On Decamping to Nantucket for the Election
Campaign staff respect, candidates win and lose on their own, thoughts from Nate Silver, Bill Maher, Doug Sosnik
Moving on from political campaign work has its benefits — like blowing out of D.C. to take in the 2024 election spectacle from a distance.
I like Nantucket in October — the hordes have departed; fishing from the beach remains excellent; the weather generally remains a temperate, sunny mid 60’s. Specifically, I like hanging at Great Point on the island’s far northeast tip — the perfect “middle of nowhere.” Seals remain anglers’ primary nuisance and a Great White fin will occasionally break the surface — but no one’s around.
My beat to crap 2001 F-250 pickup made it up here for the 12th time. A remote beach with friends fishing for blues and bass — not votes — is a different galaxy from the frenzied psychosis inside a presidential campaign, or grind it out toss-up Senate race like those in PA, OH, WI and MI.
In the final months and weeks of a big campaign, a mere handful of savvy “been here, done that” survivors are left holding fast to the spinning campaign wheel — moving ever faster as fatigue, inexperience, and marginalization (a.k.a “layered over”) takes its day-by-day, hour by hour Darwinian toll.
Win or lose, maintaining ultimate respect for every campaign staffer’s effort and labor, even if they slip off the wheel, is warranted. But special respect is reserved for these GOP and Democratic staff “survivors” who’ve worked 7-day weeks for months, and frequently longer. “Survivors” aren’t designated — it’s implicit among themselves who’s still calling the shots and in the loop as crises, conference calls and a quick crash on a headquarters couch bleeds from one day into the next. It’s a helluva way to make a living — but it’s a rush.
Whether working the Trump or Harris presidential campaign — or toiling on a toss-up race out of some Anywhere, USA fly-by-night strip mall headquarters — congratulations to you. The end is near.
But even if you lose as one of the final staff survivors — still going strong heading into this fateful final weekend — you’ll eventually come out ahead if you keep at it. You know what’s entailed, and you’re ready to make another go at it — despite the type of physical, mental and personal sacrifice very few comprehend. With ongoing perseverance will eventually come pay dirt.
That’s the way it works.
In offering the following observations about the Trump-Harris race I do so objectively and from an accountability standpoint vis-a-vis what I stated back in July
Even out here — 400 miles away from DC (as the crow flies) — one can feel this is indeed a “vibes election.”
And the vibe I get increasingly feels like 1980 — the first time I set foot in D.C.
Objectively speaking, the economy today is significantly better than it was in ‘80 under Jimmy Carter — but it’s a perceptual disaster for Biden/Harris in that even as inflation has finally dissipated, the residual damage has been done. Add the immigration policy fiasco, the pervasive wrong track sentiment, a weak candidate, and we have the making of an electoral ClusterF.
A big-time “change” election is gathering steam and suspect Donald Trump is about to win this thing in a big way — along with a slew of GOP Senate candidates, starting with David McCormick in Pennsylvania.
Mike Murphy’s “Wall of Lava” metaphor coming to fruition
To this day, GOP consultant and Kamala Harris-supporter Mike Murphy has the very best metaphor for the existential threat facing the Harris campaign.
He pointed out back in early September that both sides’ polling data shows “the country wants to fire the Biden Administration over the economy.” While noting what Harris had to do to stay on the right track after a strong debate, he compared the Biden/Harris economic record to “a wall of lava” — a looming, existential threat lurking out of sight… for the moment.
Mike’s a pal, and I’m not going to put words in his mouth as to where he now believes the wall of lava might be entering the final weekend, but it’s my opinion the wall has already breached the defensive perimeter of the Harris campaign and flames have begun to engulf her candidacy and those of other down ballot Dems.
Incumbent PA Senator Bob Casey’s ad — touting his work with Trump on trade — was the first sign of developing problems and a ghoulish harbinger of what’s to come next Tuesday. Things could be close — but perhaps not.
Amid the initial post-Democratic convention hoopla, I offered several reasons on 7/23 why Kamala Harris would likely come up short against Donald Trump.
The bolded point below was my #1 rationale in July — and remains my #1 rationale in late October:
Candidates themselves win and lose races.
My 10/31 follow-up observation with the benefit of additional hindsight:
You can have the best consultants and have ‘the dominant media’ as cheerleaders, but Kamala Harris has simply not grown into being a winning presidential persona with the necessary media performance skills to propel herself to victory.
And few do.
Despite vastly improving her stump performance following Brett Baier’s contentious Fox News interview — exuding real passion in the large crowd, rally format — the quality of her media appearances did not correspondingly follow. In general, her media engagements have been inarticulate, evasive, lacking strategic precision, and, in the end, a big problem.
The Vice-President’s appearance on ABC’s The View — in which she didn’t offer a single example of how she’d differentiate herself from President Biden — was, in my opinion, THE killer defining moment of this campaign. It sealed her fate.
The comment obliterated her “New Way Forward” rationale, an avalanche of definitional GOP paid media followed. The Vice-President’s negatives today are now as high or higher than Trump’s in much of the polling — a devastating data point — with The View video clip a significant causal factor.
I have professional sympathy for her communications team. Going into this unprecedented truncated election, they made the right call to cautiously tiptoe into progressively more challenging media interviews. Now we know why.
And that’s on the Vice-President — not her team.
If you can’t get through challenging media interviews with legitimate follow-ups as a baseline skill, you’re not going to be elected President of the United States.
What was I incorrect about in July?
Several things: First, I believed “the dominant media” would be more balanced — even with Trump as the GOP ticket-topper. The covert and overt support for Harris by a wide spectrum of institutions beyond just the media has been over the top, to put it mildly.
Nevertheless, I believe — and will always believe — that Republicans who spend too much time complaining about the media waste time, energy and resources better spent defining themselves and their opponent. Republicans win races all the time, even as the media coverage benefits a Democratic opponent. Deal with it, stop whining, and develop a strategy to overcome or mitigate the problem.
I was also wrong in my prior piece in thinking the Harris prosecutorial record in California would become a central campaign issue. It did not.
Salient observations from Nate Silver, Bill Maher and Doug Sosnik
While not paying as close attention to this race from out of town as would be the case from DC, I did save several recent salient observations — 3 from Nate Silver, and one each from Bill Maher and political wise man Doug Sosnik — regarding the Vice-President’s fundamental challenges:
Nate Silver (all links his):
Voters don’t go through an issue matrix and decide which candidate is closer to them on some Cartesian plane. Rather, most of them vibe out which candidate is on their side based on some intangible feeling and then backfill the reason for their vote.
Harris ran far to her left in 2019, adopting many unpopular positions, and doesn’t really have a viable strategy for explaining her changing stances.
Harris has been running on vibes and has failed to articulate a clear vision for the country. It might have been a good strategy if the “fundamentals” favored her, but they don’t.
Bill Maher:
Kamala’s big, I think, challenge here to win over the undecided voters is to convince them that she’s not part of what they suspect she might be, sort of a stealth version of the worst excesses of the left.
Doug Sosnik:
Ms. Harris has been hurt far more than is generally recognized by a short campaign. Running for president is not like seeking any other office. The grind and pressure of a primary make for better candidates by forcing them to articulate a vision of where they want to lead the country. Because Mr. Biden stayed in the race in 2023 and half of 2024, Ms. Harris did not have the time or the political muscle tone to develop a compelling narrative about where she would lead the country if elected president. That has prevented her from closing the deal with some voters who do not want to support Mr. Trump.
A few final thoughts
Before heading back out to cast a few more lines during daylight, I’ll note that If Kamala Harris prevails — and the abortion issue and surge of female voters pushes her over the top — kudos for pulling it off.
As to the theory of the case against Trump — that he’s an unhinged fascist who’ll destroy democracy and America as we know it — I’ve never objectively believed the charges would fully resonate with persuadables in general and those “recalling better economic times” during his presidency, specifically.
Why? He was already in the White House — the world didn’t blow up, and we’re all still here. Had he not already served, the allegations would be more salient.