Is this the hoped-for liberation? In her first interview with the arch-conservative TV channel Fox News, Democratic US presidential candidate Kamala Harris was surprisingly aggressive. Presenter Bret Baier repeatedly tried to lure Republican Donald Trump's rival onto the slippery slope, often interrupting her. On the controversial topic of "illegal migration" - one of the weak points in President Joe Biden's government record - she coldly countered: if Trump had not torpedoed a bipartisan bill at the beginning of the year, there would be more border guards today and less deadly fentanyl smuggled into the United States via Mexico.

Harris was on the wire in the confrontational interview. One of the key phrases: “My presidency will not be a continuation of Joe Biden's presidency.” In doing so, the Democrat wanted to refute Trump's general accusation that she only stands for “keep it up.” She attacked her competitor sharply. For example, his statement that he will use the National Guard or the military against “enemies within” if necessary.

‍

Killer instinct missing

The offensive style that Harris displayed at Fox News was sorely needed. Until now, she was considered too timid because she was initially afraid to give interviews. As she made her way through to it, she occasionally rambled in her answers and was often not clear enough. James Carville, Bill Clinton's campaign advisor, therefore wrote to the Harris' team: “You have to become more aggressive.” He said he missed the “killer instinct” in the vice-presidential campaign.

In fact, things aren't looking good for the Democrat right now. The momentum is gone, the contagious wave of lightness is a thing of the past. At the nomination party conference in August, Harris presented herself as a brilliant high-starter. Youthful enthusiasm, positive message: The Democrats' Biden depression was suddenly blown away. Harris quickly gained in opinion polls. Not only at national level, but also in the decisive “swing states,” it overtook Trump, who led for a long time.

But around two and a half weeks before the presidential election, the mood has changed. According to the American news website realclearpolitics Trump has a narrow advantage in the “swing states” of Pennsylvania, Michigan, Arizona, Nevada, Georgia and North Carolina. Harris only has a razor-thin plus in Wisconsin. That doesn't have to mean anything. But the hoped-for boost for the democrat has failed to materialize.

One of several reasons for this: Harris is unable to fully mobilize two important groups of regular voters in her party: Blacks and Latinos. According to a survey by New York Times and Siena College, Harris is ahead of Trump with 78 to 15 percent among black voters and 56 to 37 percent among Latinos.

‍

Approval is fading

But approval is fading. Four years ago, Joe Biden still had the support of 92 percent of blacks and 63 percent of Latinos. Black men in particular take Harris off the flag. Currently, only 70 percent want to vote for Harris, compared to 85 percent for Biden in 2020. Trump has caught up in the traditionally democratic electoral segments.

Given Trump's ethnically charged language, the result is astonishing. The Republican is raging ever more aggressively against migrants who are “poisoning the blood of the country”. But Trump is not harmed by this sledgehammer rhetoric. Quite the opposite. But Trump is not harmed by this sledgehammer rhetoric. According to surveys, 43 percent of Latinos and 40 percent of blacks are in favour of building a wall along the Mexican border. Half of both groups of voters complain that crime has gotten out of control in big cities.

But Trump also scores points when it comes to foreign policy. A majority of blacks and Latinos sympathize with his “America-First” course. Tenor: The government should care less about the world's crises and focus more on problems at home.

There are also many deficiencies in the economy — the number one issue for US citizens in the election campaign. Only 20 percent of Latinos and 26 percent of blacks describe the current economic situation as good or excellent. More than half of both groups of voters say they have often restricted their purchase of food due to prices.

‍

Perceived inflation versus statistics

It is true that the inflation rate in the Biden presidency fell from 9.1 percent in June 2022 to below three percent. But statistics and subjective perception diverge. “There is now a problem for Harris: The perceived inflation among Americans is not identical with economic macro data. Goods that are bought constantly contribute much more to the subjective impression of inflation than purchases of durable goods such as cars or furniture,” says economist Welf Werner, director of the Heideberg Center for American Studies (HCA) at Heidelberg University. Food in particular became particularly expensive particularly quickly. “What counts for people is that today, for example, I pay twice as much for a cucumber as I did four years ago.”

Citizens of the frequent-driver nation of America are particularly sensitive to gas prices. In July 2024, the equivalent of around 92 US cents per liter had to be paid on a nationwide average. In summer 2019, the price was 71 cents, in summer 2020 even just 58 cents. Many US voters associate the late Trump years with moderate fuel costs. Many Americans blame Biden for the price plateau, which is still quite high compared to the pre-corona period. And Harris.

Harris has not yet understood how to reduce her concept of prosperity to the realities of life of US citizens. But the democrat's biggest shortcoming is probably the lack of a vision of where she wants to lead the country. Too often, she has sold her policy as a list of individual measures. Trump, on the other hand, appears as a system blaster who wants to conjure up “change” with a ride of fire.

Harris has been on a learning curve since Biden withdrew from the presidential race. She has made the transition from vice president as a de facto Biden appendix to an independent player. But even if she gets better, it's completely unclear whether that's enough. In any case, it will be very close on November 5th.

‍

Michael Backfisch is an author for international politics. He was the Head of Foreign Affairs at the Funke Central Office in Berlin from 2015 to 2023. He was previously Deputy Editor in Chief of Handelsblatt. He worked for the business newspaper as a US correspondent in Washington and as a Middle East correspondent in Dubai.

‍