Exit Poll: 80% of voters decided before September

[wbrocks67]

Before September (80%): Trump +2, 51-49
In September (6%): Harris +6, 52-46
In October (5%): Harris +7, 49-42
In last week (3%): Trump +14, 56-42
In last few days (3%): Trump +5, 47-42

https://www.cnn.com/election/2024/exit-polls/national-results/general/president/0

Edison updated and I'm not sure this was much different from what it was, but thought it's important to point out and any post-election hot takes should mention this. By the time the switch happened, 8 in 10 voters had already decided, and Trump was winning those voters nationally by 2.

She was able to claw back some voters in Sept/Oct, but probably lost the final deciders due to them being low engagement voters who voted purely on the economy, etc.

Think this just gives more evidence to the cake being baked - we can squabble about specific little things Harris and her campaign did, but if 8/10 voters in the national electorate were voting Trump barely a month into Harris's launch, there's only so much clawing back you can do in that situation.

[VALibertarian]

To offer a counterpoint - there's also the separate poll of whether you decided your vote in the last month or before that - and 87% said before that, but only 50/49 Trump/Harris. Hardly insurmountable odds unless you think ya girl would be incapable to overcoming a 1% deficit in 30 days given the copious influx of funds/ground game/enthusiasm.

Hell the separate poll of did you decide your vote in the last week or before that says the same, with 92% of voters saying before the last week, again splitting 50/49.

This hardly seems like the cake being baked to me (92% decided and only being down 1% seems easily winnable if Harris played the game as well as you seemed to think she did during the last month), and honestly idk what you're trying to say with this post (asking in good faith). It comes off as trying to maintain this narrative of "Harris did everything right but my god Trump was just destined to win!" which seems a little silly.

TLDR: At least stick to your pre-election and election day guns that every single factor favored Harris lol

[lfromnj]

Yup every week was somehow disastrous for Trump yet he won !

[Voice of low info America]

She was able to claw back some voters in Sept/Oct, but probably lost the final deciders due to them being low engagement voters who voted purely on the economy, etc.

This sounds much more normal than high engagement voters who vote on "democracy", lol.

[wbrocks67]

To offer a counterpoint - there's also the separate poll of whether you decided your vote in the last month or before that - and 87% said before that, but only 50/49 Trump/Harris. Hardly insurmountable odds unless you think ya girl would be incapable to overcoming a 1% deficit in 30 days given the copious influx of funds/ground game/enthusiasm.

Hell the separate poll of did you decide your vote in the last week or before that says the same, with 92% of voters saying before the last week, again splitting 50/49.

This hardly seems like the cake being baked to me (92% decided and only being down 1% seems easily winnable if Harris played the game as well as you seemed to think she did during the last month), and honestly idk what you're trying to say with this post (asking in good faith). It comes off as trying to maintain this narrative of "Harris did everything right but my god Trump was just destined to win!" which seems a little silly.

TLDR: At least stick to your pre-election and election day guns that every single factor favored Harris lol

That's not what I'm saying here, but I'm not sure why that's silly? You can run the best campaign possible but that doesn't mean you're going to win in the end.

I think you're trying to have me not update my priors with new information which seems odd. I do think a lot of factors favored Harris and that's why she was able to do what she did! I absolutely think the campaign infrastructure, ads, fundraising, etc. as well as the economy being in better shape than all of the comparable G7 countries absolutely gave her a boost. Was that enough to overcome? Apparently not! And voters did feel a lot worse about things than we/I expected, and given the feeling towards the Biden administration for those things, there's only so much you can do.

My point is that there's context and nuance and again, not to say her campaign was flawless, but that it *was* a tough hill to climb when you're an incumbent VP and 80-90% of the voters have decided already and Trump is winning them by 1 nationally. There's only so much you can do to get over that hump. I think there's way too much discussion of Harris having a bad campaign or acting as if this was her fault when the race was Trump's to lose for much longer than we realized.

[wbrocks67]

She was able to claw back some voters in Sept/Oct, but probably lost the final deciders due to them being low engagement voters who voted purely on the economy, etc.

This sounds much more normal than high engagement voters who vote on "democracy", lol.

Weird to me that there are so many prescriptions on Democrats talking down to voters yet this type of comment insinuates any voter who prioritized something other than the economy is "wrong"? Why should they be talked down to then?

[Arizona Iced Tea]

Well most Americans are partisans so this isn't surprising.

[Voice of low info America]

She was able to claw back some voters in Sept/Oct, but probably lost the final deciders due to them being low engagement voters who voted purely on the economy, etc.

This sounds much more normal than high engagement voters who vote on "democracy", lol.

Weird to me that there are so many prescriptions on Democrats talking down to voters yet this type of comment insinuates any voter who prioritized something other than the economy is "wrong"? Why should they be talked down to then?

There is nothing wrong about voting on issues other than the economy. Voting on abortion or immigration, for example, is very legitimate because these are issues that actually affect people's lives. Being "high engagement" and obsessed with nonsense like "democracy" makes you a ridiculous person.

[GAinDC]

To offer a counterpoint - there's also the separate poll of whether you decided your vote in the last month or before that - and 87% said before that, but only 50/49 Trump/Harris. Hardly insurmountable odds unless you think ya girl would be incapable to overcoming a 1% deficit in 30 days given the copious influx of funds/ground game/enthusiasm.

Hell the separate poll of did you decide your vote in the last week or before that says the same, with 92% of voters saying before the last week, again splitting 50/49.

This hardly seems like the cake being baked to me (92% decided and only being down 1% seems easily winnable if Harris played the game as well as you seemed to think she did during the last month), and honestly idk what you're trying to say with this post (asking in good faith). It comes off as trying to maintain this narrative of "Harris did everything right but my god Trump was just destined to win!" which seems a little silly.

TLDR: At least stick to your pre-election and election day guns that every single factor favored Harris lol

That's not what I'm saying here, but I'm not sure why that's silly? You can run the best campaign possible but that doesn't mean you're going to win in the end.

I think you're trying to have me not update my priors with new information which seems odd. I do think a lot of factors favored Harris and that's why she was able to do what she did! I absolutely think the campaign infrastructure, ads, fundraising, etc. as well as the economy being in better shape than all of the comparable G7 countries absolutely gave her a boost. Was that enough to overcome? Apparently not! And voters did feel a lot worse about things than we/I expected, and given the feeling towards the Biden administration for those things, there's only so much you can do.

My point is that there's context and nuance and again, not to say her campaign was flawless, but that it *was* a tough hill to climb when you're an incumbent VP and 80-90% of the voters have decided already and Trump is winning them by 1 nationally. There's only so much you can do to get over that hump. I think there's way too much discussion of Harris having a bad campaign or acting as if this was her fault when the race was Trump's to lose for much longer than we realized.

A lot of people on here are expecting a big, dramatic mea culpa from the Harris boosters on here because we dared to have hope that she could pull it off.

That kind of optimism, and reasonable introspection about why she lost, is threatening to the MAGA people because they NEED us to be crushed and hopeless so they can feel like they "owned the libs."

It's also threatening to a lot of the leftist/Bernie types on here because they want another opening to totally reshape the Democratic Party, whether the base wants it or not.

Don't let it get to you. You are a great asset to this discussion board because you probably represent the average dem better than most -- you were hopeful Harris could win, you accepted that she lost, and you want the party to learn some lessons without completely going off the deep end. That's what I'm mostly seeing out in the real world.

[Progressive Pessimist]

This was pretty obvious given how the results ended up.

Anything that appeared positive for Harris was all a mirage. This, even more than 2016, was the ultimate nothing matters election.

[MABA 2020]

Yeah hard to be that mad at Kamala when it's hard to imagine another Democrat winning under these circumstances

[RBH]

It would be a lot easier to make the "nobody could have possibly won" if a bunch of downballot Dems didn't get elected while Harris was losing their districts