John Kelly’s Critique Jolts 2024 Presidential Race as Harris Regains Momentum

https://icaro.icaromediagroup.com/system/images/photos/16380789/original/open-uri20241025-55-1ossvmv?1729814575
ICARO Media Group
Politics
24/10/2024 23h59

****

The 2024 presidential campaign has taken a surprising turn following a blistering critique of Donald Trump by his former chief of staff John F. Kelly, significantly boosting Kamala Harris' chances just days before the election. The critique, which has been extensively covered by media, appears to be influencing voter sentiment and could reshape the race in its final days.

Only two days prior, President Trump seemed firmly on track for a decisive victory on November 5. However, in a dramatic twist, Kelly labeled Trump an "erratic amateur" and "unfit for the presidency," which redounded in Harris' favor. This reversal upended a month-long decline for the Vice President, raising questions about whether this late-campaign turbulence might be enough to alter the election's outcome.

According to Thomas Miller, a data scientist and Northwestern University professor, the 2024 campaign has grown extraordinarily volatile. Miller's election forecasting model, which relies on data from the political betting site PredictIt, showed Trump's forecasted electoral vote count at 346 just two days ago, dwarfing Harris' 192. By October 23, however, Harris had surged to 214 electoral votes, narrowing Trump's lead to 110—a significant change Miller attributes to Kelly's explosive statements.

Miller's prediction model, known for its accuracy in past elections, now illustrates a rapid shift back towards Harris. Previously, the model had shown her on a steady decline from a high of over 300 electoral votes following her strong debate performances, to hovering below the 270 electoral vote threshold needed to win. Trump's lead grew substantially after a series of campaign missteps by Harris, peaking on October 22. Yet, Kelly's critique, highlighting Trump's alleged preference for authoritarian governance and erratic behavior, has resonated with the electorate and reshaped the PredictIt betting landscape.

The renewed momentum for Harris is evident in betting market trajectories and polling adjustments. Public sentiment, as reflected in prediction markets and daily betting shifts, hints at a potentially different election outcome than previously forecasted by traditional polling.

Miller also points to a disconnect between the "technicals" of polling data and election fundamentals—historic determinants such as economic conditions and candidate strategies. He emphasizes that Harris’ upbeat, hopeful campaign message contrasts starkly with Trump's "dark, anti-immigrant" rhetoric. Historically, campaigns centered on positive, inclusive themes typically prevail, suggesting Harris should be leading based on fundamental political strategies.

While Miller respects the expertise of Allan Lichtman, another renowned election forecaster who also favors Harris based on long-term determinants, he remains cautious. Miller asserts that despite favorable fundamentals for Harris, the real-time voting data still heavily favors Trump. He warns that public perception of economic hardships and international policies are tilting voter sentiment towards Trump, despite favorable macroeconomic indicators touted by the Harris campaign.

In summary, the late-game surge for Harris, fueled by John Kelly's denunciation of Trump, has revitalized her campaign. Yet, with twelve days to go until the election, it remains uncertain whether this momentum shift will be sufficient to secure a victory against Trump’s robust data-backed lead. As events continue to unfold, both candidates brace for the final and most crucial phase of their campaigns.

The views expressed in this article do not reflect the opinion of ICARO, or any of its affiliates.

Related