In Pennsylvania, a critical battleground for the November elections, both the Trump and Harris campaigns are carefully navigating the political landscape, but a new development could benefit former President Donald Trump.

Observers have long anticipated that the presidential race might hinge on Pennsylvania, a state notable for influential figures like Sen. John Fetterman (D-PA) and Democratic Gov. Josh Shapiro, who was considered for vice president but ultimately not chosen by Kamala Harris. Fetterman, a progressive who has shifted towards the center on some issues, even forecasted a Trump victory in the state.

Meanwhile, Vice President Kamala Harris is adjusting her stance on fracking, a contentious issue with significant economic implications in Pennsylvania. InsiderAdvantage Polling suggests these factors may be tilting the contest in Trump’s favor.

A recent survey of 800 likely Pennsylvania voters shows former President Donald Trump leading Harris by 2%, with Trump at 50% and Harris at 48% if the election were held today. Trump’s lead is notable compared to GOP Senate nominee Dave McCormick, who trails incumbent Sen. Bob Casey (D-PA) by 5%, with McCormick at 44% and Casey at 49%.

Only 1% of voters prefer another presidential candidate, and another 1% are undecided. The absence of Robert F. Kennedy Jr. from the statewide ballot may have led his supporters to Trump, who received Kennedy’s endorsement.

Additionally, recent post-debate analysis suggests that the shrinking pool of undecided voters may be leaning in Trump’s direction.

PENNSYLVANIA GE: @InsiderPolling

Trump: 50% (+2)
Harris: 48%
——
Senate
Casey (inc): 49% (+5)
McCormick: 44%
——
#86 (2.0/3.0) | 800 LV | 9/14-15 | ±3.46%https://t.co/6uRWwQj7rP pic.twitter.com/xgnSpBBfNQ

— InteractivePolls (@IAPolls2022) September 17, 2024

Harris’s evolving position on fracking has led to criticism regarding her trustworthiness and policy intentions. During her 2019 presidential campaign, Harris vowed to implement a nationwide ban on fracking, citing environmental studies that pointed to potential dangers for local water supplies.

In contrast, she now supports Pennsylvania’s authority to utilize fracking for natural gas extraction. Critics question her genuineness, highlighting that other progressive commitments from her earlier campaigns—such as funding gender transitions for migrants and felons—are notably missing from her current platform.

Journalists have voiced concerns over whether her updated stance is a sincere transformation or a strategic political maneuver.