Presidential campaigns looking for evidence of a breakthrough in polling continue to be reminded of the cold reality that the race is essentially tied. After a series of positive polls showing Harris-Walz leading or gaining momentum nationally and in key swing states, The New York Times/Siena College (hardly a MAGA bastion) released a poll this week showing Harris-Walz losing in Arizona, Georgia and North Carolina. If that’s the case, Pennsylvania looks like even more of a must-win state for Harris, which makes her campaign’s stubborn refusal to offer clear answers on fracking all the more mystifying. 

>>>READ: Harris Has a Policy Problem, not a Values Problem

On Meet the Press this weekend Harris surrogate and Pennsylvania Senator John Fetterman was asked to explain Harris’s shifting position on fracking three times and refused to offer a straight answer. Instead of being forthright with voters, Fetterman offered a rambling and flippant “yeah, but” answer that attempted to shift attention to Trump-Vance’s bizarre fixation on the false story about migrants eating cats and pets. Fetterman also attacked Meet the Press host Kristen Welker for playing “gotcha” with her line of questioning when she had the temerity to note that Fetterman called fracking “a stain on Pennsylvania” back in 2016. It didn’t help that Fetterman’s casual and contrived “man of the people” dilapidated brick backdrop made him look like he was being held hostage to voter concerns. 

As Democrats, and many Republicans, fairly note about Trump, the side that is attacking the media and debate moderators is usually losing and knows it is losing. 

Although an NBC poll released on Sunday showed Harris with a double-digit increase in popularity, it also showed Trump with a nine-point advantage on the economy and an eight-point lead on affordability. Many serious Democrats are alarmed about this gap, yet the Harris-Walz campaign and its surrogates seem to be complacent and are betting the election that Trump’s inability to stay on message will save them from defeat. 

>>>READ: Trump’s Missed Opportunity on Climate Change

If Democrats believe Trump is a threat to democracy, and not merely to Democrats, they need to offer a much more serious and humble response on fracking that will reassure swing voters who care far more about the economy and affordability than social issues. Instead of attacking voters for asking good-faith questions, they should try radical honesty and tell the truth.

A truthful, serious answer from a surrogate could sound something like this:

“As Democrats, many voices in our coalition view climate change as an existential threat. President Biden and Vice President Harris share that concern. Yet, too often, serious leaders in our party have been intimidated into taking positions on energy policy for indefensible, short-term political reasons that go against common sense and their better judgment. The fact is many of the voices in our coalition on climate are also the loudest and resort to extreme tactics like throwing soup on paintings and gluing themselves to roads to get their point across. When politicians like Harris and Fetterman voiced their opposition to fracking they were attempting to pacify these extreme voices in our coalition. That was a mistake.

“In politics and life, good leaders admit to past mistakes and make course corrections, especially when new information becomes available. It is very clear that fracking, on balance, is good for people – especially low-income Americans – and the planet. Fracking is the primary reason for lower energy costs and America’s global leadership in lowering emissions. 

“We’ve seen about faces unfold in other countries. In Germany, for instance, political leaders have disavowed positions they took on energy policy after it became apparent those positions were playing into Vladimir Putin’s hands and undermining German and global security. The same process is now underway among progressive in the United States. That’s why Kamala Harris has gone from a critic of fracking to a champion of fracking.”

In a few short weeks, pre-election analysis will give way to post-mortems. Harris would be wise to realize that confessing to political expediency now is far less costly than losing in November.

The views and opinions expressed are those of the author’s and do not necessarily reflect the official policy or position of C3.