had the opportunity to shine at all, and she’s up against Trump, who fights dirty, nasty, disgusting, it's going to be a really hard uphill battle for her.” —Jessica, undecided Clinton-Biden voter from PA

“We didn’t really get a say in, I guess, like us selecting her to run, and also, I mean, yeah, she worked alongside with Biden, and she’s great,” [Note: The tepid inflection here suggested more "she's fine."] . . . “I guess I just need to, like, know more about her and whether she’s a good representation for the Democratic party.” —Ajanta, MI Flipper

“If they could, like, give me some serious policies, show me some serious plans, then I could seriously get behind it. But right now, I just feel like they’re trying to almost manipulate me with positive energy to vote away. So I’m trying very much to not get sprinkled with the fairy dust. I’m trying to keep my eyes open, like I feel like most of my family’s like ‘it just feels so good.’ And I sometimes feel like Democrats can be emotional voters.” —Kimberly, GA Flipper

THE GREAT DEBATE

Harris and Trump’s debate on Tuesday was historic. Not only was it the first time the two had met in person, but it offered America a depth of insight into who their choices are in relation to each other.

Harris kept her big-tent energy that night, but I’d be remiss if I didn’t note that she may have done so with too much theatrics. One piece of constructive feedback for Harris would be to let Trump remain the actor/entertainer — her tendency to lean into orchestrated, scripted, and somewhat dramatic delivery remains unpalatable. Recent cultural norms that have lauded pettiness remain incredibly off-putting to a lot of Americans, particularly those who already view all politicians as out-of-touch elites. This country needs principled leadership that doesn’t fuel polarization.

Let’s get into Harris’ moderate highlights.

On immigration:

“So I'm the only person on this stage who has prosecuted transnational criminal organizations for the trafficking of guns, drugs, and human beings. And let me say that the United StatesCongress, including some of the most conservative members of the United States Senate, came up with a border security bill which I supported. And that bill would have put 1,500 more border agents on the border to help those folks who are working there right now over time trying to do their job. It would have allowed us to stem the flow of fentanyl coming into the United States. I know there are so many families watching tonight who have been personally affected by the surge of fentanyl in our country. That bill would have put more resources to allow us to prosecute transnational criminal organizations for trafficking in guns, drugs and human beings. But you know what happened to that bill? Donald Trump got on the phone, called up some folks in Congress, and said kill the bill. And you know why? Because he preferred to run on a problem instead of fixing a problem. And understand, this comes at a time where the people of our country actually need a leader who engages in solutions, who actually addresses the problems at hand. But what we have in the former president is someone who would prefer to run on a problem instead of fixing a problem.”

On bipartisan support:

“I think one of the reasons why in this election I actually have the endorsement of 200 Republicans who have formally worked with President Bush, Mitt Romney, and John McCain including the endorsement of former Vice President Dick Cheney and Congressmember Liz Cheney.”

On guns:

"Tim Walz and I are both gun owners. We're not taking anybody's guns away. So stop with the continuous lying about this stuff." 

On energy:

"We have invested a trillion dollars in a clean energy economy while we have also increased domestic gas production to historic levels." 

On healthcare:

"I absolutely support and over the last four years as vice president private health care options. But what we need to do is maintain and grow the Affordable Care Act."

Jonathan V. Last at wrote this about Harris’ debate performance:

Harris has positioned herself as a centrist, Biden Democrat. From the opening question, Harris talked about her support for family formation (a big conservative talking point) and her recognition of the importance of small-businesses (a key Republican constituency). She emphasized her plan for tax cuts. She was hawkish on Russia and China. She offered an unwavering commitment to Israel. She noted that she and her running mate are both gun owners. She talked about the importance of supporting law enforcement and making the criminal justice system work. She is in favor of the strictest border control bill ever passed by the Senate. I’m not sure what else moderate voters could ask from her. If someone doesn’t believe in or trust Harris, that’s fine and they can say so. But don’t pretend that she’s running as something she’s not. Harris has positioned her candidacy in the dead center of American politics.

The Washington Post reported on Harris debate performance responses from Republicans:

It was clear in the debate that Vice President Kamala Harris’ goal was to get under Donald Trump’s skin. But less obvious were the ways in which she was trying to appeal to independent and disenchanted Republican voters. “I pledge to you to be a president for all Americans,” Harris said less than five minutes into the debate…Harris’ debate strategy wasn’t missed by some of the most prominent never-Trumpers. Sen. Mitt Romney (R-Utah), who voted twice to impeach Trump and said he will not vote for Trump in November, took notice. He praised Harris’ debate performance, telling reporters that people saw an “intelligent, capable person.” Romney would not commit to endorsing Harris, though. “I’ve got nothing to add,” he told us.

Republican organizers backing Harris estimate that most of the Republican voters who supported Haley will end up voting for Trump. But they are hoping to get as much as 25 percent of Haley’s voters in swing states, which they argue could be significant in what is expected to be a tight election decided by a handful of states. Former Republican Rep. Joe Walsh (Ill.) has been traveling to battleground states to meet with pro-Harris Republican voter groups that have sprung up in each of the key states, encouraging them to persuade their Republican friends to also vote for Harris. He attended a debate watch party with Republican Harris supporters in the swing state of Arizona and said that ahead of the debate people were unsure how she would perform. Republican voters’ biggest concern is not about policy differences but if Harris is up to the job, according to Walsh. “Based on a lot of messages, she passed that test,” Walsh said. The Harris campaign has had three meetings with Haley voters, who expressed concern about some of her economic policies, including her support for a ban on price gouging in the food industry and her push to increase capital gains taxes. Robert Schwartz, a senior adviser for Haley Voters for Harris, said there was “a lot to appreciate” with Harris’ performance. He said Haley voters he is working with liked her position on Ukraine and foreign policy and that she clarified some of her previous positions, such as her support for private health insurance and fracking. But some in his group still have concerns, Schwartz said, including that Harris didn’t fully reject defunding the police. He said they have been told by the campaign that she supports the hiring of an extra 100,000 police officers. He wishes she would have spoken to that. Still, Harris is trying to contrast her bipartisan outreach to Trump, who plays to his base and threatens to jail his political opponents. “If we can convince 10,000 Republicans, that will make a difference,” Walsh said.

BLUEPRINT POLL OF BATTLEGROUND STATE SWING VOTERS

Blueprint released robust new polling this past week on where Harris stands with voters in the swing states of Arizona, Nevada, Wisconsin, Michigan, Pennsylvania, Georgia, and North Carolina.

When it comes to the issues that swing state voters prioritize the most (jobs and the economy,  inflation, Social Security and Medicare, healthcare, immigration, corruption, and the border), Harris enjoys her largest trust advantages on healthcare and Social Security and Medicare, while Trump retains clear advantages on immigration and the border. But among swing state independents, Harris has an advantage on every single issue except the border, immigration, and oil and gas exploration—including trust advantages over Trump on inflation and the economy.  

The policy proposals that test best in the swing states are those aimed at bringing down food and prescription costs, cracking down on drug traffickers, and reducing the deficit. 

When it comes to messages that Harris can deliver at the debate, our poll indicates that Harris should press her strength on Social Security and Medicare, hone in on her pledges to reduce costs, particularly on food and healthcare, and highlight her record of and commitment to taking on bad corporate actors.

Further:

Harris has a net favorability rating of -2 (49% favorable, 51% unfavorable) compared to Donald Trump’s -6 (46% favorable, 52% unfavorable). But with independent swing state voters, the contrast is more striking: Harris is at -1 (46% favorable, 48% unfavorable), while Trump is at -30 (34% favorable, 63% unfavorable).

Harris’ net favorability is +70 with Black swing state voters, +27 with Latino swing state voters, +11 with younger (aged 18-44) swing state voters, and +10 with women swing state voters. She’s at -18 with white swing state voters and -16 with male swing state voters.

Breaking it down by region: in the Rust Belt, Harris is at -2 (48% favorable, 50% unfavorable) favorability and -1 (49% favorable, 50% unfavorable) in the Sun Belt. Trump, meanwhile, is at +1 (50% favorable, 49% unfavorable) in the Rust Belt but -10 (44% favorable, 54% unfavorable) in the Sun Belt.

40% of swing state voters have a favorable view of JD Vance, and 44% have an unfavorable view, leaving him at -4 net; he sinks to -24 among independents (25% favorable, 49% unfavorable). In the Rust Belt, Vance’s favorability is at -7; it’s -3 in the Sun Belt.

Tim Walz is the most popular candidate in the swing states, both with voters overall (+2; 43% favorable, 41% unfavorable) and independents (+3; 38% favorable, 35% unfavorable). He’s at +5 in the Rust Belt and +1 in the Sun Belt.

Blueprint also conducted a snap poll after the debate, finding:

 45% of voters who watched the debate are now more likely to support Kamala Harris after the debate, with 39% much more likely. Only 31% say they are more likely to support Trump. Among independents, 37% are more likely to back Harris compared to 26% for Trump.

 56% of debate viewers believe Kamala Harris won, including 50% of independents. Just 28% of independents think Trump won, a significant win for team Harris. 

 Harris' positive messaging outshines anti-Trump attacks,with messages focused on values, healthcare, freedom, and unity performing especially well with independents and persuadable voters.

Harris’ contrasts with Trump that resonate are those that are the least anti-Trump and rather pivot to Kamala Harris’ unique vision and plan for America—highlighting the desire for voters to learn more about her. 

CHENEYS FOR HARRIS

Former Wyoming U.S. Rep. Liz Cheney said she will vote for Harris, and also indicated on Friday that her father, Former Republican Vice President Dick Cheney, will vote for Harris as well.

NEW HARRIS ADS, “FOCUSED” & “FEARLESS”

The Harris campaign released two new ads this past week. “Focused” emphasizes Harris’ plans to build up the middle class, noting “Middle class families built America. We need a leader who has their back.”

“Fearless” highlights Harris’ record as a prosecutor “putting murderers and abusers behind bars,” as attorney general “winning $20 billion for home owners,” and as Vice President “taking on the big drug companies to cap the cost of insulin for seniors.”

RVAT AD BUY

Republican Voters Against Trump launched an $11.5 million ad buy in swing states Arizona, Michigan, Nebraska, Pennsylvania, and Wisconsin.

BIG BIZ ENDORSEMENTS

On Friday, 88 corporate leaders endorsed Harris in a letter. Signees included Mark Cuban and those who've led major companies like PepsiCo, Blackstone, Paramount, Ford, and Starbucks. 

MICHIGAN HALEY VOTERS FOR HARRIS

Haley Voters for Harris launched its Michigan operation this past week, noting their plans to reach out to the nearly 300,000 Haley voters in the state to encourage them to vote for Vice President Kamala Harris. Further:

Ambassador Haley received 296,200 (27 percent) of the vote in the Republican primaries.  Our organization (PivotPAC) reached out to 260,000 Michigan voters through digital ads and text messages encouraging them to vote for Ambassador Haley - and against Donald Trump - in February.

While much of the media attention focused on the 101,430 Uncommitted voters, Haley voters outnumbered them by a 3 to 1 ratio.  The key to winning Michigan in November runs through suburban educated voters in the Detroit and Grand Rapids suburbs. 

Multiple members of Ambassador Haley’s state leadership team here in Michigan do not support former President Trump, and some are vocally advocating for VP Harris to win.  

Former Representative Dave Trott (R), a member of Republicans for Harris, says, “While Trump has alienated suburban voters with his unhinged tirades, Kamala Harris has moved to the middle and continues to reach out constructively to Republicans.  She strongly supports our allies and wants to keep the U.S. military the strongest, most lethal fighting force in the world.  The Harris campaign is making a strong play to win the votes of Haley voters here in Michigan.”

HARRIS GAINS MOMENTUM WITH SOMEWHATS, UNDECIDED VOTERS

On Friday, we dove deep into gains the Harris campaign has had with a unique set of voters: the “somewhats.”

PROSECUTORS UP AND DOWN BALLOT

Harris’ record as a prosecutor is helping another prosecutor running down-ballot: Welcome candidate Will Rollins. Rollins was highlighted in a piece by Slate’s Nitish Pahwa headlined “Democrats Are Just Fine Running as Cops.”

In California’s 41^st District, a showdown is taking shape that almost eerily mimics the showdown at the very top of the ticket. There, the Republican congressman is someone who was caught soliciting a sex worker early in his tenure; has consistently been deemed one of Congress’ most corrupt members over the years, thanks to his success securing legislative earmarks that directly benefited his properties; and even came under FBI investigation in 2010 over what media outlets referred to at the time as “an alleged inside deal to buy publicly-owned land.” Running against him is a former prosecutor from a marginalized background hoping to flip the seat blue… One thing Rollins will tell you is that the numbers are on his side. That 2022 race was a loss but a narrow one; Calvert, usually a double-digit victor, saw his lead shrink to 4.5 points. Rollins outperformed most of the other Democrats who’d run for GOP-held districts that year—plus, in that go-round, he didn’t get much attention or support from the national Democratic Party. (This year, major Democratic institutions and leaders like Hakeem Jeffries have helped fundraise for him.)

I hope y’all are rested from last week’s DNC, recovering from a collective “Democrats are back, baby” hangover, and gearing up for a great Labor Day weekend.

Kamala Harris was certainly ready to keep the DNC momentum going, spending the week affirming her policy commitments focused on costs, and announcing she will appoint a Republican to her cabinet.

I took a step back this week to think about the state of the presidential race — and this newsletter. We got some great constructive feedback last week to not make this digest merely a “PR outlet for Harris,” but to clearly show where the Harris-Walz ticket is - and is not - aligning their messaging and actions with what can maximize the odds of both winning and governing effectively. This comment highlighted something I’ve been chewing on with our Center Left partners: there will never be a definition of “moderate” that’s as clear as "progressive" or "MAGA." But that doesn't mean moderate isn't real — one aspect is nicely defined by Starts With Us — or that depolarizing isn't possible, as we cover via our new podcast.

One could also argue we have bigger problems to hash out right now as a Party (and as a country) than quibbling about, say, economic incentives, but I do often ask myself, what happens if we win?

I’m curious of y’all’s thoughts on this: What does “moderate” mean to you? And how do you self-identify as a Center Left Democrat? Since WelcomeFest, I’ve been into self-identifying as a “progressive conservative” with Rep. Jared Golden, or as a “passionate pragmatist.” Let me know in the comments section, please!

Now, on to this week’s round-up.

HARRIS WALZ CNN INTERVIEW

Kamala Harris and Tim Walz sat down with CNN’s Dana Bash for the duo’s first official interview since launching their ticket. Bash peppered them with questions ranging from why Harris shifted her position on policy stances she took in 2019 on issues like fracking and the Green New Deal to how she responded when Biden notified her of his decision to drop out of the race.

Some (Kamala is Moderate) highlights:

1. Harris pledges to appoint a Republican to her Cabinet: “I think it’s important to have people at the table when some of the most important decisions are being made that have different views, different experiences,” she said in an interview with CNN. “And I think it would be to the benefit of the American public to have a member of my Cabinet who was a Republican.”

2. Harris confirms she will not ban fracking: “No, and I made that clear on the debate stage in 2020, that I would not ban fracking. As vice president, I did not ban fracking. As president, I will not ban fracking.”

3. Harris emphasizes her intention to secure the border: “Joe Biden and I and our administration worked with members of the United States Congress on an immigration issue that is very significant to the American people and to our security, which is the border. And through bipartisan work, including some of the most conservative members of the United States Congress, a bill was crafted which we supported, which I support. And Donald Trump got word of this bill that would’ve — that contributed to securing our border. And because he believes that it would not have helped him politically, he told his folks in Congress, '“Don’t put it forward.” He killed the bill: a border security bill that would’ve put 1,500 more agents on the border. And let me tell you something. The Border Patrol endorsed the bill.”

4. Harris’ vision for an “opportunity economy:” Day one, it’s gonna be about one, implementing my plan for what I call an opportunity economy. I’ve already laid out a number of proposals in that regard, which include what we’re gonna do to bring down the cost of everyday goods, what we’re gonna do to invest in America’s small businesses, what we’re gonna do to invest in families… We had to recover as an economy, and we have done that. I’m very proud of the work that we have done that has brought inflation down to less than 3%, the work that we have done to cap the cost of insulin at $35 a month for seniors. Donald Trump said he was gonna do a number of things, including allowing Medicare to negotiate drug prices. Never happened. We did it.

Post-interview, some pundits were unsatisfied with Harris’ explanation of her policy flip-flops. But as we noted in the original Kamala Is Moderate, her discomfort with the unrealistic litmus test fervor of the 2020 primary was clear at the time. I understand it may not be worth it for Harris to divide the joyful bandwagon by religitgating 2020, but it is clear that we all need to continue widening the path to victory in the middle - both before the election, and after. That's what's realistic, anyway: as Matt Yglesias points out, the median U.S. senator is likely to be Lisa Murkowski, so we may as well start proposing policies that will both help swing voters and have a chance at passing. Better to further moderate before the election than after. 

You can view the full transcript of the interview here.

HARRIS GAINS FAV AMONG TRUMP UNFAVS

To be fair, this is last week’s news, but the New York Times reported groups from which Harris has gained and lost support in the electorate. Most notably, she’s up 46 points among voters who have a “somewhat unfavorable” view of Trump.

She’s also, notably, down 10 points among those who identify as “somewhat conservative,” which is a hard hit, as those are the same voters we often work to woo with our Welcome candidates.

RETIRED 4-STAR GENERAL, FORMER STAFF OF PROMINENT REPUBLICANS ENDORSE HARRIS

More than 200 former staff of both Bush Presidents, the late Sen. John McCain, and Sen. Mitt Romney declared their endorsement of Kamala Harris in an open letter released Monday. The group of Republicans urged moderate Republicans and conservative-leaning independent voters to “take a brave stand once more, to vote for leaders that will strive for consensus, not chaos; that will work to unite, not divide; that will make our country and our children proud.”

Additionally, retired four-star general General Larry Ellis, who served in that rank under George W. Bush’s administration, endorsed Harris’ campaign this week as well.

TWEET OF THE WEEK

I’ve reminded myself over and over again that millions of Americans didn’t even know the DNC was taking place this week, but I’ll try not to let that spoil the wins for this week :)

Funny enough, at this week’s Democratic National Convention, I think I spent half of my time with Republican friends who work in the center right space. Our Never Trump friends are fired up for the Harris Walz ticket, and the sense of community and patriotism is truly inspiring. Btw, Reed Howard (pictured with us below) just launched the Republicans for Harris Substack page, so please be sure to check that out!

Now, on to this week’s round-up.

Lauren and Liam with our pal Reed Howard who leads Republicans for Harris.

A SPEECH FOR THE HISTORY BOOKS

Kamala Harris’ nomination acceptance speech was truly one for the books. She spoke of her track record protecting individuals and families as a prosecutor and Attorney General, splendidly aggressive plans to secure the border, balanced perspectives for Israel & Palestine, plans to declare a strong national military, intentions to beat China in the tech race, and more.

She closed with an ending that could have been ripped from a Republican speechwriter’s notes:

America, let us show each other and the world who we are and what we stand for: Freedom, opportunity, compassion, dignity, fairness and endless possibilities.

We are the heirs to the greatest democracy in the history of the world. And on behalf of our children and our grandchildren and all those who sacrificed so dearly for our freedom and liberty, we must be worthy of this moment.

It is now our turn to do what generations before us have done, guided by optimism and faith, to fight for this country we love, to fight for the ideals we cherish and to uphold the awesome responsibility that comes with the greatest privilege on Earth: the privilege and pride of being an American. So let’s get out there, let’s fight for it. Let’s get out there, let’s vote for it, and together, let us write the next great chapter in the most extraordinary story ever told.

Thank you. God bless you, and may God bless the United States of America. Thank you.

Kamala is a moderate.

She said she wants to secure the border, strengthen our defense, protect Social Security and Medicare and prosecute criminals. This is the moderate Kamala that welcomes Republicans into Team Normal.

WHAT FOLKS SAID ABOUT THE SPEECH

Semafor proclaims “Kamala the Centrist,” and notes that,

“The convention “marked the triumphal return of former US President Barack Obama’s brand of politics — with some notable updates for the Trump era,” Semafor’s Benjy Sarlin writes.”

The New York Times, in their post “Why Harris’s centrism is working,” writes,

Harris has surged in the polls, erasing Biden’s deficit and taking a small lead over Trump, for two main reasons. First, she has won over some swing voters, including independents, working-class Midwesterners and even a fraction of 2020 Trump voters. Second, she has done so at no apparent cost: In addition to attracting swing voters, she has built a bigger lead than Biden had among the Democratic base, such as young voters, college graduates and city residents.

It’s a point we’ve made before at WelcomeStack: moderation is mobilizing. Our base is moderate, and they’re excited when they see a candidate who stands for these values and is willing to run a campaign capable of beating Trump. We’ve said it before and we’ll say it again: they aren’t the base if they are constantly threatening to leave you. You can find the base inside the convention cheering, not outside jeering.

The Washington Post, in a column called “Hi, moderates, it’s me, Kamala,” writes,

But Harris didn’t mention that fact or lean into the identity politics that the right has accused the left of abusing. Instead, she positioned herself as a president for all people. It was a clear effort to appeal to independent and disaffected Trump voters — a theme that was evident throughout the four-day convention, especially last night.

“I know there are people of various political views watching tonight. And I want you to know: I promise to be a president for all Americans,” Harris said in her roughly 40-minute speech.

And Jonathan Chait writes in “Kamala Harris Understood the Assignment,”

Harris cast her lot firmly on the conservative side of social questions like criminal justice, border enforcement, the military, and patriotism. Democrats waved American flags and chanted “U-S-A!” with gusto and frequency. Harris presented her own plans as responsible, common sense, and potentially bipartisan. She cast her opponent, not herself, as the driver of radical change — somehow without undercutting her depicting of him as old news. Trump’s angry rejoinder that Harris is serving in the White House right now, along with his desperation to disavow himself from Project 2025, which he has previously touted as his master plan for a second term, is another sign of how well this is working.

What a change from 2020 - and, as Nate Silver wrote, Kamala Harris is not going back to the failed politics of 2016.

The theme of WelcomeFest last month was For The People (In The Middle). That’s what this DNC was. As we wrote yesterday, we are Not Going Back (to the disastrous 2020 primary). Moderate Kamala is winning the middle.

After having another week to think about how to structure this (additional recommendations welcome, btw), I’ve decided to add even more flavor to the mix: things we want to see or hear from the Harris-Walz ticket.

Now, on to this week’s round-up!

THE ECONOMY: KAMALA’S VERSION

Harris gave remarks centered on the economy on Friday to a crowd in Raleigh, NC. You can read her full remarks here.

Her focus was on how, as President, she would lower the cost of living for Americans. To achieve that, she noted plans to:

• Lower the cost of food by passing the first-ever federal ban on price gouging, supporting small food business, and encouraging competition in the food industry.

• Address the cost of healthcare by lowering the cost of insulin and prescription drugs by demanding transparency in the negotiations between Big Pharma and the insurance companies, and canceling medical debt.

• Fix the housing crisis by building 3 million units by the end of her first term for both buyers and renters, address landlord greed inflating the cost of housing with a new law, and provide first-time homebuyers with $25,000
  in down payment assistance.

• Help Americans keep more of their money by restoring the Earned Income Tax Credit and the Child Tax Credit.

Additional notable moments in her remarks included:

• Mainstream language that doesn’t sound like a Democratic handout and hits on the restoration of human dignity in America: “What we will do to bring down costs,
  increase the security and stability financially of your family, and expand opportunity for working- and middle-class Americans. 

• Contrasting with Trump on who he protects: “If you want to know who someone cares about, look who they fight for…Donald Trump fights for billionaires and large corporations. I will fight to give money back to working- and middle-class Americans.”

As a bonus, I must have missed this before, but she also mentioned that she worked at McDonald’s in high school. Supersize!

Slow Boring’s Matt Yglesias got jazzed at one point in her remarks in particular.

GETTING FOX-Y

The Harris campaign announced yesterday its $370 million ad buy in swing states this fall, with $200 million of that to be spent on digital ads.

Notably, the ad reservation will target moderate voters viewing FOX News programming. The New York Times reported:

The Harris campaign also said it would place ads on Fox News during the day, when the network has a “more moderate audience,” according to the memo, describing this as a strategy to reach supporters of former Gov. Nikki Haley of South Carolina, who was the runner-up in the Republican primary race, and “other conservative-leaning independents.”

HARRIS PRACTICING DEMOCRACY IN 2019

Welcome retweeted a video from 2019 of a then-Democratic presidential primary candidate Kamala Harris’ (non-combative) exchange with a young Republican in Iowa. In the video, Harris responds to his remarks saying,

“I want to thank you for being here… for having an open mind. Part of the beauty of our democracy is that we debate, we discuss, we often will disagree, but we have the same motivation. I know you’re here ‘cause you love our country, and I’m here for the same reason. And we may have other different ideas about how we go about expressing that love and strengthening our country, but I know we’re on the same page in terms of where we’re coming from. And I know that about you ‘cause you’re here right now, and you had the courage to stand up and say what you said. And that means a lot to me. So thank you, thank you.”

SLIGHT LEAD IN PENNSYLVANIA

In Quinnipiac’s first survey of likely voters in the 2024 presidential election race in the new era of a Harris-Walz ticket, Vice President Kamala Harris has a slight lead over former President Donald Trump 48 - 45% among likely voters. We The People Party candidate Robert F. Kennedy, Jr. is at 4% support, and Green Party candidate Jill Stein and Libertarian Party candidate Chase Oliver receive less than one percent support each.

Additionally:

• Democrats support Harris 91 - 6%; Republicans support Trump 88 - 9%; Independents support Harris over Trump 46-42%.

• Women support Harris 54 - 41%, Men back Trump 49 - 42%.

LOVE FROM DOUBLE HATERS

A new poll from Monmouth found the number of double haters (voters who held an unfavorable view of both candidates) for the current nominees has been cut in half since Harris became Democratic nominee for President. They note:

When favorability ratings for Harris and Trump are combined, just 8% do not have a favorable opinion of either candidate. Monmouth’s June poll found that 54% of the double haters were not supporting either candidate, with 28% backing Biden and 19% backing Trump. In the current poll, Harris actually holds majority support (53%) among these Biden-Trump double haters, with just 11% voting for Trump and 35% backing neither candidate.

Taking Biden out of the mix and replacing him with Harris has significantly altered a key metric in this race. As we reported last month, Trump-Biden double haters want to shake things up, but they are wary of change that is too authoritarian. Harris appears to provide most of this group with the fresh outlook they desire,” said Patrick Murray, director of the independent Monmouth University Polling Institute.

Additionally, enthusiasm among Democrats has “skyrocketed.” According to Monmouth:

 A huge shift in enthusiasm is the most vivid finding in the poll. While the number of voters who were at least somewhat enthusiastic about the Trump versus Biden rematch had been increasing throughout the year, it never topped 50%. Now that the contest is Trump versus Harris, voter enthusiasm has risen to 68%. The biggest jump has been among Democrats (from 46% in June to 85% now), but there has also been a notable increase in enthusiasm among independents (from 34% to 53%). Among Republicans, enthusiasm for the Trump-Harris contest (71%) is identical to what it was for the Trump-Biden rematch in June (71%).

Monmouth also asked specifically about enthusiasm for each party’s choice of nominee. The national electorate’s enthusiasm for Trump as the Republican nominee (41%) is basically unchanged from February (40%). However, enthusiasm for Harris as the Democratic standard-bearer (47%) is significantly higher than it was for Biden earlier this year (32%). Currently, Democratic voters are slightly more enthusiastic about having Harris as their nominee (92%) than Republicans are about having Trump at the top of their ticket (84%). Back in February, Republican enthusiasm for Trump was similarly high (80%), but Democratic enthusiasm about the prospect of Biden being their nominee was significantly lower (62%).

“This is clearly a different ballgame. The nominee change has raised the ceiling for potential Democratic support in the presidential contest by a small but crucial amount, at least for now,” said Murray.

NEW MEMOS FROM THIRD WAY

Our friends at Third Way have new memos out fact-checking lies from Donald Trump and MAGA Republicans painting “Vice President Harris as a radical on the border, public safety, health care, and energy — A perception that could hurt Harris if it is allowed to set in. Voters are sure to be inundated with these messages leading up to the election, but the facts offer ample opportunity to push back.”

READ: Rebutting Border Attacks on VP Harris and Myths & Facts: Rebutting Trump’s False Attacks on Harris’s Record

MODERATE ‘MINISTRATION

Also from Third Way, big news came last week: Their new Moderate Talent Pipeline is active. As we’ve noted in the past, one of the biggest weaknesses of the Biden Administration was in the the human infrastructure — they hired scores of progressive Warren staffers who pushed policy and messaging to the left of where he himself — and most of America — was on many issues. The Moderate Talent Pipeline will work to fix that problem by being a “a long-term, strategic initiative to amplify moderate views, voices, and political power. The Talent Pipeline will be identifying, recruiting, and helping place moderate staff throughout government: political appointees in the White House and federal agencies, staff in congressional offices and committees, and within prominent Democratic campaigns.”

BONUS: 20 Qs for KAMALA HARRIS

We liked this piece from Semafor’s Benjy Sarlin on things he would like to Harris to answer in her campaigning for the presidency.

Welcome’s Wishlist

1. Harris has really caught her groove as a presidential candidate. We’d love to see her be more aggressive on the Team Normal front — she mentioned her parents didn’t buy a home until she and her sister were teenagers, and she worked at McDonald’s in high school. More of this, please!

2. Moderation at the national level helps in swing districts. Our Welcome candidates note that Harris-Walz’s moderate messaging is helpful to them as they run in some of the most competitive congressional districts in the country. The Harris-Walz Team Normal backgrounds are things candidates can not only evoke but relate to with biographical elements that align with rural candidates with Walz, particularly. Messaging from Harris and Walz that can align with what candidates are saying in swing districts is a huge help to them and their campaigns.

Today we’re kicking off our log of each week’s moderate highlights leading up to Election Day (12 weeks out!). Additionally, we’ll include the coverage that calibrates us to Harris-Walz Centrism. If you have tips for this weekly round-up, feel free to share them with me (lauren@welcomepac.org).

BTW: We haven’t seen anyone do a “Moderates for Kamala” Zoom yet - has this been done? Please shoot us a note if you’d be interested in joining/planning.

Subscribe now

NEW AD ON BORDER SECURITY

A new Harris campaign ad touts Harris’ history prosecuting drug cartels and plans to “hire thousands more border agents and crack down on fentanyl and human trafficking.”

BLUEPRINT POLLING MESSAGE TESTING

A new Blueprint poll out this week makes the case for moderate Harris messaging. The top testing messages for Harris all focus on moderate themes:

• "tough on crime prosecutor"

• "prosecuted sex traffickers and other men who abused women, putting them behind bars"

• "protecting Social Security and Medicare"

Additionally, the poll found Harris even on overall favorability: 46% of voters view her favorably, and 46% view her unfavorably—a major improvement compared to how voters viewed her before Biden exited the race. Trump is viewed favorably by 43% of voters and unfavorably by 52%. The poll also shows that voter attitudes about Harris are less calcified than their perception of Trump.

KAMALA’S A PRO AT SHHH’ING PROTESTERS

Perhaps this week’s most notable moment came at a campaign rally in Michigan when protesters disrupted the Vice President during her remarks, to which she responded, “I’m here ‘cause we believe in democracy. Everyone’s voice matters, but I am speaking now. I am speaking now.” The crowd roared with applause.

For Additional Consumption:

WHAT’S BETTER THAN CALLING TRUMP WEIRD?

Two of our favorite researchers David Broockman and Josh Kalla put out a piece via Slow Boring this week making the case to frame Harris as leader of Team Normal: “Right now, the data’s message for Democrats is clear: Just be normal.”

Further, “How should Democrats be defining Harris? Some commentators treat this question as a proxy for the battle between the Democrats’ progressive and moderate factions, hoping Harris will voice support for their faction’s signature policies. But our mega-survey finds neither side of this debate is right. Rather than tacking to the left or to the center, it’s messages that present Harris like a normal Democrat that most persuade voters. That means running on mainstream “kitchen table” Democratic ideas to reduce the cost of living, protect Medicare and Social Security by taxing the rich, keep abortion legal, and raise the minimum wage. Other messages that don’t map onto ideological divides in the Democratic party, such as touting her achievements as a prosecutor and casting the tie-breaking vote for the American Rescue Plan, also perform well.

In other words, a good rule of thumb for Harris is that if both AOC and Joe Manchin would say they’re for something, she should probably be saying that, too.”

TIM WALZ CAN RETURN TO HIS (MODERATE) ROOTS

Matt Yglesias noted in his write-up on the Walz selection that “Walz as a House member was quite moderate. He ranked as the seventh “most bipartisan” member of the 114th Congress.”

WALZ IS A “MIDDLE AMERICA LIBERAL”

Ed Warren with Team Commonsense noted praise from the Center Left ecosystem around the Walz pick: “In fact, most of the center-left is loudly proclaiming their enthusiasm for him as a pragmatic centrist. The New Dems, a 100-Member coalition of moderates in the US House, celebrated that Walz is a ‘no-nonsense, down-to-earth, and authentic candidate’ ‘that leads from the middle.’ Third Way proclaimed that he is ‘what America needs’ with his bipartisan voting record and unusual, approachable background as a ‘gun owner, hunter and a former high school football coach.’”

He also analyzed Walz’s flavor of Democratic politics by referring to him as representing “Middle America liberals: You might call them “Minnesota nice.” But that does not make them pushovers. They come from a strong tradition of liberals that are fierce advocates for the underdog, proudly champion American values, and have an enduring belief in the nobility of public service. That makes them strong allies of the labor movement and defenders of social rights. As Tim Walz has said multiple times, “In Minnesota, we respect our neighbors and their personal choices that they make. Even if we wouldn’t make the same choice for ourselves, there’s a golden rule. Mind your own damn business.”

WALZ: THE GREAT UNITER?

Vox’s Zack Beauchamp made the case that Walz could be seen as a unifier of the Democratic Party’s two major factions: leftists and centrists.

He notes, “Walz’s position on how to end the current Gaza war is virtually identical to Shapiro’s. The most important difference is less Middle East policy than domestic: Shapiro has been far harsher on pro-Palestine campus protests than Walz has. So while Walz is the left’s chosen candidate, he is not a candidate of the left. He’s a mainstream Democrat with a record containing elements that both progressives and moderates can like.”

Further, “Harris has tacked to the center: repudiating many of her past unpopular positions in favor of more moderate stances that align better with mainstream public opinion. The message that Republicans are “weird” is designed to play up the notion that she represents the vast American middle while Trump is the true extremist. Walz helps make this message more credible.”

One thing Zach got wrong, however, is stating that Walz invented the “Republicans are weird” language for Democrats. That was actually Rep. Marie Gluesenkamp Perez in 2022. :)

BONUS: WALZ MAKES GOOD IMPRESSION(S)

Kyle Tharp’s FWIW newsletter noted this week that, “According to a new analysis from CAP Action, excitement about the Walz news far outpaced that of the Trump campaign’s announcement of JD Vance. Top progressive pages generated 28 million engagements on posts related to Walz between Tuesday and Wednesday  — more than three times the 8.1 million engagements that posts related to Vance received from top conservative pages during the two days after his announcement.”

A consensus has emerged over the last few days that the battle for the White House boils down to defining Kamala1. Specifically, either defining her as a California radical who was the most liberal US Senator (as Trump and GOP Senate candidates want) or as a pragmatic prosecutor (which mainstream Democrats want).

On Tuesday, we laid out three dynamics that will influence how Harris is defined:

1. Harris’s true self is moderate, and her public campaign discomfort derived from being pressured left

2. The 2020 primary dynamic squeezed her, while the 2024 primary-free dynamic frees Harris to be herself - and focus on the middle

3. Biden was moved left over the past four years, and those dynamics must shift for Harris to win

We’ll dive into the first two today. And be talking much more about it at WelcomeFest in DC on Tuesday, which will feature some of the sharpest analysts of these topics:

• : This Is the Best Possible Way for Kamala Harris to Launch a Run for President

• : The case for Kamala Harris, from a former hater + Kamala Harris should try to be really popular

• Blueprint polling: ’The upside for Harris is huge’: Democratic poll finds Kamala needs to define her brand quickly

• : Trump campaign ‘completely freaked out’ by Harris candidacy, says former Republican strategist

2020 Pre-mortem on Centrist Harris

The doubters often go back to the “For The People” 2020 campaign flop (or all the way back to her statewide campaign for AG in 2010, which she narrowly won in deep blue California).

But forget all the postmortems of the 2020 Harris presidential primary campaign. Five years ago this week, The New York Times wrote a pre-mortem just months into her presidential primary campaign that captures the upside of Harris: she is by nature the type of moderate that can win the middle.

At her strongest, Senator Kamala Harris is forceful and pragmatic. She elates crowds in Iowa and South Carolina with her denunciations of President Trump, and spells out her policy agenda — on matters like restricting gun sales, reducing prescription drug prices and giving tax benefits to renters — in precise terms.

And it also captures a downside, not so much to Harris as to where the Democratic primary zeitgeist went in 2020: to extreme litmus tests. Here’s the next paragraph in the same article:

Then there is another version of Ms. Harris: unsteady when addressing litmus-test questions — the hypothetical or intensely ideological queries like whether a single-payer system should void all private insurance, or whether a convicted terrorist should be able to vote from prison. She is intensely resistant, sometimes to the point of visible discomfort, to her own party’s thirst for policies that would redraw the American economy and system of government.

Wait a second, Kamala Harris was “intensely resistant” “to the point of visible discomfort” at Democratic activists’ “thirst for policies” that would lead to massive changes?

That sounds like someone who could appeal to many swing voters! But alas, 2020 was a funhouse mirror that distorted formerly pragmatic Democratic. It was basically like dozens of little Iraq War votes for the next generation of rising star candidates. As Matt Yglesias recently wrote, Harris:

caught a bit of world-historical bad luck in that she happened to run for president during literally the only political cycle in history where a track-record as a tough on crime prosecutor could possibly be construed as a weakness. I do not think she handled this situation correctly, but it was an honest-to-God weird situation.

2020 was weird!

The NYT article headline shows where the media and progressive mindset was at the time:

Ah yes, the horror of “relevant policy”.

With five years of hindsight, we know just how wrong this narrative of the 2020 Democratic primary electorate was - and how well Kamala’s instinctive pragmatism could have won out over Elizabeth Warren’s “big, structural change” if emphasized:

“I’m not trying to restructure society,” Ms. Harris said. “I’m just trying to take care of the issues that wake people up in the middle of the night.”

Kamala was right, and the real-time coverage of the 2020 Democratic primary was wrong. Joe Biden’s team devised a winning strategy in that primary because, in their words, “We turned off Twitter. We stayed away from it. We knew that the country was in a different headspace than social media would suggest“

But while Kamala The Human Being was right in 2020, her presidential campaign team pushed her along with the Twitter-infused media narrative. The pragmatic candidate got mauled by the online leftists in her employ:

One adviser said the fixation that some younger staffers have with liberals on Twitter distorted their view of what issues and moments truly mattered, joking that it was not President Trump’s account that should be taken offline, as Ms. Harris has urged, but rather those of their own trigger-happy communications team.

“Not Ideological”

Re-reading the 2019 coverage can be tortuous, as it relives just how damaging the overreach of the progressive left was - and how its ramifications are still being felt today. The same NYT article again:

At times, her shifts in tone and substance have been abrupt. Earlier this month, she laid out a clear and creative plan to lower drug prices with presidential executive powers. Then, hours later, she took a new and confusing stance on “Medicare for All”-style health insurance, endorsing the program but opposing taxes typically seen as necessary to fund it.

That set of instincts — her preference for narrow, tactile proposals over grandly ambitious ones, her facility with procedure and unease with ideology — defines her approach to politics, according to Ms. Harris and her closest associates. And her ability to reconcile those inclinations with her party’s mood could determine the fate of her campaign.

It was not the mood of the party! It was the mood of the young staffers and activists on Twitter! Many great leaders got swallowed up by the Online Left, and then spit out by voters. Only the Twitter-less Biden was immune, and left standing.

While not fun to re-live, the 2020 primary still shapes the Democratic world today. But it can also shape a counter-reaction that can power Kamala to an electoral college victory.

Here’s another problem she had in the 2020 primary: actually caring about what all the buzzwords and unrealistic policy proposals meant:

Part of the difficulty, Ms. Harris said, was her impulse to take any given question and start “running through, in my head, all the scenarios about how it would actually work.”

“It can be very — obviously — challenging for me as a candidate, because it can be misinterpreted, I think, as being evasive, or, ‘Is she sure? Is she wiffly-waffling?’ Or whatever,” Ms. Harris said. “But it’s just, I really do think through these things.”

Kamala isn’t just sharp and energetic. She’s ideologically flexible:

Five associates observed, in near-identical language, that she is “not ideological.”

The centrist’s curse of ideological flexibility can be the greatest gift of a politician.

Coronation Upside

A competitive race for the nomination would have brought some benefits - baseline democracy benefits of increased engagement, partisan benefits of attention, raising the profile of potential Vice Presidential nominees, and maybe even moving the conversation to swing voters.

But competition also poses risk on the “moving Kamala to the center” strategy - largely because she is personally moderate and it was the competition that pushed her left!

The risk most often mentioned about a competitive primary was the party fracturing. But given the dynamics within the party ecosystem, and the delta between over-educated activists and low-information swing voters, the bigger risk is actually in unifying all of the “professional left.” As Lauren wrote in her critique of Ezra Klein’s praise of Biden’s unity approach, unity did not actually work for Biden’s re-election prospects. Biden was unpopular and losing - and not listening to the general election winners in the party.

A competition for the nomination may have enhanced a focus on electability, but it would force Harris to compete for every interest group bloc in the Democratic ecosystem. While conditions today are different than in 2020, the nonprofit progressive industrial complex is still strong. The Groups still have their litmus tests and foundation-funded grant metrics for media hits for pushing Democrats leftward. And just as in 2020, they would have pushed Harris. Just like interest groups are (successfully!) pushing the contenders for the vice presidential nomination to change positions now.

A bellwether of Democratic Socialists, the editor of The Nation Magazine, gave voice to leftist frustration by asking, “where's pressure on Harris to not just run on Trump being a criminal & coconuts & decency or whatever?”

No competition means no pressure. And, if Harris pushes back, the purity test groups have no leverage.

Nixon to China, Unburdened

Without having to hold down the left flank for primary votes (or delegates), Harris is free to do whatever is needed to win. She can “say the words” Biden would not: America is producing more energy, including oil, than any nation ever.

For a flavor of how this would actually work, check out this video recommended by a moderate faction leader in her native SF. Harris mocked the impracticality of San Franciscans who “are progressive minded” that she “agrees with conceptually” but do not address reality - who do not address the reasons “I have three padlocks on my door.” You can check out this video starting at 11:12.

Harris is now free to do that again - to pull off a "Nixon to China" move, a metaphor:

to refer to the ability of a politician with an unassailable reputation among their supporters for representing and defending their values to take actions that would draw their criticism and even opposition if taken by someone without those credentials.

Or, more bluntly: she can pivot.

Trump to Evangelicals

Unfortunately, the Nixon to China - or Harris to the Middle - move is even more necessary because Trump is doing something similar to his right flank. The Former Guy got Republicans to remove abortion specifics from the Republican platform, and then disowned Project 2025 in a forceful way, starting by invoking his “great common sense”:

“some on the severe right came up with Project 2025 … they’re sort of the opposite of the radical left, you have the radical left and the radical right … read some of the things and they’re seriously extreme.”

Trump’s mocking tone evokes the Harris frustration with the far left in San Francisco. We need that front and center to win more swing voters. As that video from 2013 shows, Kamala can pull it off by invoking her progressive credibility (raised in Berkeley, CA by liberal activist parents) then pivoting to why she must tell tough truths to those on her own side. In telling her own political story, Matt Yglesias suggests a specific election:

She can remind people that she challenged the incumbent DA in San Francisco from the right to win her first election — that she is well aware of the excesses of big-city liberalism and has in fact fought against them

Day One

Kamala’s initial campaign appearance on her first full day as a candidate was at the Delaware campaign office. And it held some positive themes for voters in the middle: patriotism and bipartisanship.

She kicked off with patriotic themes:

We are all here because we love our country … we believe in opportunity, in freedom, in justice.

And the first thing she invoked about Joe Biden - after his economic successes - was bipartisanship:

He brought together Republicans and Democrats and passed historic legislation … I would sit with Joe in the Oval Office as he would bring members of both sides of the aisle, and talk. And listen. And help them see what they may have in common, and how we can actually work towards solutions.

That message works, and is true to who Kamala is.

Let’s get to work to make the (true) message stick. For the People in the middle.

Further Reading

Jonathan Chait - The Cop Against the Criminal. Let’s Do This.

Josh Barro - This Is the Best Possible Way for Kamala Harris to Launch a Run for President

Catherine Rampell - Yes, ‘Kamala is a cop.’ This time, it could help her win an election.

Matt Yglesias - The case for Kamala Harris, from a former hater and Kamala Harris should try to be really popular (from 2021)