New Data Shows the Economy Was the Deciding Factor for Voters in Pennsylvania and Michigan — and Harris Missed Opportunities to Play Up Economic Populism
A new analysis from Data for Progress in partnership with the Progressive Change Institute of polling conducted in Pennsylvania and Michigan during election week suggests Kamala Harris' decision to focus on generating earned media by campaigning with former Republican Representative Liz Cheney in the final days of the race sacrificed enthusiasm among key voters. Focusing wholly instead on populist economic issues would have benefited her with key voters in both states.
The findings also show that voters in Pennsylvania and Michigan — two key swing states — made their decision on the economy and that inflation and high prices were the most important aspect of the economy that voters took into consideration when choosing a candidate.
Voters believed Donald Trump would address this core issue of the economy more than Harris. Voters also heard more from Trump on economic issues than they did from Harris, and considered Trump to be the “change candidate.”
However, Trump’s own voters expect him to increase taxes on billionaires and big corporations, expand Medicare, and address kitchen table issues like corporate grocery price gouging and “junk fees.”
Together, these findings provide clarity about Harris' campaign decisions — and Trump’s mandates moving forward.
Please see these key findings detailed below.
Harris Missed an Opportunity With Key Voters by Campaigning With Cheney Instead of Focusing More on the Economy
In both polls, we asked voters two questions about how their enthusiasm for Harris was impacted by her campaign strategy. One question featured Harris' decision to campaign with Cheney, while the other question focused on Harris' decision to push economic populist messaging. Our findings suggest that Harris' decision to campaign with Cheney diverted valuable time that could have been spent continuing to hammer on her popular economic messaging in the final days of the campaign.
Our polling finds that Pennsylvania Independents were 18 points more enthusiastic to vote for Harris when campaigning on economic issues, and 7 points less enthusiastic to vote for Harris when campaigning with Cheney – a swing of 25 points. In Michigan, Independents were 11 points more enthusiastic to vote for Harris when campaigning on economic issues and 7 points less enthusiastic when campaigning with Cheney — a swing of 18 points. In both states, 70% of voters said Harris campaigning with Cheney either had no impact on their enthusiasm or made them less enthusiastic.
Even among the Democratic base, campaigning on economic issues boosted enthusiasm to vote for Harris by 25 points in Pennsylvania and by 20 points in Michigan when compared to enthusiasm when campaigning with Cheney — suggesting that the economy should have been Harris' sole focus throughout the critical final days, as it stimulated the base and attracted swing voters.
Economy and Inflation Were Top Priorities for Voters
By wide margins, Pennsylvania and Michigan Independents and Republicans — the audience Harris was looking to win over — said the economy was their top issue when voting. This finding emphasizes why diverting resources to campaigning with Cheney in the final days, instead of doubling down on Harris' messaging regarding popular economic issues, may have decreased enthusiasm for Harris among key voters.
In both states, inflation and high prices were the most important aspects of the economy that voters took into consideration when choosing a candidate. Independent voters, including more than 9 in 10 Pennsylvania voters and more than 8 in 10 Michigan voters, named inflation and high prices as the most important aspects of the economy when considering whom to vote for.
2024 Trump Voters Strongly Supported Populist Economic Policies, Yet Believed Trump Would Improve Overall Economy
By nearly a 2-to-1 margin, Trump's own supporters in both states said they want to increase taxes on billionaires. A majority of Trump voters supported increasing taxes on big corporations. A strong majority of Trump's voters wanted him to crack down on corporate price gouging and hidden "junk fees." These findings indicate that Trump has a mandate to meet his supporters on these popular issues.
Split A/B refers to an in-survey experiment design where respondents were randomly assigned to see slightly different versions of a policy proposal. This approach allows us to test how differences in framing or emphasis impact levels of support for a given policy. The randomization was conducted independently for each policy, meaning a respondent assigned to Split A for one policy might be assigned to either Split A or Split B for another policy.
Even though Trump supporters in both states backed populist economic policies, the results indicate that the number one reason they voted for him was because they believed he would improve the economy and lower costs driven by the impacts of inflation.
Voters Heard More From Trump Than Harris on Economy, Considered Trump the ‘Change Candidate’
Despite leading Trump as the “change candidate” in early October, Harris was unable to convince most voters that she would bring about the change they wanted to see. While voters supported Harris' economic platform, they consistently heard Trump talk more about the economy — the most important issue — than Harris in both states.
Most Voters Support Harris' Economic Policies, Know Trump Sides With Billionaires
While in both polls voters trusted Trump to improve the economy, more voters – 53% in Pennsylvania and 55% in Michigan – thought Harris was more likely to “crack down on corporations that rip off families,” and 53% of Pennsylvania voters and 51% of Michigan voters thought Trump would “take actions that benefit billionaires and corporate elites.” This highlights a disconnect between the issues voters value and the candidate they trust to address those issues.
Overall, these findings underscore how central the economy and the economic pain of the past few years were in shaping voter decisions in Pennsylvania and Michigan. While Harris ran on a popular economic agenda, she was ultimately unable to convince voters that she, not Trump, would usher in the changes they wanted to see, lower prices, and challenge bad actors and special interests. However, most voters supported the policies Harris was running on, Trump voters included. Looking ahead, this polling has identified areas of overwhelming support for progressive, populist economic policies, suggesting that executing these policies should be a priority for the incoming administration.
Methodology
These surveys by Data for Progress, in collaboration with the Progressive Change Institute, were both fielded from November 1-4, interviewed 799 Michigan voters and 910 Pennsylvania voters, and were weighted to the 2024 election results in each state.
The following surveys were conducted by Data for Progress, and the samples were weighted to be representative of likely voters by age, gender, education, race, geography, 2020 recalled vote, and the 2024 election result. For more information on Data for Progress’ methodology, please visit dataforprogress.org/our-methodology.
Michigan: From November 1 to 4, 2024, Data for Progress conducted a survey of 799 likely voters in Michigan using SMS and web panel respondents. The survey was conducted in English. The margin of error associated with the sample size is ±3 percentage points.
Pennsylvania: From November 1 to 4, 2024, Data for Progress conducted a survey of 901 likely voters in Pennsylvania using SMS and web panel respondents. The survey was conducted in English. The margin of error associated with the sample size is ±3 percentage points.