CHRIS CRUCIAL: Pennsylvania, Pennsylvania, Pennsylvania!

PLUS: Harris drops $25 million on downballot races

Welcome to Chris Crucial. Check out my mission statement on why you should invest in me. I’m now just 53(!) paid subscribers away from 3,500!! Help me make that goal! It’s $6 a month/$60 for the year. Do it today!👇

1. Pennsylvania is the whole ball game

If you are me and write and talk about politics for a living, people ask you the same question a lot: Who’s going to win?

I always say the same thing: I don’t know. If I did, I would tell you!

But then I quickly add: If you tell me who wins Pennsylvania, I’ll tell you who wins the election.

That answer is based on my belief that Pennsylvania is THE swing state in this election — as it was in 2020 and 2016. (Fun fact: The candidate that has carried Pennsylvania has won the national election in each of the last four elections.) That, yes, both Kamala Harris and Donald Trump can get to 270 electoral votes if they lose Pennsylvania but, man oh man, it is tough.

Well now my sense about the importance of Pennsylvania is being backed up by two of the best election models out there.

Nate Silver, who writes the Silver Bulletin Substack, told me today that the current version of his model shows that if Trump wins Pennsylvania he has a 93% of winning the electoral college while Harris has a 91% chance of winning the whole thing if she carries the state.

Decision Desk HQ’s election model is only slightly less certain about Pennsylvania dictating the outcome. If Harris wins the state, she has an 86% chance of winning overall, according to DDHQ’s Scott Tranter. If Trump wins Pennsylvania, he has a 79% of winning the presidency.

(Tranter noted that the percentages were even higher a few weeks back — until it became clear that Harris had truly put Georgia and North Carolina into the toss-up category.)

The electoral map provides conclusive evidence of the centrality of the Keystone State.

If Trump, for example, won just Pennsylvania and North Carolina, he would be at 254 electoral votes — just 16 away from a victory. Meaning that if he won Georgia as well, he’d be the next president.

Now, flip Pennsylvania to Harris. That puts her at 245 electoral votes — just 25 away from victory, with six swing states up for grabs. If Harris won only Michigan and Wisconsin — in addition to PA — she’d be at 270 electoral votes.

Again, are there paths for Harris and Trump that don’t include a win in Pennsylvania? Sure. But it’s a whole hell of a lot easier for either of them to get to 270 electoral votes if they win it.

Both candidates — and their aligned super PACs — know this fact. In August alone, the candidates (and their committees) spent more than $37 million each on campaign ads in the state. That’s $10 million more than either side spent in any other swing state. And both sides are expected to spend another $66+ million — each — on TV ads in the state over the next two months.

To be clear: Every swing state matters. But Pennsylvania matters the most.

2. Harris pumps cash downballot

Flush with cash, Vice President Kamala Harris’ campaign is donating $24 million to downballot Democrats, her campaign announced on Tuesday.

“The Vice President believes that this race is about mobilizing the entire country, in races at every level, to fight for our freedoms and our economic opportunity,” said campaign chair Jen O’Malley Dillon. “That’s why the Vice President has made the decision to invest a historic sum into electing Democrats up and down the ballot: because Democrats win when we fight together.”

The biggest beneficiaries of Harris’ largesse will be the House and Senate Democratic campaign committees, which will each receive $10 million. Another $2.5 million will be allocated to the Democratic Legislative Campaign Committee, which is tasked with electing candidates at the state legislative level. A million dollars each will go to the Democratic Attorneys General Association and the Democratic Governors Association.

Harris’ donations will further extend Democratic fundraising advantages in House and Senate races.

In a Politico piece headlined “House and Senate Republicans are starting to panic about a huge money gap with Democrats,” Ally Mutnick wrote:

The leader of House Republicans’ biggest super PAC told donors last month he needed $35 million more to compete with Democrats in the fall. Senate GOP campaign chair Steve Daines used his primetime speaking slot at the Republican convention to lament that massive spending from Democrats was keeping him awake at night. And his House GOP counterpart warned that their party’s challengers trailed Democratic incumbents by a collective $37 million at the end of June.

Republicans were already worried about a glaring financial gap even before Kamala Harris’ rise. Now, with the election just two months away, they found themselves in an even more dire position: Democrats have seen a flood of enthusiasm in recent weeks, they’re far outspending Republicans on air and their donors are more energized than ever — with campaign finance data showing a surge in grassroots fundraising in late July after President Joe Biden dropped out.

Panic is starting to set in.

Senate Republicans are leaning heavily on self-funding candidates. In Wisconsin, Montana, Pennsylvania and Ohio, the expectation is that the GOP nominees will, largely, self fund their efforts.

The party has no such plan for House races. Here’s CNN on the money situation in the House:

Democratic candidates outraised their GOP opponents in 21 of the 22 of the House races currently rated as Toss-ups by The Cook Political Report with Amy Walter, the most competitive category. Arizona Rep. David Schweikert was the lone Republican in this group to lead in second-quarter fundraising – but the fractured field of Democrats competing in the July 30 primary combined to outraise him.

Underscoring Democrats’ fundraising strength, 11 of their candidates in the Toss-up races also reported war chests of $3 million or more, and five of those topped $4 million. Only three Republicans in Toss-up races entered July with cash-on-hand totals of more than $3 million.

Money, of course, can only get you so far. How the top of the ticket fares in these states and districts will also be critically important.

But, ask any political operative whether they’d rather be the candidate with more money than the one with less and every single one would say the former.

3. Trump is the worst GOP candidate

On paper, Republicans should be winning this election. The economy. Immigration. An unpopular president. And yet, Donald Trump isn’t winning.

Why? Because Trump is a deeply flawed — and weak — Republican nominee. I explain why in my daily video on my YouTube channel. Subscribe!

NOTABLE QUOTABLE

“When you lose an election and you try to overturn the results so that you can stay in power, you lose me. You lose me at that point.” — Former Pennsylvania Republican Sen. Pat Toomey announces he will not vote for Donald Trump this November. (Toomey said he won’t vote for Harris either.)

ONE GOOD CHART

Joe Biden has (largely) disappeared from public life since announcing at the end of July that he wouldn’t seek a 2nd term. And his poll numbers have never been better! (Hat tip Damon Linker.)

SONG OF THE DAY

Confession: I have not watched “Bad Monkey,” the new Vince Vaughn show on Apple TV +. But I DO dig a song that Jason Isbell & the 400 Unit have done for the show. It’s a Tom Petty cover called “You’re Gonna Get It.”

Thanks for reading! This nightly newsletter brings you ALL of what you need to know from the world of politics. Think of it as a daily cheat sheet! If you want to get it in your email inbox every night at 7:30 pm, become a subscriber today!