View this post on the web at [link removed]

I.
Occam’s Razor says the simplest explanation is usually correct. It was coined by William of Ockham — a 14th century English academic who studied at Oxford and wrote a bunch of books.
“It’s the economy, stupid” was the political Occam’s Razor that helped elect Bill Clinton in 1992. It was coined by James Carville — a legendary political consultant who studied at LSU, takes pride in not being an elite, and won a bunch of elections.
Elections — like many complex, multi-variate expressions — can often be simplified to a single key variable. The side that knows what that variable is and exploits it, wins.
In an extremely complex, noisy election with powerful forces on both sides, most of those forces will cancel out.
When you run through the operations, the answer is clear: it’s the economy, stupid.
II.
This presidential race is tied because both sides are evenly matched in almost every way.
Here’s my basic analysis of how Trump and Harris mostly cancel each other out, and why it will eventually just come down to economic sentiment.
Trump lost the debate, but it doesn’t matter, because Harris missed a golden opportunity to say something of substance.
In technical terms, Harris won that debate. Most people thought she did well and Trump did poorly. But, as I predicted [ [link removed] ], it had zero impact on the polls.
Why?
The CNN poll had some interesting data on voter perceptions of both candidates pre and post-debate. Trump’s numbers didn’t change much. Harris’s favorability went up 6 points. But her unfavorables also went up 6 points. The net benefit to her was 0.
If you win a debate and net zero fans, did you really win the debate? In my view, no. Trump and Harris both beat themselves.
Immigration and abortion likely cancel each other out.
Most Americans support legal immigration, oppose illegal immigration, and are deeply concerned by the Biden administration’s spectacular failure to secure the border. This is a huge liability for any Democratic nominee for president — not least the sitting Vice President of the United States. No amount of lying and obfuscation will save Harris from the consequences.
Many Americans oppose abortion on moral and/or religious grounds, but the vast majority of Americans support legal abortion and keeping the government out of it. This is a huge liability for any Republican nominee for president — not least the former President who ran on overturning Roe v. Wade, did it, and then bragged about it. No amount of bullshit about states’ rights will save Trump from the consequences.
Democrats have outperformed in every single election since 2020, thanks in large part to our advantage (~Harris +9) on abortion. But at this moment, immigration matters a lot to voters and Republicans (~Trump +7) have the clear edge there.
Both issues will prove equally important.
Trump is a better candidate. Harris belongs to a better party, and has a better campaign.
Trump is a generational political talent on par with Obama before him, and Bill Clinton before that. Harris is simply not in that league.
Harris’s campaign, however, is more disciplined, strategic, and well-resourced than Trump’s will ever be. The VP has the legacy media establishment, Hollywood, Wall Street, the Bushes, the Cheneys, the Democratic machine, and will raise and spend $1 billion or more. Unlike Trump, she listens to her advisers and allows herself to be managed. That is a strength.
I also believe Trump is making a big mistake by delegating his Get-Out-The-Vote (GOTV) field operation to outside groups, and neglecting mail-in voting, while the Harris campaign invests heavily — and directly — in ground operations in every battleground state.
Obama was a team player and a star. That’s why he won both his elections handily.
Trump is a star, but he’s a one-man show. Harris is a team player, but she’s not a star. That’s why this election is so close.
Harris looks good. Trump sounds good.
When I mute the sound and just watch these two candidates, VP Harris is winning. Harris looks good. Her hand gestures, facial expressions, posture, and relatively calm demeanor all project stability. Trump looks old, sometimes happy, sometimes grumpy, sometimes hyper, sometimes tired — but never stable. Rarely presidential.
But with the audio on, and now overlayed on the video, this is a very different contest. A lot of what Harris says is utter nonsense. Even when she makes sense, her ideas — a tax credit here, a housing subsidy there — are piecemeal and half-baked, like an 8th-grader’s book report written the night before it’s due.
She sounds incredibly compelling on abortion and little else. I keep hearing “opportunity economy,” but I have no idea what that means, which means that the median swing voter in Pennsylvania definitely has no idea what that means. And on foreign policy, her vague, haiku-like pronouncements do not inspire confidence.
The VP didn’t always speak like this. Check out this speech [ [link removed] ] she gave as San Francisco District Attorney: clear, coherent, substantive, and at times, even funny. No word salads, no haikus. I don’t know why. But Harris does not speak with the same confidence and command today.
Trump sounds good. He delivers a clear economic argument for the working class: when I was president, prices were lower and you were richer. On border enforcement, he’s in his comfort zone, and compelling. These are probably the two biggest issues in the election. And Harris has not yet found her voice on them.
Legacy media supports Harris. Social media and podcasts are either apolitical or support Trump.
I don’t have an exhaustive survey to show you here. Just my dual impression:
Republicans underestimate how successfully ABC, NBC, and CNN, etc., have, in Kristin Welker’s iconic phrase, “reintroduced” a historically unpopular, 36% approval-rating Vice President as a Democratic nominee who 47% of Americans now support.
Democrats underestimate how the subtle ridicule of Elon Musk, Joe Rogan, Tim Dillon, Tucker Carlson, The Megyn Kelly Show, and the Daily Show tarnishes the credibility of VP Harris with voters under 40, who mostly don’t watch legacy news.
Both media forces are powerful.
Mainstream media tells me to take Harris seriously:
Alternative media tells me she’s a joke:
Women will turn out for Harris. Men will show up for Trump.
The gender gap in this election might be the greatest recorded in American political history [ [link removed] ]: 33 points. Women are trending liberal and men are trending conservative. I guess if I had to choose, this is slightly good for Harris, because women are more reliable voters. But do not underestimate the size of the silent Trump voters, who won’t show up in the polling, and will be mostly men — especially young men.
Democrats think Trump is a threat to democracy. Republicans think Democrats are a threat to democracy. Independents have mixed views — and mostly hate them both.
Republicans see the Biden cover-up and Harris nomination as fundamentally undemocratic, Trump’s legal troubles as political persecution, and the media’s suppression of the COVID lab leak hypothesis and the Hunter Biden laptop as election interference.
Democrats see Trump’s refusal to concede the 2020 election, January 6th, criminal cases, and Project 2025 [ [link removed] ] as a threat to elections, voting, the peaceful transfer of power — and the blueprint for theocracy and dictatorship.
Swing voters seem to think they both have a point.
Voters want change. Yet both Harris and Trump represent the status quo.
Trump has dominated American political culture and discourse for 10 years. Most people are tired of his personality, even if they vote for his policies.
Harris is the sitting Vice-President for an unpopular president, has held office continuously for 20 years, and her party has occupied the White House for 8 of the last 12. She won’t escape responsibility for inflation and the border. And despite being a fresh face, she talks like the old guard. Celebrating endorsements from Hillary Clinton and Dick Cheney didn’t help. [ [link removed] ]
III.
“Money, money, money, muh-nay. Muh-nay!” - For the Love of Money, The O’Jays
This yields only one net advantage for either candidate: when Trump was president, most Americans enjoyed lower prices and a higher standard of living.
Assets vs. income
Middle class and upper-middle class Americans may not feel this, because they own assets: a home, a 401k, maybe a even an equity stake in a business. If you own assets, the last 3.5 years — and especially the pandemic years — were prosperous for you.
But if you are living off income, the Biden presidency has not been fun. Prices have gone up dramatically on most household necessities. And wages have not kept up with inflation.
Indeed, 2/3rds of Americans report living paycheck to paycheck. This means that they would not be able to pay their bills or manage their finances if they became unemployed. The average American feels they need to earn over $186,000 to live comfortably, more than triple the median full-time, annual worker's salary.
She talks funny, he talks money
Vice President Harris realizes this, but she seems incapable of speaking about it convincingly. From the Oprah town hall and other events, I recall 3 concrete ideas: a $50,000 loan for small business founders, a $6,000 child tax credit, and a $25,000 subsidy for first-time homeowners. But I also remember several word salads and Haikus about ‘the opportunity economy.’
More than the details, her tone is off. Harris doesn’t sound passionate, confident, or knowledgeable when talking about economics (versus, say, abortion rights). That will cost her in Pennsylvania, North Carolina, Georgia, and beyond.
More important, he is perceived as credible on the economy because many Americans felt richer during his presidency than during Biden’s. Harris can catch up. But today’s Pittsburgh policy address [ [link removed] ] notwithstanding, the Vice President has a long road to hoe.
President Trump benefits from (1) his pre-political brand as a (supposedly) successful businessman on The Apprentice (2) his actual economic success as president (3) strong, confident speeches about his pre-COVID economy. I recall 3-4 concrete ideas: no tax on tips, no tax on social security, cut the corporate tax rate, cut regulations.
In an election tied in just about every other way, that likely means Trump wins.

Unsubscribe [link removed]?