Many articles have speculated generally on how Muslim voters, alienated by U.S. support for Israel’s Gaza invasion, and now Israel’s attacks on civilian life in Lebanon, could decide the election in several swing states. Without interpretive data, they do little more than give Harris supporters one more thing to worry about. A deeper dive into the polls does indeed show that Harris’s inability to take a stand against Israeli violence can indeed lead to a Trump victory. And it certainly underscores the need for a strong response from the Harris-Walz ticket.
Many Muslim voters have abandoned the Democratic ticket for third party candidates. An August 29th poll conducted by the Council on American Islamic Relations (CAIR) showed Harris with 29.4 percent of the Muslim vote, Jill Stein 29.1 percent, Trump 11.2 percent, Cornel West 4.2 percent, the Libertarian Party <1 percent, and 16.5 percent undecided. Nationally Stein polls at only 1.2 percent and West <1 percent while Undecideds account for about 3-4 percent. And before Biden withdrew from the race, he was polling 12 percent among Muslims. Clearly:
- Muslims are abandoning Harris in five key states where they could sway the election. Stein leads Harris: 35-29 percent in Arizona, 44-39 percent in Wisconsin, 43-17 percent in Georgia, and 40-12 percent in Michigan and in Pennsylvania trails Harris 37-25 percent.
- Harris has far more intrinsic support among Muslims than Biden did when he withdrew.
- Muslims recognize that Trump is toxic to their interests.
- Stein, West, and Undecided voters represent 49.8 percent of Muslim voters, a vast differential from the relatively miniscule nationwide percentages. This 50 percent would almost certainly vote overwhelmingly for Harris were she to oppose our Israel/Gaza policy.
By breaking with Biden’s Gaza policy, Harris can win back many of these votes. Whether this results in a net gain among non-Muslim voters is unclear: Certainly many non-Muslims plan not to vote for Harris because of Gaza, and many voters could turn against her if she called for an arms embargo, immediate cease fire, and rebuilding of Gazan communities. But a critical gain among Muslim voters is guaranteed.
The following calculations address how many votes Kamala Harris can potentially win back if she does break with the administration’s policy. At the end of the post, I explain how I came up with these numbers.
Michigan: About 120,000 Muslim voters (2.2 percent of the total statewide vote), could potentially shift to Harris from third party candidates and undecideds if she urged an end to Israel’s invasions. This in a state where her lead is a shaky 2.6 percent, which includes outlier polls that show Harris with a far wider lead than the majority of polls do. 15 electoral votes. 2020 results: Biden 50.62 percent, Trump 47.84 percent.
The Uncommitted National Movement, which garnered 101,623 (13.2 percent) uncommitted (no candidate) votes in the Michigan primary, just decided not to endorse Harris’s candidacy. The movement aims to pressure Democrats to withdraw support for Israel’s invasion and now represents 700,000 voters nationwide. This is an important indication that electoral protest on behalf of Gaza and Lebanon Harris is growing, and not just among Muslims.
Arizona: A shift of about 30,000 extra votes (.9 percent) for Harris in a state Trump currently leads by 1.9 percent and that Biden won by less than 11,000 votes. And while Democrat Ruben Gallego has a comfortable lead over Maga Republican Kari Lake in the Arizona Senate race, the state is a presidential toss-up. 11 electoral votes. 2020 results: Biden 49.36 percent, Trump 49.06 percent (10,457 votes).
Wisconsin: An estimated 10,000 extra votes (.3 percent) for Harris where her 1.9 percent lead is well within the margin of error. As in Michigan, one outlier poll that gave Harris a 7 percent lead (MassINC) is responsible for over half the reported 1.9 percent margin. 10 electoral votes. 2020 results: Biden 49.4 percent, Trump 48.8 percent or 20,682 votes.
Georgia: 40-45,000 votes (.8-.9 percent) could shift to Harris, Trump currently leads by .6 percent. 16 electoral votes. 2020 results: Biden 49.47 percent, Trump 49.24 percent or 11,779 votes out of almost 5 million cast. Along with black voters, Muslims gave Biden his victory here.
Pennsylvania: 60,000 extra votes (.9 percent) for Harris in a state Harris leads by .8 percent when 3rd party candidates are included and .1 percent when not. Stein is polling .6 percent in PA overall. 19 electoral votes. 2020 results: Biden 50.01 percent, Trump 48.84 percent. She needs those 60,000 votes.
Method: I used purely arithmetical procedures based on 10-12 different polls, depending on the state. This is not a statistical analysis that might take into account Bayesian adjustments, rates of change in trends, etc.
In 2020’s national election, 66 percent of all eligible voters cast ballots, the highest rate since 1900. Muslims are particularly engaged in this year’s election. CAIR estimates 80-85 percent of eligible Muslims will vote; on the side of caution, I used a 75 percent participation figure.
I based the state-wide numbers for Muslim voters on 2020 figures with an add-on that accounted for the upward trend in Muslim voter registration.
I multiplied likely Muslim voters by the percentage of voters polling for Stein, West, and Undecided. The disdain of Muslim voters for Trump, and the 90 percent+ Democratic tilt of black voters, many of whom are Muslim, support the assumption that the vast majority of this triune group could revert to Harris.
These are rough estimates because primary source data, including the U.S. Census Bureau’s, are only estimates. In truth, even if voters shift back to Harris are half these rates, they could determine a majority of the 71 electoral votes held by the 5 states. My aim is not to “call” the election but to demonstrate that Muslim voters’ abhorrence of an immoral, unpopular Democratic policy could wind up giving the election to Donald Trump.
Again, this post is not about the invasions themselves, though my views are stated in passing. Pragmatism should not override morality, but it is vital to acknowledge the practical arguments for a strategic change-of-course that could well decide the election.
COMMENTS