We’re down to days and still don’t know who wins the state most say is most needed to win White House. It’s that kind of year.

Not because candidates are so good. But because neither one’s convincing a majority of Pennsylvanians that they’re good enough. That’s just how we see it. And have seen it.

Check this out. I looked at 70 Pennsylvania polls on Kamala Harris or Donald Trump (and, yeah, and I know you’re thinking, geez, get a life). But guess how many times either got above 50%?

Remember, this is in the oh-so-split Keystone State, in polling from the start of the race — right after President Biden got out and backed Harris in July — to the dwindling days of the campaign.

Okay, you don’t have to guess. I’ll tell you. Harris topped 50% just four times. And not by much. She hit 51% in a Bloomberg Poll in August. Then, in September, 52% in a Boston-based MassINC poll, 51% in another Bloomberg Poll, and 51% in a Quinnipiac Poll.

Trump? Topped 50% only once. He got 51% in a September AtlasIntel Poll out of Sao Paulo, Brazil (I don’t know, maybe somebody said, `Just find me a good poll. I don’t care if it’s in South America!’).

The latest of the 70 polls were just before Trump’s Madison Square Garden “lovefest” last Sunday. So, they don’t reflect any impact a speaker calling Puerto Rico “a floating island of garbage” has on the state’s 620,000 eligible Hispanic voters. Nor any effect of Joe `that’s-not-what-I-meant’ Biden then calling Trump supporters “garbage.”

But of the 70 polls, all showing a tight race, 20 were ties, Harris led slightly in 32, Trump led slightly in 18. And the average of the last seven had Trump up, 48.1% to 47.7%. A Quinnipiac poll released Wednesday shows Trump 47%, Harris 46%. Or, as we say in the biz, a virtual tie possibly trending toward Trump.

Now what? Well, now it’s what every election’s about, turnout. Who votes? How much of each candidate’s reliable base shows up? And what about the intangible, slippery, maybe-not-even-voting undecideds? I mean this in the sense of who votes Tuesday and by mail: 1.3 million mail-ins are in; about 2 million mail ballots were requested.

State polls point to candidates’ strongest support: for Harris, women, Blacks and college-educated voters aged 30-to-44 in Philadelphia and Allegheny County; for Trump, white men without college degrees, aged 45-to-64 in central and western counties. Generalizations, I know, and maybe over-stated. But what in politics isn’t?

Plus, this is a squirrely race. And speaking of squirrely, national Democratic guru James Carville, who made his bones in Pennsylvania, wrote in The New York Times he’s “certain” Harris wins. Meanwhile, national polling expert Nate Silver wrote in The Times on the same day he has a “hunch” Trump wins.

As for me, I’m not certain of anything. But I have a hunch. Since this is Pennsylvania – Land of Low Expectations — things won’t go smoothly. I hope I’m wrong.

But there’s mail-in ballot processing, which, thanks to the feeble minds writing our state laws, can’t begin until Election Day. That flaw, left unfixed by our Legislature for four years, could cause conspiracy-inspiring delayed results, as it did in 2020.

State officials expect fewer mail-ins this year (no pandemic), and note county election boards got state grants for more personnel and new equipment to speed the process. We’ll see.

There’s also litigation over improperly filed mail-ins. The state Supreme Court recently ruled voters whose mail-ins are rejected for errors such as being undated can cast “provisional” ballots which can still count. State and national Republicans sought a stay of that court order pending an appeal to the U.S. Supreme Court.

And this stuff we know about. Who knows what else lurks out there?

I keep wondering how history judges this election. U.S. voters chose wisely? U.S. voters chose poorly? Seems it’s up to Pennsylvania voters to write that history.

John Baer may be reached at baer.columnist@gmail.com