Will voters care about Harris’ border change?

Since President Joe Biden stepped down as the Democratic Party’s nominee, Vice President Kamala Harris has had a tailwind. She’s captured momentum, money and media attention. It also seems that many voters are rewarding Democrats for changing the top of their ticket.

But in an election that will likely come down to a few thousand votes in about five states, the question remains: Will the electorate reward or punish Harris for her pivot on the most important issue facing voters?

In February, Gallup noted that “immigration” had become the frontrunner on its Top of Most Important Problems list. Gallup also released a poll last month showing that 55% of Americans want to see immigration levels reduced, the highest percentage since 2001 and up from 41% last year.

The country’s stance on immigration runs counter to what Harris tried to sell during her 2019 Democratic presidential primary: She supported decriminalizing illegal entry into the U.S. and even favored providing health care to people who entered illegally.

In 2021, Biden tasked his vice president with addressing the root causes of mass migration from Central and South America. In 2023, the Border Patrol workers union denounced Harris’ inaction on the border crisis, tweeting: “If you got a job 2 years ago with the express purpose of reducing illegal immigration, and then you sit by and do nothing while illegal immigration explodes to levels we’ve never seen before, you should be fired and replaced. Period.”

Now, as the Democratic presidential candidate, Harris has done a 180-degree turn on immigration and border security. Politico reported that at a recent rally in Arizona, Harris told the crowd the following: She emphasized her record as attorney general of the “border state” of California in combating transnational crime; she promised to fight for “strong border security”; she attacked Trump for killing a bipartisan border bill earlier this year; and she promised to sign a similar bill into law if she were president.

In a recent Bulwark podcast, statistician and founder of the polling website FiveThirtyEight Nate Silver attempted to contrast Harris’s underperformance as vice president with her current overperformance as a presidential candidate.

“And then I wonder if the White House, when she (Harris) was vice president, tried to thwart her or limit her,” Silver said. “She was given some tough assignments, like the border and voting rights, which is not a tough assignment, but it’s the one thing they couldn’t really do anything about.”

To be clear, this was Silver’s personal opinion. But when pundits and political professionals use the term “rough assignment” to describe just one task, it doesn’t give voters much confidence that Harris can handle all the other facets of the job if she wins the presidency.

Meanwhile, the Trump campaign is struggling to find a coherent message, and its main messenger is seriously flawed. So, just because she’s not Trump, Harris’ immigration flip-flops may not matter.

St. Louis Post-Dispatch/Tribune News Service