Kamala Harris's momentum falls, with clear advantage before presidential elections

Harris may maintain a slight advantage in the national average polls, but this advantage is deceptive. Her numbers are much worse than Hillary Clinton was in 2016 before she lost to Trump. Clinton was ahead with more than six points; Harris is less than a drop and a half. And in the six countries that are most likely to decide the outcome of this year, polls speak of a stalemate, with an advantage for each candidate within the margin of error.

If the past is a guide, that draw is also deceptive and Trump has a clear advantage. He exceeded polls in both his previous races, even in his unsuccessful bid for re-election in 2020.

The vice president based all hope on trying to get voters to see it as a force for renovation and change. At first it seemed to be working. Voters appeared eager for a younger, less recognised face in national politics. She may be Joe Biden's colleague in the government, but a vice president rarely makes a lot of space in American minds.

Trump, on the other hand, is very popular. Presidential elections are usually a referendum for the ruling party, but a former president is usually not the candidate coming from the other camp.

So Harris has tried to make himself look foreign to this race. It campaigns with slogans like “render page” and “we will not go back to”, as if the Benden-Haris record in charge was really a joint Biden-Trump record that stretches eight years ago. It hopes to promise a new start, under a decades- younger leader than Biden or Trump.

Whether consciously or not, Harris copied the 2016 Trump campaign when he offered himself as an alternative to the exhausted politics of the Bush and Clinton dynasty.

Harris' problem is that millions of Americans have fond memories of Trump's years, before inflation went up like an Elon Musk rocket and war broke out from Ukraine to the Middle East. Trump gave peace and prosperity; Beden and Harris have led over inflation, chaos on the world stage and uncontrolled immigration.

While voters may not have paid attention to Harris' actions as vice president, they know she is Beden's partner in all the disappointments and failures of the past four years. They also know that Biden called him his “caren of the border”, a flattering title that has turned into a curse for Harris as voters consider him responsible for the immigration crisis. Along with inflation, this is the main concern of voters.

Harris couldn't escape the responsibilities he shares with Beden. And she has not been able to take advantage of Trump's age as a campaign issue, because she still has to maintain the claim that the president is still capable of serving when he is obviously in much worse condition than Trump.

After surviving everything, from criminal sentences to attempted murder, what criticism does Harris have to fear Trump? She has tried every argument and no one was enough to keep her ahead in the polls. Voters just don't hate Trump enough to choose anyone as president, as long as it's not him. Harris had to raise a fable for herself, not just against Trump. But what she did wasn't convincing.

Harris is now becoming desperate. She had to use measures that would not require a safer candidate. Her interview with the Republican-minded Fox News was intended to get rid of Trump anyone who could feel the desire to desert. But she only highlighted her weaknesses in immigration and foreign policy.

Harris's field has also had to make awkward calls to motivate more major Democrats' electorates, even sending Barack Obama to lecture black men for their insufficient enthusiasm. These are not the movements of a candidate whose wind blows on his back.

However, Harris has an advantage that Hillary Clinton lacked: she knows Trump should not be underestimated. The 2016 elections were determined by several dozen thousands of votes in the relevant states, and the same was true of the 2020 elections. Harris' campaign has more money than Trump's. Can it spend enough wisely to challenge Trump's recent achievements?

Even Clinton spent more than Trump and still lost. Money may not be able to buy what Harris really needs: a public willing to seize a chance for four more years of Kamala Harris and the Democrats in the government. /The pen.al