Here we are 40 days out from the presidential election, and a critical aspect of the two campaigns is their inability to take a substantial lead. 

A key shift in this election came when President Joe Biden stepped down as the Democratic nominee and Vice President Kamala Harris took his place. Democrats, unhappy with Biden’s poor image, switched to a candidate who had a slightly better image, though it was still unfavorable. 

At the time of the switch, the Winning the Issues survey (July 23–25) showed that 19 percent of the electorate had an unfavorable view of both Biden and Donald Trump. Of those voters, 60 percent also had an unfavorable view of Harris, but a significant portion of the remaining 40 percent moved to the newly minted presidential candidate, Harris. 

That immediately changed the race from a marginal Trump lead to a marginal Harris lead, where it remains today. The result of the new matchup was an unfavorable view of both Harris and Trump by 13 percent of the electorate.

Neither the Democratic convention nor the last debate really changed anything for either candidate. After the initial shift toward Harris, she got no bounce after the convention. Nor was there a bounce after the first debate. 

In a new Winning the Issues survey (September 18–19), the electorate was asked how each candidate did in the debate on a scale of 1 (very poorly) to 5 (neutral) to 9 (very well). Harris was rated a 5.59, slightly above neutral, while Trump came in at a 4.28, slightly below neutral and further from that point than Harris.  

The September survey showed little change in the candidates’ images since the switch. In late July, Harris’ favorable-unfavorable was 46-50 percent. At the time of the switch, Biden was at 41-57 percent favorable-unfavorable, or -16, while her image then was only -4. Now, she is at 46-51.

Trump’s favorable-unfavorable was at 42-57 percent, and now currently is at 43-55.  In this latest survey, Harris is at -5, and Trump is at -12, both underwater, while 12 percent of the electorate have an unfavorable view of both. Among independents, her favorable-unfavorable is at 37-56 percent, while Trump is at 35-62, so both have work to do with these crucial voters.  

Both candidates are now faced with a key decision or, maybe better put, a big risk: To debate or not to debate … a second time. 

The possibility of a second Harris-Trump debate makes for a great subplot to one of the most interesting campaigns we’ve ever seen. How the campaigns and the candidates address the debate question rests on whether they think another debate will put them over the top or whether they can afford to take the chance, given the last debate.  

Today, most polls show the race is hovering around a 2 to 3 percent national Harris lead. That means the Electoral College is in play. 

Of the 10 presidential races since 1856 that were 3 percent or closer, four were won by the person who did not win the popular vote. So for Harris, getting that number up to where Biden was in 2020 (4.5 percent) is a must-win objective. Inversely for Trump, reducing that margin puts him in a much stronger position to win the Electoral College, as he did in 2016. 

So introducing another debate creates both opportunity and huge risk for both candidates, who need a way to break out. The Harris campaign, apparently buoyed by her last debate performance, thinks a second debate is worth the risk. Voters in the latest Winning the Issues survey gave her a neutral grade; still, in fairness, it was better than Trump’s. 

That neutral performance was likely the result of the limited policy content Harris offered viewers. She particularly struggled with economic issues, failing to defend the Biden-Harris record on the economy. Inflation, still the top issue for voters, especially independents, remains a significant weight on her campaign.

Trump, who has a strong record on inflation, needs to up his game when it comes to delivering a concise economic message that focuses on both his past accomplishments and his plans to bring down the cost of living and reinvigorate the economy. The opportunity is there for Trump to win the economic argument.  

He did not make the case in the last debate, but the seven key battleground states still remain toss-ups. To break the stalemate, the former president must improve his standing with independents. Fortunately for Trump, 43 percent of voters overwhelmingly identify the economy as the top issue, with immigration at 11 percent and abortion at 9 percent.

When the electorate was asked which party they had more confidence in to handle the issue of the economy, they preferred Republicans by a 50-39 margin. On the issue of inflation, it was 49-40.  

Among independents, economic issues reached 45 percent. Independents make up the largest group among undecided voters, and they also represent 58 percent of those voters who have an unfavorable view of both candidates.  

That gets us back to the heart of the question — to debate or not to debate — and whether each candidate can effectively discuss their policies. Independents are split on Harris, with 42 percent thinking she is more focused on policies and 42 percent thinking she is more focused on Trump. Her challenge is that her economic policy has been little more than a couple of proposals rather than a coherent overall policy direction.   

For Trump, 27 percent think he is more focused on policies and 60 percent on attacking Harris, which is why Republicans have urged him to talk about his economic policies, with inflation the central, key concern of the electorate.

So it seems to come down to this: Harris has the discipline but needs content. Trump has the content but needs discipline. Both campaigns face the same difficult choice — whether to throw all their chips on the table for one more high stakes roll of the dice, or cash in their winnings and bet it will be enough to get them across that elusive finish line.

David Winston is the president of The Winston Group and a longtime adviser to congressional Republicans. He previously served as the director of planning for Speaker Newt Gingrich. He advises Fortune 100 companies, foundations and nonprofit organizations on strategic planning and public policy issues, as well as serving as an election analyst for CBS News.