Who will be the next US president? Hazarding a guess would be like flipping a coin. If one were to go by the average of all opinion polls, former president Donald John Trump is fast closing the gap with incumbent vice-president Kamala Devi Harris, who has held a lead ever since she got a wild card entry into the fray after President Joseph Robinette Biden, Jr opted out.
According to the latest projections by election analysis site FiveThirtyEight, Trump won 526 times out of 1,000 simulations and Harris 471 times. Three of these simulations, done using polling, economic and demographic data, threw up no winner.
The higher winning probability for Trump, however, doesn’t mean he is poised to get more votes from Americans than Harris. This is because in US presidential elections, the total votes polled nationally in favour of candidates in themselves don’t decide the winner. What matters is the vote of the Electoral College, comprising 538 electors who will actually pick the next US President. The presidential candidate who has the support of a minimum of 270 electors (half of the Electoral College + 1) will emerge victorious. In the rare event of a 269-269 tie, the newly elected House of Representatives will decide the winner.
There have been instances in the past where those who got the majority of popular votes failed to make it to the White House. In 2016, for example, Hillary Clinton received nearly three million more votes than Trump, but the latter became President with the backing of 304 electoral votes against Clinton’s 227.
Before that, in 2000, the Democratic Party’s nominee Al Gore had won the popular vote but George W Bush had a narrow victory with 271 electoral votes in a controversy-ridden election marred by recounting and delays. Similar scenarios had emerged in 1888, 1824, and 1876 as well, indicating the chequered history of US presidential elections. “It can happen again,” says former Ambassador and director-general of Kerala International Centre, T P Sreenivasan.
Popular vote vs electoral vote
The biggest irony in the US electoral process is that the popular vote – the total number of votes each candidate receives from across the country – does not determine who enters the highest office in the country. The power to pick the President lies with the group of 538 electors in the Electoral College (100 senators, 435 members of Congress, plus three votes for Washington, DC). When US citizens cast their votes, they are in fact voting for a slate of electors who are supposed to support their party’s candidate.
While this may seem a fair system at first glance, many consider this a practice that undermines the true spirit of democracy. The cornerstone of this view is the controversial ‘winner takes all’ rule followed by 48 states and the District of Columbia. In each of these states, all the electoral votes go to the candidate who wins the popular vote in the state. It means, if a majority of voters in a state vote for the Republican candidate, then the Republican slate of electors is chosen. If a majority vote for the Democratic presidential candidate, the Democratic slate of electors is chosen.
The problem with the system is the votes of minorities in states dominated by one political viewpoint will not count. Such a situation also fosters an atmosphere of resignation, where people are not motivated to vote. This, perhaps, explains the low voting percentage in US elections compared to other functioning democracies. Will the turnout be any different this time? According to Sreenivasan, there is no reason for voting percent to increase. “It will be more or less the same level as before,” he told this newspaper.
Nebraska (5 electoral votes) and Maine (4 electoral votes) are the only two states that don’t follow the winner-takes-all system. These two states allow electoral votes to be split. In Nebraska, two of five electoral votes go to the winner of the statewide vote. One electoral vote goes to the winner in each of Nebraska’s three congressional districts. In Maine, two of four electoral votes go to the statewide winner and one electoral vote goes to the winner in each of the two congressional districts.
Problem with Electoral College
The Electoral College system, mooted by the founding fathers of the US Constitution as a compromise between election of the President by the Congress and election by popular vote of citizens, has no dearth of critics.
Jesse Wegman, author of Let the People Pick the President: The Case for Abolishing the Electoral College, put it bluntly in one of his analyses in the run-up to the 2020 elections: “Every four years, tens of millions of Americans’ votes magically disappear before the real election for president happens — about six weeks after Election Day — when 538 electors convene in state capitals across the country to cast their votes for president.”
In a recent paper, Katherine Ann Shaw, professor of law at the University of Pennsylvania Law School, notes that the trend of popular and Electoral College vote splitting has accelerated to an alarming degree in the past two decades. “Two of the last six elections, those held in 2000 and 2016, produced a split between the popular vote and the Electoral College vote. Two others came unnervingly close to that result: In 2004, incumbent George W. Bush won a 286-251 victory in the Electoral College, but if fewer than 60,000 Bush voters in Ohio had switched their votes to John Kerry, who would have become the president despite a popular vote loss of approximately 3 million. And just tens of thousands of changed votes in a few key states would have handed Trump the presidency in 2020 despite a popular vote loss of approximately 7 million,” she says.
As recently as in October, the Democratic vice presidential candidate Tim Walz called for abolition of the Electoral College, which he said should be replaced by a direct national popular vote. Speaking at a fundraiser event, he said the system is a painful reminder of how Clinton lost to Trump in 2016 despite winning more votes in the overall national tally. Though Walz had to take back his words owing to pressure from the campaign managers, questions about the propriety of the system remain.
“Many are of the view that the Electoral College system is flawed and unnecessary when popular vote is also counted. Popular vote should be the basis for winning. This is a reform that can be implemented. But it is not likely to be adopted because of vested interests,” Sreenivasan points out.
According to Wegman, the Democrats have been on the short end of “this absurd, antidemocratic system”. In a recent opinion piece in The New York Times, he poses a query to those supporting the Electoral College system if they have considered a situation where Trump wins the popular vote but loses the election.
Such a scenario can’t be ruled out. According to a survey conducted by George Mason University and The Washington Post, a majority of voters in swing states fear Trump won’t accept defeat and his supporters, still smarting from his 2020 loss which they believe was due to unfair means, will turn to violence in an attempt to install him in power. The survey found that far fewer voters harboured similar fears about Harris.
What do the polls say
As of Friday, FiveThirtyEight’s daily election poll tracker showed Harris leading the national polls with a 1.2-percentage-point advantage over Trump, at 47.9% to 46.8%. For context, this lead has significantly narrowed from the 1.8-point margin till a week ago, showing that Trump is all set to outpace Harris. Several polls say Trump is clearly leading the race, which is a notable shift from a few weeks ago when almost all polls, barring that of Fox News, put Harris in the lead.
Even though these polls show a close race, the results need not be that close. Polls are just an indicator of how the public feels about a candidate or an issue at a given time and their opinion can change due to a variety of factors. Since the US doesn’t have the concept of a silent period, intense campaigning happens right through the election day. And, a lot can change in the last minutes, rendering opinion polls useless.
Why swing states matter
Of the 538 electors, the Democrats are believed to have 226 electors with them, while 219 are said to be with the Republicans. The remaining 93 electoral votes held by seven swing states — Pennsylvania (19), Georgia (16), North Carolina (16), Michigan (15), Arizona (11), Wisconsin (10), and Nevada (6) – are expected to decide the winner. Going by this number, the Democrats will have to get another 44 electoral votes to touch 270. The Republicans will need 51.
Of these, Pennsylvania is said to hold the key to White House. If Trump manages to win this key state, it would leave just 74 electoral votes on the table, from which he would only need 32 more, while Harris would need to capture 44 to win. If Harris wins this crucial state, several experts think it may be the end of the road for Trump.
Betting markets
If opinion polls are showing a tight race, the betting markets are clearly predicting a win for the Republican candidate at 60:40. According to Allan Lichtman, a historian and professor at American University known for accurately predicting presidential elections, Harris will win. He first made the prediction in September and has refused to change his stance despite polls showing Trump is gaining momentum. His forecast is based on 13 key metrics and has almost always turned out to be true except in 2000 when he said Al Gore would win.
“The polls are neck and neck and nobody is making a prediction. But the bigger support for Trump in the stock market is considered an indication that he will win. I have personally believed that Trump has a good chance to win,” says Sreenivasan.
Who is better for the world?
India will have to work with whoever wins, though some believe a Trump presidency would be better for New Delhi. “It is a pity that a great and mature democracy has only these two candidates to choose from. Because of the circumstances, Kamala became a candidate without going through the primaries. It was feared Trump would be disqualified from contesting because of the rebellion he called for. Neither of them is expected to be super. There is a sense of resignation. But most people around the world believe that Trump would be a more effective President for the US and the world,” says Ambassador Sreenivasan.
What changed in a month
When Kamala Harris got a wild card entry into the presidential race after Joe Biden bowed out to quell questions about his advanced age and mental acuity, many thought she didn’t have a chance against Donald Trump. But her endorsement was so fast, she managed to attract more election funds than Joe Biden in record time. Her multicultural background, liberal views, education, and pleasant personality – compared with Trump’s grim looks and abrasive characteristics -- helped her campaign take off well. She was able to score higher ratings than Trump in most polls and kept on widening the gap to her advantage. However, things started changing after the initial euphoria wore off and the hitherto friendly media started asking tough questions. Some observers note that her media interactions did more harm than good, as she came out fumbling and incoherent when asked what exactly she would do differently if elected, given that she is already part of the administration as Vice President.
An NBC News poll released in the second week of October had flagged the trend of Harris losing her popularity to Trump. Her indirect message, ‘Elect me to keep Trump away’, turned out to be not good enough to keep her ahead in the race. And Trump started dominating the news cycle with his bold statements and clear stand on issues, however controversial they may be. He also went out of his way to persuade the traditional Republican supporters to come out in large numbers and vote — many reports say a record number of Republicans voted early this time. According to the Associated Press, as many as 69 million Americans have already cast their ballots as of Saturday.
Some US political observers feel Trump this time has pushed his limits and managed to draw a number of apolitical youngsters, mostly second-generation immigrants, who are not impressed with the Biden administration’s handling of the economy, rising inflation, and above all wasteful expenditure in the form of war funding. These voters are said to be game for giving Trump another chance than having another four years of a predictable government.
Trump’s campaign has strategically focused on appealing to male voters and it seems to be working. According to a recent USA Today/Suffolk University poll, Trump leads among men with 53% support. He is building on this vote base by harping on issues that matter to them, such as economic issues, law and order, and border security.
To be fair to the Democratic Party candidate, Harris had to pay for Biden’s mistakes; the negative perception about Biden’s policies added to her woes. The NBC poll conducted in October showed that 45% believe Biden’s policies damaged their lives, a stark contrast to 44% who said they benefited from Trump’s earlier presidency from 2016 to 2020. To these people, Trump is the obvious choice. By framing his campaign around economic revival and prosperity for the working class, Trump seems to have positioned himself as a viable alternative to those who believe the Biden rule was ineffective.
While Trump may come off as brusque, many believe his likely team — if he wins the election — will have capable hands like Vivek Ramaswamy, Elon Musk, Robert F Kennedy Jr, Tulsi Gabbard et al, to balance it out.
