The Undecided

A month after the American elections, the ‘official’ press only talks about swing states, swing voters, i.e. the so-called undecided. One gets the impression that the two candidates are speaking only to them and that everyone else has already made up their minds.

As always, the narrative is simple, sometimes even simplistic. Let’s not forget that this type of certainty prevented us from predicting Trump’s election in 2016 and Brexit. Today, the key question is whether another surprise result is around the corner, a surprise since the official projections that the press offers us daily continue to give us Harris with a slight advantage over Trump in the swing states.

It is difficult to avoid the temptation to tell readers that only 3 percent of the American population will decide with their vote who will be elected president. As the Financial Times writes: the seven swing states represent just 18 percent of the electoral colleges (93 out of 538). Within them, the undecided would be just 3 percent, which means that they will be the ones to move the vote in one direction or another. But this would only happen if those who are not undecided continued to vote as they did in 2020.

If we want to make a dispassionate and objective analysis then things are not as simple as they look. First of all, it is not true that the candidates ignore the critical mass of the electorate, those who vote for their party. One of Kamala Harris's problems, according to her party, is the difficulties that she has in gaining the trust of key segments of the population, e.g. the black and white men who are members of unions in the rust belt. Unlike Donald Trump, who was president, Kamala Harris is the great unknown for most Americans. In the last four years, she has not been around the country, she has not visited the factories still standing, she has not appeared alongside the various governors, she has not expressed an opinion on the social and economic conditions of the swing states. The fact that she is a woman in these elections seems to weigh much less than the fact that no one knows who she really is.

Having changed her position on issues such as fracking, a decision taken to win over that 3 percent of undecided voters does not solve this problem, indeed, it risks making her lose a slice of the moderate voters who traditionally vote for the Democratic candidate.

It is impossible in the very short time at her disposal to create a solid political image without a real political program of rupture, alternative, that gets people talking and discussing. In this situation, Harris risks being a dusted copy of Biden's policies, which are not very popular. And this explains why, a month before the elections, her electoral campaign does not resonate enough, and she is making use of prominent figures such as Oprah to speak to the general public and politicians such as Obama or Occorsio Cortes to speak at rallies. All of this is risky for one simple reason, Kamala Harris continues to project the image of vice president, of the number two instead of being number one.

Trump and Vance are both at home in the rust belt, let's not forget that in 2016 Trump won thanks to the votes of these states. And precisely because they are known it is easier for them to run a targeted campaign to win the vote of the undecided without alienating the vote of the decided. But they also have to deal with hot topics such as, for example, abortion. Trump has toned down a lot to appeal to women and moderates, he did it by trying not to alienate the super conservatives and the nebula of Christian fundamentalism that represents an electoral force not to be underestimated in Georgia and South Carolina, two of the seven swing states.

Another element to keep in mind is the greater propensity of the Democratic Party supporters to reveal their preference for Harris compared to those who will vote for Trump.

Traveling through two of the swing states, Pennsylvania and Michigan in the last few days, one notices a peculiar phenomenon, while Trump constantly displays an air of triumphalism, his electorate tends to remain silent so as not to reveal their choice. Only activists, party militants and MAGA supporters loudly advertise their vote, but it is basically an exercise in political propaganda. From professionals to workers to housewives and the unemployed, those who vote for Trump in these two states keep it to themselves, often not even in the family they talk about it to avoid embarrassing tensions.

The behavior of the pro-Harris front is different. His entire electorate is very happy to declare their adhesion to the vice president. There is no segment among them that by choice keeps it hidden. And so it is as easy for a foreigner to come across the pro-Harris front as it is for the revealers