The BDN Opinion section operates independently and does not set news policies or contribute to reporting or editing articles elsewhere in the newspaper or on bangordailynews.com
Gordon L. Weil formerly wrote for the Washington Post and other newspapers, served on the U.S. Senate and EU staffs, headed Maine state agencies and was a Harpswell selectman.
Political candidates want “The Big Mo” — big momentum.
The idea, which originated in professional sports in the 1960s, soon spread to politics. The theory is that momentum influences how people vote. Progress promotes progress.
In this year’s presidential race, we may see momentum. That’s because the 100-day campaign is much shorter than it has been in more than half a century. President Joe Biden’s withdrawal produced a new Democratic candidate and entirely changed the landscape for the challenger.
Not only is the campaign brief, but also both candidates start from scratch. Though her success came rapidly, Vice President Kamala Harris could not begin her campaign until she had lined up the necessary delegate support. For former President Donald Trump, it meant going “back to the old drawing board” to redesign his campaign.
For Harris, given the declining Biden support, there’s nowhere to go but up and momentum is essential. She needs to restore Democratic unity and gain among independents and disaffected Republicans. For Trump, who may have peaked just short of 50 percent, the challenge is stalling her momentum by adding to his core support.
The shorter campaign with its necessarily sharper focus might increase voter interest between now and Nov. 5. In this short race, the vice-presidential picks could be a factor.
Trump’s choice of hard-hitting J.D. Vance was meant to appeal to mid-America’s workers. So far, Vance has not boosted Trump’s standing. Harris had the same intent with Tim Walz. She may hope that his affable style plus his greater federal government experience than Trump, Vance or herself can add to her momentum.
The media plays a critical role in how campaign interest develops. Aside from the purely partisan players like MSNBC and Fox, preaching to the faithful, many voters develop their impressions of candidates from the media’s coverage. Media messages may not be explicit, but can be tilted.
Of course, money also matters. With huge war chests, candidates’ ads convey often exaggerated or false information, focusing more on the opposition than themselves. That can motivate their supporters and influence people who accept the video spots as fact. The bias is obvious but still can be influential.
A driving force behind media attitudes is opinion polling. The polls now come in a daily torrent. Every day’s little movement, even within the so-called margin of error, influences the media. Does it focus on Harris’ experience or inexperience? On Trump’s policies or his posing? The polls may guide the coverage.
As I’ve frequently noted, polls have serious defects, ranging from the refusal of many voters to participate to the undisclosed bias of the pollsters. So, survey numbers should be viewed with skepticism.
But they are useful in at least one respect. They reveal momentum. If a candidate’s numbers are steadily growing, that shows positive momentum. At that point, the media can be expected to become more positive about a candidate whose support is growing. In turn, more positive media coverage can stimulate more positive poll results.
Handle with care. The poll results are fragile and can be affected by a single major event. The bottom fell out for Biden after his debate failure in a way that could not have been foreseen. That one evening changed the entire election campaign. If the event or error is big enough, simple coverage of it can affect voters.
Much of the media and voter focus is on the national poll standing of the candidates. That’s not really helpful, because we do not have a national, popular election. Given the way the electoral vote works, a Democrat is likely to need a solid lead in the country as a whole to be assured of gaining enough electoral votes. Running even with a GOP opponent may not do the job.
Where history has shown close races, the media focuses on swing states that might determine the election outcome. Polling may focus on individual states, but the surveys may be intermittent or incompetent. The same concerns apply as for national polling.
The greater the margin between the two alternatives, the more reliable are the poll results. Statistics show that survey data is more reliable the wider the gap. Here polling momentum can matter, flowing through to the media and back again. Within the margin of error, differences don’t matter.
Trump must try to block any Harris momentum by extending his appeal beyond his MAGA core. If he holds onto Republican conservatives, he could win.
Harris has benefitted from increased party unity following her selection and may get a lift from the Democratic National Convention.
Can she capture “the Big Mo” next month? If her progress is more than a polling “bounce,” she could surprise with a solid victory. The bigger her margin, the lower the likelihood of an effective Trump post-election challenge.
