Kamala Harris Will Win (And 43 Other Things I Think About the Election)
It's finally time to pass through this historical inflection point
I think Kamala Harris will win the election and become president.
I don’t think this for a scientific reason. The polls tell us it’s close, it’ll be decided by seven swing states, and either candidate could win. I’m not about to argue that the data says otherwise.
I know polls underestimated Trump support in 2016 and 2020, but they show a tighter race this time, and I think the reason is more likely because pollsters adjusted to avoid a repeat mistake than because Harris has substantially less support than Joe Biden did in 2020.
Either way, I think it’ll be nice to stop talking about polls and start talking about actual votes.
I think it will probably take more than a day to know the outcome. In particular, key swing state Pennsylvania cannot, by state law, process mail-in ballots in advance, which will create delays.
But in the end, I think Harris will win. I hesitated to make this election prediction—it’s the result I hope for, and I personally interact with more Harris voters—but it’s the outcome in line with my writing since 2020, and I think I should follow the implication of those arguments.
I argued that Trump’s coup attempt and the Jan. 6 attack were a big deal, that Congress’s Jan. 6 investigation was important and well done, and that Biden has been right to warn of threats to U.S. democracy. Ahead of the 2022 midterm elections, “savvy” pundits warned that Biden talking about democracy rather than exclusively about the economy would help cause a “red wave,” but Democrats had the best midterm showing for the sitting president’s party in years. I think Harris standing up for democracy will help her electorally, not hurt.
I advocated criminal charges for 2020 coup plotters as a matter of principle, and adamantly disagreed with writers who argued that law enforcement should let Trump’s many crimes slide because indictments might help him politically. I still think America was right not to surrender rule of law without a fight. And while the system failed to prevent Trump from getting a chance to put himself above the law, it has identified him as a jury-convicted felon, and brought more information about his crimes to light.
I do not think most Americans want to elect a criminal. Obviously nothing will shake Trump’s core support. He was always going to get the Republican nomination, indicted or not. But I bet Harris has won over more undecided voters with her record as a prosecutor than Trump has as a criminal defendant.
I think if Trump loses the election, the legal process will move forward, he’ll be convicted and punished for federal crimes, and this will restore some trust in public institutions.
I argued before Biden dropped out that Harris would be a stronger candidate, and all the reasons have panned out. She’s better than she was in the 2020 primary, and 2024 is a better political environment for her. Race and gender are not insurmountable political hurdles. I think a younger, more coherent candidate makes a sharper contrast with Trump, one who can credibly offer the country a chance to turn the page.
I think Harris has run an excellent campaign, and in unprecedented circumstances. Presidential nominees typically have been campaigning for over a year at this point, but Harris and her team hit all the marks in less than four months, smoothly consolidating the Democratic party, and building a broad coalition that ranges from Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez to Dick Cheney. It hasn’t been totally flawless, of course, but it’s about as close as a candidate can get. If she loses, it’s because enough Americans saw what Trump offers and want it, not because the Harris campaign made avoidable mistakes.
I thought Harris crushed Trump in the debate, and I think enough people watched or heard about it to matter.
I think the Harris media strategy has been smart. First, they let events like the transition from Biden, the VP pick, high attendance rallies, the convention, and the debate generate earned media. Afterwards, Harris ignored media demands that she operate on their calendar, then did a blitz of interviews with a wide variety of outlets as Election Day approached and more voters were paying attention.
I think the late campaign ads showing women agreeing with their MAGA husbands then secretly voting Harris, and blue collar dads going with their MAGA buddy then secretly voting Harris, capture something important. There aren’t many shy Trump voters left, and there are probably some Harris supporters who aren’t broadcasting it.
I think conservative pundits getting publicly upset about the suggestion that women might not vote how their husbands tell them—Fox News’ Jesse Waters said his wife voting Harris would be “the same thing as having an affair”—underlines why Trump will lose. Much of the blame should go to the New Right: the hyperonline, culture war-fixated, democracy-skeptical faction that has effectively taken over the Republican Party. Think Elon Musk, JD Vance, Tucker Carlson, various podcasters, influencers, etc.
I argued that the New Right’s theory of power is insane. Their worldview rests on the belief that conservatives are persecuted victims of radical leftists that supposedly control all major institutions and suppress majority opinion. But with Musk turning Twitter into an increasingly insular nexus for the online right, and Vance becoming the VP nominee, the New Right could be a victim of its own success. “The more this sort of right-wing discourse breaks its online containment to seep into the real-world public’s impression of the Trump campaign,” I wrote in July, “the more it risks turning off undecided voters and rallying Harris supporters against it.”
I think that’s exactly what happened. Especially in the final months, Trump 2024 has steered hard into racism, misogyny, transphobia, and other bigotries, to a greater degree, and more menacingly, than in 2016 or 2020.
I think the New Right not only believes a lot of this stuff and feels liberated expressing it, but also thinks it’s popular. At least popular enough that it’s good political strategy.
I do not think it is. I think it’s a lot more popular on X (née Twitter) than off, and that the broader right-wing internet is enough of an information bubble that they don’t fully realize it.
I think Trump’s October 27 Madison Square Garden rally proves this point on its own. Speaker after speaker demeaned, mocked, and threatened minorities. Trump senior advisor Stephen Miller alluded to a Hitler slogan. The location and atmosphere recalled a 1939 Nazi rally in MSG, and one in 1968 for segregationist George Wallace.
The breakout story from Trump’s fascist MSG rally was one speaker, comedian Tony Hinchcliffe, calling Puerto Rico an “island of garbage,” and I think it’s making a difference. Pureto Rican celebrities who weren’t really involved in politics—Bad Bunny, Jenifer Lopez, Ricky Martin, Marc Anthony, more—objected en masse, bringing it to the attention of millions.
I don’t think the New Right’s response is fixing the damage. They tried to turn an awkward criticism of the rally from Joe Biden into a claim that he insulted all Republicans as “garbage.” MAGA figures such as Donald Trump Jr. and podcaster Megyn Kelly posted pictures of themselves wearing garbage bags for Halloween. Trump himself rode around in a garbage truck with his logo on it. This referential trolling style is typical of the online right, and it annoyed some liberals as intended, but didn’t land with the wider public. The main impact appears to be drawing even more attention to the insults against Puerto Ricans, sustaining that story. And it turns out a lot of Puerto Rican Americans live in Pennsylvania.
I think New Right figures are undermining Republican chances in direct ways too. Elon Musk became the Trump campaign’s number one surrogate, a top donor, and future White House official. His PAC is running Trump’s get-out-the-vote operations, reportedly as poorly as Musk has run Twitter. And he’s likely breaking election laws, such as those forbidding PAC-campaign coordination, or financially incentivizing vote registration. A few days before the election, Musk, Vance, and other prominent Trumpist figures are spending energy promising to avenge Peanut the Squirrel. (What’s that, you ask? Exactly.)
I think the New Right’s theory of power is why calling Trump and Co. “weird” struck a nerve. Just about anyone unfamiliar with the New Right’s online in-speak thinks they’re weird (and many familiar with it do too). While they laugh at being called “racist”—that’s just a small cabal of too-powerful leftists trying to control you, remember?—the “weird” charge stings. Weird means atypical, unusual, not the avatars of normal their worldview casts them as.
I think Trump’s anti-trans ads are gross, and that it sucks for trans people, parents with younger kids, and anyone of basic human decency to hear it blasting during NFL football, MLB playoffs, and other events.
I bet focusing so much on anti-trans won’t help politically, and could backfire. Way more Americans fall somewhere between supporting trans people and “whatever, let them do their thing” than find appeal in a hateful ad where an ominous voice intones “they/them.”
I think the big post-election narrative, the obvious-in-hindsight thing that too many professional politics-knowers dismissed, will be the partisan gender gap and high turnout among women.
I think conventional political wisdom is still underestimating the impact of the Dobbs decision and red state laws that take away women’s right to bodily autonomy, and expose them to avoidable, sometimes deadly, medical risk. Even after Democrats did well in the midterms, special elections, and state referenda, pundits still treat abortion rights as just another partisan issue.
Many times in recent years I’ve thought of Ben Franklin’s famous line: “A republic, if you can keep it.” Democracy is not humanity’s natural state. It’s this beautiful, fragile thing people built and have to constantly defend. For a lot of my life, Americans took it for granted. Democracy is imperfect, of course, but like Winston Churchill said, it’s the worst form of government except for all the others.
I think the United States is in perfect position to live up to another Churchill quip: “You can always count on the Americans to do the right thing, after they have exhausted all the other possibilities.”
That’s why I think this is going to work, and not just now, but in a lasting way. Trump and MAGA have pushed America to the limit. Congress didn’t stop him, law enforcement didn’t stop him, the Supreme Court majority—half of which he appointed—helped him. The only barrier left is We the People.
We’re in an upside-down election. It’s effectively a referendum on Constitutional democracy, the U.S.-led world order, and whether we’ll live in factual reality. I know everyone doesn’t think it is, but it is whether they realize it or not. I think enough people know something’s up, something big, and will opt to continue the American experiment.
We rejected Trump in 2020 and he couldn’t overcome it. If we vote against him again, he’ll lie and try to steal it again, but I think he’ll fail.
I think we really can end it this time. Before the last election, Trump hadn’t tried to overthrow the Constitution nor been criminally indicted. He’s 78 years old, and has noticeably declined. In 2020, he lost to a returning figure from the past; this time he’s losing to a symbol of the future.
I think Alan Elrod and others are right when they warn that, even with a solid Harris victory, this fact-denying, democracy-opposing movement and the structural issues that got us here will still be problems. But I think they’re being too pessimistic. The U.S. has always had forces like these—The Paranoid Style in American Politics came out in 1964—but those forces are weaker if they don’t get institutional power.
Trump’s attack on the Constitution is a serious challenge, but that means it’s also an opportunity for historical achievement. With all due respect, I believe this is going to be one of our finest hours.
I do not think articles like this predicting a Harris win will make a single person complacent. That attitude was specific to 2016, and Ameicans learned the lesson the hard way. Besides, while fear of losing is motivating, so is excitement about being part of a winner.
I strongly recommend you ignore professional and social media on Election Day, at least until the first states start reporting after 7pm EST. It’s like the hours of sports television before a big game. No one knows anything, so they’re filling the time with speculation, rumor, and preconceived narratives.
I think it’s rare to see a trio in greater need of a giant L than Donald Trump, Vladimir Putin, and Elon Musk, and rarer still that all three can get one at the same time.
I think the symbolic impact and substantive potential of Harris defeating Trump will really hit after we get through this inflection point.
I know this prediction could be proven wrong quickly, and stand as my worst call ever.
But if so, I think I’ll have bigger problems.
I think a large, diverse, pro-democracy coalition of Americans is about to make history. In a good way. And the whole world is going to feel it.
This turned out wrong, obviously. Read my post-election follow up here.