Opinion | We Still Don't Know What Kamala Harris Really Is About

With less than two weeks to voting day, the US presidential race remains maddeningly deadlocked and statistically tied. A gain of a percentage point here, a fraction there could mean victory or defeat.  

That said, Donald Trump appears to have some last-minute momentum while Kamala Harris seems to be struggling to win new converts while losing a percentage of traditional voters. Although the average of various national polls still shows Harris ahead with 48.1% and Trump at 46.4%, her four-point lead in August has narrowed and changed the ‘vibe' somewhat. But national polls don't tell the real story, it's state polls where the action is because of the complicated Electoral College system in the presidential election. 

Of the seven so-called battleground states – Pennsylvania, Wisconsin, Michigan, Georgia, Arizona, Nevada and North Carolina –Trump is ahead in five and Harris in two in a sign of the wheels turning in his favour. But it's all within the margin of error. 

Beyond The "Vibes" Campaign

Last week, Nate Silver, a reputed pollster, listed 24 reasons why Trump could win, ranging from the Electoral College bias favouring Republicans, voters' negative perceptions about the economy, illegal immigration ballooning under the current administration where Harris is Vice-President to the shift in Black and Latino male vote towards Trump, and, most importantly, Harris's failure to define herself on issues in a manner that resonates.

Being a “joyful warrior” and running a “vibes” campaign is proving inadequate—voters are worried about inflation, not what influencers say. Harris has been in office for nearly four years but can't seem to disassociate herself from the administration's failed policies in a way that works for her. 

No surprise then the Democrats are anxious while the Republicans are swaggering a bit at the moment. But the tables could turn yet again because polls can be and have been wrong in the past two elections. Things could swing either way in the final phase, depending on voter turnout and the ground game where Democrats have a definite edge. The Dems also have more money—the Harris campaign has collected $1 billion in small and large donations. 

Harris's Warnings Are Not Working

But what about the closing arguments to sway those who are still undecided? Trump and Harris are making a similar case—‘elect me because the other is a threat to democracy, your way of life and to America itself'. While Trump's arsenal always had shades of the apocalypse—Democrats as ‘closet communists', Harris as a ‘radical leftist', ‘illegals are invading', ‘world is in chaos'--Harris has also caught the fever in the final stretch.

Her attacks are increasingly pointed. She is busy painting Trump as toxic, dangerous, unchecked, unstable, even a potential dictator and a man who can't follow a thought for a minute. A second Trump administration would be a living manifestation of Project 2025, an extremist agenda prepared by ultra-conservatives. The plan includes mass firing of government workers and dismantling the entire department of education.  

The problem is, the warnings are not working, especially with blue-collar voters. Her campaign might be making a mistake by hammering the wrong nail. Voters have already factored in Trump's dangerous flaws and taken a measure. They have filtered out what they don't like. His inflammatory rhetoric and threats to unleash the military on fellow Americans (Democrats) are seen as bombastic talk and not a plan of action. After two assassination attempts, he is also a beneficiary of some sympathy, especially with those who feel the Democrats overreached by drowning him in legal cases. 

An Undefined Candidate

By contrast, Harris remains largely undefined for many Americans. Is she a populist who will take on big business, or will she swim within her lane? Even when given a chance to clarify her positions on illegal immigration and what she would do differently to fix the economy, she played safe instead of striking a different note. It reinforced the idea she's an incumbent defending the current administration's record, not a candidate of change who will “turn the page” as she says. 

Voters are hungering for “change” from this administration's policies, whether on the economy, broken borders, or two raging wars. Trump has hammered on all those issues from the start and set the narrative of Democrats' failure on all three. 

While Harris may be struggling with male voters, she does have an advantage with women on the issue of reproductive rights. No matter how Trump spins it, he can't get away from the fact that his Supreme Court appointees dismantled Roe v. Wade, taking away a woman's right to have an abortion. The court sent the matter to states resulting in a patchwork of restrictive laws, with some states banning abortions after six weeks of pregnancy. Harris is passionate when speaking on the issue, unlike any other. She needs to hammer on it until the end to rouse women to come out in ever greater numbers. At the same time, she could admit that illegal immigration should have been managed better. 

Dems and liberals feel outraged that Trump, a convicted felon, might win the White House again, but voters have other things on their minds. It doesn't help Harris to parade Republicans who broke from Trump and consider him a closet fascist at her town hall meetings. It doesn't matter how many Republicans sign letters in her support. What matters are her plans, policies and predilections, which even at this late stage remain largely confined to her website. They haven't been translated into effective messaging to voters. 

The McDonald's Masterstroke

Economic populism is working well for Trump. He appeared at a McDonald's in the battleground state of Pennsylvania last Sunday to cook fries and hand out orders at the drive-in window. It was a political masterstroke and reinforced the image that he connects with average folks. How a billionaire who has played the system forever can also play a messiah for the working class will remain a mystery, but that's where the messaging of one camp has succeeded over the other.

The Democratic Party's disconnect from working-class voters—Blacks, Whites and Latinos—is shocking to some, but it's been in the process for some time. The Republicans stole the constituency in broad daylight, while the Democrats were busy playing ‘woke' and pandering to the extreme fringe of the party. In the process, the Dems lost touch with a majority of everyday Americans who don't live in California and New York.

(Seema Sirohi is a Washington, DC-based columnist and the author of 'Friends With Benefits: The India-US Story', a book about the past 30 years of the relationship)

Disclaimer: These are the personal opinions of the author