New Keystone State polling shows interesting coalitions lining up behind Kamala Harris and Donald Trump in a race the vice president leads by just 3 points, inside the +/- 3.8% margin of error.
The Democratic presidential nominee is better regarded by well-educated, affluent voters regardless of race, especially in major metropolitan areas.
And the Republican nominee’s base seems to be the less-educated, rural working class, at least according to a Franklin & Marshall survey conducted between July 31 and Aug. 11, with responses from 920 registered voters — 411 Democrats, 378 Republicans and 131 independents.
Among white voters without a college degree, Trump dominates Harris, leading 53% to 35%, with Robert Kennedy Jr. at 7% and the Green Party’s Jill Stein at 1%.
But while Harris lags against white voters who didn’t finish college, she makes up for it with those who did, taking 62% support, with Trump at 28%, Kennedy at 5% and Libertarian Chase Oliver at 1%.
Among all voters, the educational divide is only reinforced. Trump leads Harris 59% to 29% with people with a “high school or less” education and 49% to 37% with those who had “some college.” Yet among those with a college degree, Harris leads 61% to 30%.
And while many polls suggest a major ethnic gap in presidential preference, this survey tells a different story.
Harris leads by 3 points with white voters, 46% to 43%, with Kennedy at 6%. Among nonwhite voters, Trump leads Harris 44% to 43%; Kennedy’s at 7%.
Beyond suggesting education matters more than ethnicity in Pennsylvania, the poll offers further indications voters in the Keystone State see Trump, not Harris, as the working-class hero.
The former president does best among those respondents who make less than $35,000 a year, with 48% support against 38% for Harris, 6% for Kennedy, 3% for Jill Stein, 1% for Oliver and 2% for someone else.
But those making higher incomes like Harris.
She leads Trump 48% to 36% with those making between $35,000 and $75,000 a year, with Kennedy at 8% and no other candidate above 1%.
And among those making more than $75,000 a year, Harris is at 52%, with Trump 14 points behind.
Some theorize that blue-collar voters in Pennsylvania and other states feel abandoned by the Democratic Party as organized labor’s power has waned, and the data speak to that.
Underscoring that theory also in this survey: the concentration of Harris’ support in urban areas.
Harris will hope to rack up the votes in what pollsters call “large central metro” areas, where she leads Trump 70% to 20%. She also leads Trump by 3 points in fringe metro areas.
For the former president, it’s a shame trees can’t vote, as he dominates in more rural areas.
He leads Harris 51% to 39% in medium metros, 56% to 30% in small metros, 54% to 32% in micropolitan areas and 54% to 37% in “noncore” areas.
Harris will also rise or fall based on ability to turn out the vote in Philadelphia, which takes its time counting mail ballots like few other cities in the country. She leads 59% to 38% in that area of the state and by 8 points in Allegheny/southwest (the Pittsburgh region).
Trump leads Harris in the northwest, northeast and central areas of the state.
What’s clear from this survey: Pennsylvania will be hard fought, and for Trump to win, he and his team must be aggressive in turning out voters in more isolated areas to counter Harris’ advantages in population centers. And along those lines, just as in 2020, late-counted votes from urban areas may again make the difference in a close election.
