The states of Wisconsin, Michigan, and Pennsylvania, known as the “blue wall,” have been instrumental in securing the White House for the past two Democratic presidents.
According to three sources familiar with the campaign’s strategy, recent discussions have revolved around the potential for a partial break in the blue wall this year.
The focus of these conversations has been on the possibility of Michigan or Wisconsin “falling” to former President Donald Trump, while the remaining two states stay blue.
If Harris were to lose Wisconsin or Michigan, it would have significant implications for her chances of winning the White House. Even if she manages to secure Pennsylvania, where both Harris and Trump have devoted considerable time and resources, it would not be enough to reach the crucial 270 electoral votes needed to secure victory. Harris would need to win another battleground state or possibly two to achieve her goal.
According to a senior official from the Harris campaign, there is a concern that Michigan or Wisconsin may lose ground. However, the primary worry lies with Michigan.
Other individuals familiar with the campaign strategy also express deep concern about Michigan. Despite this, they maintain that all states are closely contested and that there are other possible paths to victory.
According to recent public polling, a Harris campaign spokesperson refuted the idea that there are serious concerns over Michigan.
In fact, a Detroit News poll conducted from October 1st to 4th showed that Harris, who is currently campaigning in Michigan, has a slight lead in the state. This sentiment was also echoed by a Washington Post poll conducted on Monday.
“We are definitely in the race to win Michigan,” declared Lauren Hitt, spokeswoman for the Harris campaign. She pointed out that Harris has been actively engaging with the state this week and expressed confidence in their chances of victory. “We firmly believe that we will emerge as the winners in Michigan.”
But Democrats may also face a potential setback: one of Harris’ most promising backup plans could be in jeopardy. Recently, a number of Harris advisors highlighted the electoral votes from North Carolina and Nevada as a viable alternative route if Trump were to secure Pennsylvania’s 19 electoral votes.
According to sources familiar with the campaign dynamics, while Democrats in North Carolina continue to maintain strong organization and leadership, the Harris team is not as confident about their chances of victory in the state.
But as the November 5th election approaches, Harris and Trump find themselves in a tightly contested race, with both candidates neck and neck.
Throughout the campaign, the Harris team has consistently emphasized their seven-state battleground strategy, dedicating substantial resources to organization and infrastructure development in rural areas. In addition, they have successfully outpaced Republicans in terms of ad spending.
“I don’t believe in following a predetermined path based on party affiliations or regional biases. Instead, I see seven states that are highly contested and will ultimately be decided by the efforts made on the ground,” emphasized Dan Kanninen, the battleground state director for Harris.
“To ensure victory in these close races, we have strategically built a comprehensive operation. The truth is, any one of these seven states has an equal chance of becoming the tipping-point state.”
According to public polling, the election in the remaining states of Nevada, Arizona, and Georgia is still undecided or Harris is trailing. Recent surveys indicate that Trump is leading in Arizona and Georgia, while Harris has a slight advantage in Nevada.
Trump has encountered his fair share of challenges. There are increasing reports of difficulties with his campaign operations in swing states. Furthermore, he has fallen behind Harris in terms of fundraising, which raises concerns about his ability to mobilize infrequent voters if the race remains close.
This is evident from his recent visit to North Carolina, indicating that his campaign does not consider it a guaranteed victory, despite the fact that it has not voted for a Democratic candidate since 2008.
Additionally, during his visit, he repeated false information about Hurricane Helene, despite being contradicted by members of his own party.
The blue wall states have played a crucial role in determining the outcome of presidential elections in recent years. They were instrumental in propelling Barack Obama to victory in both 2008 and 2012. However, in 2016, Hillary Clinton faltered in these states, losing them to Trump.
Her decision to skip campaigning in Wisconsin during the general election that year has drawn significant criticism. Nevertheless, Joe Biden managed to reclaim the blue wall for the Democrats in the 2020 election.
According to sources within Harris’ camp, this year’s unique economic and electoral characteristics could potentially result in each of these states tipping in different directions, unlike in previous cases where they all went in the same direction to boost the ultimate victor.
In 1988, the blue wall experienced a rare instance where it did not vote in unison. This occurred when Michael Dukakis managed to win Wisconsin, while losing Pennsylvania and Michigan.
Tad Devine, a Democratic strategist who led electoral strategy for Democratic presidential nominees in 1988, 2000, and 2004, believes that it would be historically uncommon for the blue wall states to separate from each other, although he does not dismiss the possibility. Devine acknowledges that Harris holds an advantage in these states, considering her position on the winning ticket in 2020.
“The blue wall states, known for their consistent voting patterns, are facing an unusually neck-and-neck competition this year. Their proximity in the polls makes it uncertain which way these states will swing. While there is a possibility of a breakthrough, it is more probable that they will maintain their historical trend of voting together. These states have a long-standing connection when it comes to their voting behavior.”
Despite the challenges, there is a glimmer of hope for Harris as recent Democratic electoral victories and early voting in Michigan show promise. Just two years ago, the Democratic party achieved a significant milestone by flipping the Legislature, giving them complete control for the first time in four decades.
Furthermore, in April, Democrats secured the majority in special elections. Thanks to their strong organization in the state and favorable support from women, Harris has managed to keep the race competitive.
Harris has made multiple visits to the blue wall states, ensuring that she is not lacking in efforts. Her focus has been on Pennsylvania, where she has raced across the Rust Belt to connect with voters.
Additionally, Harris has also visited North Carolina twice this month, demonstrating her commitment to engaging with the electorate. Her visits to the state included an official visit after a hurricane and a campaign event.
The presence of other prominent Democrats like Tim Walz, Barack Obama, and Bill Clinton in North Carolina further signifies the Democrats’ recognition of a closely contested race in the state.
According to Democratic pollster Matt Baretto, who has conducted surveys for the Harris camp, it is crucial not to overlook any of the states for Harris as the race is extremely close. Baretto also highlighted that in 2022, there were predictions of a red wave by Republicans and the media, but it ultimately did not come to fruition.
According to Baretto, Harris currently holds a slight advantage in all three states. Although the margin is not significant, it is expected that the election will be closely contested, with a difference of only 1 or 2 percent in any of these states.
However, Baretto emphasized that the enthusiasm is still in favor of Harris. She is attracting large crowds and has a strong base of volunteers, which puts her in a favorable position. Nonetheless, there is still more work to be done.