Replace an unpopular party leader with a younger, charismatic woman a few weeks before an election. The older man, confident of his victory, has no idea how to react.
American commentators are wondering how long Kamala Harris can keep her “honeymoon” going. We know the answer to that, too. It’s not a honeymoon, it’s mania. With the support of a sympathetic media, the mania can last for years, and certainly for the 35 days until early voting in some states and the 75 days until Election Day.
With the Democrats holding their convention, Harris will dominate the news for another week. The average victory rate at conventions is about 5%, which would be a significant lead.
With the help of the president and two former presidents, Bill Clinton and Barack Obama, the convention sets the agenda. Harris still has a week to introduce herself.
Once an image is established, it is difficult to change. Republicans do not have enough time to sow doubts about her character. As with Dame Jacinda Ardern, Harris has fewer points of attack due to her lack of a past.
History is on Harris’ side. A third of all presidents have been vice presidents. Only two defeated presidents were subsequently re-elected. As in New Zealand, defeated heads of state rarely manage a comeback.
The office of Vice President is a great advantage. All prestige and no responsibility. Republicans are trying to tie Harris to an unpopular administration, but no one believes the Vice President was in charge.
All is not lost for Trump. Trump’s support has not dropped. When independent candidates are included in the polls, his support remains at around 45%. During Jacindamania, the National Party maintained its support at 45%.
It is not necessary for Trump to win the majority of votes. Trump has never won the majority of votes. The presidency is decided by the electoral college. A month ago, Trump had a comfortable lead in the swing states that were crucial to the election. Now, according to the election forecasting service FiveThirtyEight, Harris is ahead in the crucial states of the Rust Belt.
If Trump loses, historians will point to strategic errors made long before the election. Like Sir Bill English, who failed to realise that the National Party could not win an MMP election on its own, Trump failed to realise that his base was insufficient.
Trump should have followed Ronald Reagan’s example. Reagan chose his main challenger in the primaries, George Bush, as his vice president. Had Trump chosen his main rival, Nikki Haley, he would have increased the appeal of his candidates to independent voters and female voters.
A key campaign issue is women’s right to self-determination. Trump’s Supreme Court justices overturned the Roe v. Wade case. Machiavelli warned the prince that people who are deprived of a right never forgive.
The central issue in every election is the economy. Up to 12% more voters believe that Trump is better on economic issues. Commentators believe that Trump would win if he stopped making personal attacks and talked about the economy.
Maybe not. No voter thought Ardern knew more about the economy than English, a long-time finance minister. Voters thought Mitt Romney was better at economics than Obama.
There’s one poll question that commentators often overlook: “Who do you think cares about you?” Harris is campaigning by saying she knows what it’s like to scrape by, rent, and work at McDonald’s to put herself through school. She’s leading the “Who cares about you?” poll.
Ardern has shown that empathy is an electoral victory.
An overwhelming majority of Americans did not want to choose between two octogenarians. The choice of a younger, energetic candidate has overturned the election result. Trump is now the old, incumbent candidate.
While the last month has shown that nothing is certain in politics, Trump now needs to win the presidential debate. Having attended many debates, I know it is impossible to win a debate against a well-prepared opponent. Trump did not win the debate with Joe Biden. Biden lost when it became clear that he is cognitively impaired.
Commentators always declare the debate winner to be the candidate who performs better than expected. English was expected to win. When he failed to score a “knockout,” Ardern was declared the debate winner. Trump is expected to win the presidential debate. When Trump fails to score a “knockout,” Harris is declared the winner.
Only a mistake by Harris, such as Ardern’s “Captain’s Call” in support of the capital gains tax, can prevent a landslide victory for Kamalamania.
Our two Christophers can learn a lesson from this. Labor could replace its unpopular leader Chris Hipkins with a sensitive, capable young woman just weeks before the next election and sweep Christopher Luxon from his throne in Barbaramania.
