Key Takeaways:
Despite the recent debate, KSG assesses the US presidential race is highly likely to remain tied. Close poll numbers with large margins of error mean that the race is far from over and is highly likely to be fought in the swing states.
Key issues discussed in the debate included: the economy, foreign policy, abortion, and immigration. Harris emphasized US competitiveness against China, and Trump criticized the current administration's handling of the economy and foreign affairs.
With around 50 days left, the focus of the election is highly likely to shift toward devoting campaign funds and time to the swing states, while concerns over foreign interference and election security grow.
KSG assesses that Harris’ statements on energy indicate US ‘green’ energy companies are likely to receive additional government support. Furthermore, Harris’ and Trump’s statements indicate that under either administration, US companies are likely to face increased government pressure to divest from China.
The Debate's Content
On the night of 10 September, Vice President Kamala Harris and former President Donald Trump met on stage for the second presidential debate on ABC News in Philadelphia.
The two clashed on issues highly likely to determine the outcome of the race: the economy, abortion, immigration, and foreign policy. Regarding the economy, Harris and Trump argued over his proposed tariffs against China. Trump said that other countries “finally, after 75 years are [going to] pay us back for all that we’ve done for the world” and that Harris and Biden have “destroyed” the US economy. Harris countered his attacks by arguing that Goldman Sachs and many other economists have criticized Trump’s economic plans. Moreover, she said that Trump “basically sold us out” to China by selling them advanced computer chips for their military.
As seen above, foreign policy permeated the debate. Harris stated she wants the US to “win the competition for the 21st century” against China, which means focusing on relationships with allies, “investing in American-based technology, so that we win the race on AI, [and] on quantum computing”. Trump repeated his claim from the first debate that Hamas never would have attacked Israel if he was president: “if I were president, it would have never started”. He similarly claimed Russia would never have invaded Ukraine, and he would conclude the Russia-Ukraine War “before even becoming president”. Harris replied that dictators (and autocratic regimes) were awaiting Trump’s return, and that it is well known that he is weak on foreign policy.
Polling
Nationally, KSG assesses that Harris and Trump are essentially tied and the race is very close. Different polls and aggregate polls separate the candidates by only a few percentage points with large margins of error. As of 10 September, FiveThirtyEights’ aggregate poll shows Harris leading by 2.7% (47.1% to Trump’s 44.4%). The New York Times projects Harris leading by 2% as well. As of 10 September, the New York Times swing states polling projects that Harris holds a slight advantage over Trump in key swing states:
US Swing State | Advantage (%) | “Biggest recent polling miss” |
Wisconsin | +2 Harris | 9 points |
Michigan | +2 Harris | 6 points |
North Carolina | Less than +1 Harris | 6 points |
Pennsylvania | Less than +1 Harris | 5 points |
Nevada | Less than +1 Harris | 4 points |
Georgia | Less than +1 Trump | 2 points |
Arizona | Less than +1 Trump | 3 points |
The following map depicts the key states still in play, and hence where the campaigns will now devote significant attention to:
Map from 270toWin
Looking forward:
Overall, KSG assesses the debate will most likely add to Harris’ slight advantage over Trump in polling and boost her fundraising. However, her debate performance will most likely not ‘seal’ a victory or long-term advantage.
KSG assesses that Pennsylvania, and its 19 electoral votes, is likely to become the most important battleground state, as it is highly likely a must-win for Harris.
KSG assesses foreign interference from US adversaries – Russia, China, and Iran – and disinformation/misinformation (if it occurs) is most likely to increase at this portion of the campaign.
Harris’ comments on energy and oil are unlikely to appease conservatives and members of the business community displeased about her economic plans and messaging. Her statements about foreign oil dependence does indicate that Harris is likely to push for US domestic energy capacity. KSG assesses this is most likely to take the form of government incentives for ‘green’ energy systems primarily. However, it may also include natural gas, as Harris has stated she does not seek to ban fracking.
KSG assesses that Trump’s and Harris’ statements on China indicate there is likely to be increased government support for domestic technology companies and other industries to remain competitive against China regardless of which side wins. Moreover, US technology companies and industries with strong supply chain links to China are likely to face increased government pressure and/or incentives to divest from Chinese markets.
Finally, Harris’ statement about ‘winning’ against China indicates that US-China tensions are likely to continue to rise between 2025-2029 no matter which candidate prevails.