Vice President Kamala Harris has recently gained a slight edge over former President Donald Trump according to the latest Des Moines Register/Mediacom Iowa Poll, released just days ahead of the November 5 election. Harris garnered 47% among likely voters, while Trump follows closely with 44%. This marks a surprising shift in a state historically dominated by Trump, who previously secured victories in Iowa during the 2016 and 2020 elections.
The poll, conducted between October 28 and October 31 through a survey of 808 likely Iowa voters, has a margin of error of ±3.4 percentage points. Although Harris’ lead falls within this margin, it indicates a notable change from earlier polls; in September, Trump held a 4-point advantage.
A significant contributor to Harris’ increased support appears to be a shift among women voters, particularly independents and those aged 65 and older. The latest findings show that 57% of independent women now favor Harris compared to 29% for Trump. Among voters aged 65 and older, 63% of senior women support Harris versus 28% for Trump.
Despite these numbers, Iowa Republican Party Chair Jeff Kaufmann dismissed the poll’s validity, citing a contrasting Emerson College poll that showed Trump leading by a margin of 53% to 43%. He described the Des Moines Register’s poll as an outlier. On the other hand, House Minority Leader Jennifer Konfrst defended the Iowa Poll’s credibility, emphasizing its historical reliability.
The poll also indicated that independent candidate Robert F. Kennedy Jr. retains 3% support among likely voters, while Libertarian Chase Oliver received less than 1%. Additionally, a portion of the electorate remains undecided or unwilling to disclose their preferences.
Looking ahead to the election, Democratic leaders like Konfrst view the poll as a morale booster for voters and organizers. It serves as a catalyst for discussions within the national party about potential support and mobilization efforts in these final days before the election. Konfrst expressed optimism that grassroots efforts and community engagement would lead to unexpectedly positive results for the Democratic party.
Overall, these shifting dynamics in Iowa suggest a competitive political landscape as the election approaches, and the potential for Harris to secure a significant win could have far-reaching implications for both state and national electoral strategies. The results could also reframe Iowa’s role in future presidential nominating contests, highlighting its importance as a measuring stick for candidate viability and public sentiment.