Which swing states did Kamala Harris lose in the 2024 election and by what margins?

1. The list: which swing states were at stake and which Harris lost

The seven states treated as the decisive battlegrounds in 2024—Arizona, Georgia, Michigan, Nevada, North Carolina, Pennsylvania and Wisconsin—were the core of the campaigns’ strategies, and multiple outlets covering the post-election map report that Harris lost all seven to Trump ^{[1] [2]}. Those same sources frame the result as a reversal from 2020, when the Biden ticket carried most of that same list, making Harris’s defeats in those states central to her Electoral College loss ^[2].

2. Margin reporting: what the sources do and do not say

None of the provided pieces supplies a single, consistent state-by-state margin table that can be quoted verbatim here; instead, reportage focuses on patterns and aggregates—The Independent reported that Harris “lost them all,” and quantified the swing-state deficit as roughly 780,000 votes across the set, a shorthand for how close the map might have been if a relatively small number of votes shifted ^[2]. Pre-election polling packages and state poll snapshots (e.g., Times/SAY24, YouGov, FiveThirtyEight aggregates) showed single-digit, often margin-of-error differences across these states, underscoring how narrow many contests were heading into Election Day ^{[4] [5]}, but those are predictive snapshots rather than final margins.

3. Why margins were what they were: turnout and electorate composition

Data-focused postmortems emphasize two recurring explanations in the provided reporting: first, Democrats underperformed among infrequent and new voters who in past cycles helped carry Biden, according to a Catalist analysis shared with Cook Political Report; Catalist found roughly a two-point drop among 2020 voters who turned out again and a failure of new/infrequent voters to materialize for Harris at prior rates ^[6]. Second, precinct-level work by NBC’s Decision Desk shows turnout erosion in heavily Democratic cities in Michigan, Wisconsin and Pennsylvania—Philadelphia precincts in particular had sizable vote declines versus 2020—which translated into pro-Trump vote growth in other counties and flipped those states ^[3].

4. Competing narratives and where reporting diverges

Analysts differ on emphasis: Cook/Catalist focus on electorate composition and turnout churn ^[6], The New York Times frames the outcome as both alienation of swing voters and failure to energize the base ^[7], and precinct-level pieces accentuate geographic turnout differentials that favored Trump ^[3]. Some outlet claims verge into broader or less-supported assertions—e.g., a Times of India piece framed the losses in cultural or identity terms and extended the sweep thesis into states beyond the seven battlegrounds without consistent sourcing in the provided set ^[8]; that reporting should be read in context and weighed against data-focused analyses.

5. Bottom line and limits of the record provided

The sources supplied concur that Harris lost the seven named swing states and identify turnout shifts and a changing composition of the electorate as principal reasons ^{[1] [2] [6] [3]}. However, precise state-by-state final margins are not consistently listed among these sources, so a definitive table of each state’s vote margin cannot responsibly be produced from the provided reporting alone; readers seeking exact margins should consult state-certified results or aggregated election tallies from the Associated Press or state election authorities for final, source-level numbers (p1_s13 indicates the seven states that decided the race).