Kamala's shy voters and Musk's maneuvers: A tight election battle

Few experts and observers are willing to name a favourite two days before the election with any degree of certainty. This uncertainty extends to those conducting pre-election polls. "Surveys indicate a very close race. If they are as inaccurate as they were four or eight years ago, Trump could secure a decisive victory because Kamala Harris' poll advantage is smaller than Joe Biden's and Hillary Clinton's," said Prof. Mark Rozell, dean of the Schar School of Policy and Government at George Mason University in Virginia.

In a poll conducted by his school in collaboration with The Washington Post, Harris had a one-point lead among voters in seven key states and was narrowly leading in four of them. "Pollsters say they have corrected the errors that underestimated Trump. Some even fear that this time they might overestimate his support. It's very challenging to verify, and we'll only know once the election results are in," he added.

According to Rozell, despite this, Harris holds a slight edge in the "Rust Belt" states: Michigan and Wisconsin, while Trump leads in the southern and southwestern states: North Carolina, Georgia, Arizona, and Nevada. If this scenario played out, the outcome in Pennsylvania, the largest state with evenly divided support for both candidates, would determine the winner.

According to the political scientist, the key to Trump's victory will be reducing Harris' advantage among women, who form a larger segment of the electorate. Harris, on the other hand, must appeal to white voters – especially white men – among whom Trump has an edge. He also notes that one of the primary dividing lines, where political sympathies increasingly differ with each election, is the level of education. Harris has a decisive advantage among those with higher education, but lags among voters without a diploma.

Rozell believes that this year, a surprising factor for observers could be Harris' "shy female voters." These are women in conservative communities and families who are afraid to publicly admit to voting for Democrats but will choose Harris at the ballot box, motivated by fears of restricting abortion rights.

In the current campaign, the first presidential campaign following the Supreme Court's decision, with Trump's appointees' votes, to overturn the federal right to abortion, Democrats openly encourage the wives of conservative husbands to vote, emphasizing that their vote is confidential. "You can vote any way you want, and no one will know," says the voiceover in an election ad featuring actress Julia Roberts.

Rozell notes that this is a real phenomenon that could impact the elections. "A few years ago, when I was gathering material for a book about the religious right movement, there were many instances when, during interviews with women, they would ask me to turn off the recorder and only then honestly spoke about what they thought about abortion and restrictions on this issue," Rozell recounts.

However, the political scientist claims that decisive events could occur in the last days of the campaign, such as Trump's derogatory remarks about Puerto Ricans during a rally in New York, his comments about putting Liz Cheney, a prominent Republican politician supporting Harris, at gunpoint, or Joe Biden's gaffe where, according to Republicans, he referred to Trump voters as "trash" (Biden explains he labelled a comedian who insulted Puerto Ricans as trash).

Dr. Nicholas Higgins, a political scientist from North Greenville University in South Carolina, presents a slightly different perspective. In his view, Harris could surprise observers by winning in North Carolina, where a Democratic candidate has only won once in nearly 50 years (Barack Obama in 2008). Trump, on the other hand, might surprise by securing a victory in Pennsylvania. "Regarding North Carolina, I see favourable trends for her in early voting. For instance, in one of the counties near me, Buncombe, where Democrats typically account for 50% of the voters, early voting has already reached 66% turnout, higher than for Republicans. Meanwhile, these are areas most impacted by recent flooding from Hurricane Helene, where less motivated voters, favouring Trump, may have more pressing concerns than voting," said Higgins.

He added that although there are positive signs for Harris visible in Pennsylvania in polls at the individual county level, a factor that, in a tight race, could tip victory in Trump's favour might be Elon Musk's actions. The billionaire organized a lottery, offering a million dollars daily to voters in key states who signed his political petition for freedom of speech and the right to bear arms.

Not delving into whether this process is legal, it's quite a genius move. Trump's campaign has thus gained data on millions of his supportive voters. In this way, on election day, they will know who among them has voted and who needs additional motivation," Higgins says.

According to this scenario, if Harris wins Wisconsin and Michigan, and Trump wins Georgia and Arizona, the outcome would be decided by the result in Nevada, a state with unique characteristics where the result is particularly hard to predict.

"A large portion of voters there are workers in the entertainment and hospitality industry in Las Vegas, an industry known for high personnel turnover, making it challenging for pollsters to capture this electorate. They are also guided by slightly different priorities than the rest of the country," analyzes the political scientist.

Higgins admits, however, that he is uncertain if his predictions will hold true. "My degree of certainty is close to zero. I wouldn't bet a cent on my predictions. But if I were forced, I would point to a Trump victory," he concluded.