At Larry Sabato’s Crystal Ball Kyle Kondik and J. Miles Coleman write:
As we can see, a modest Biden lead in Virginia would actually be consistent with a roughly 3-point Trump lead in the popular vote. While Biden’s current polling deficits in the “classic” swing states (specifically the Michigan/Pennsylvania/Wisconsin trio) are not necessarily as large as they are on the furthest right column on Table 1, the fact that we’re having a serious conversation about whether he could lose Virginia is telling. Aside from Virginia, other stronger Biden 2020 states, such as Oregon, Colorado, and New Mexico are within single digits.
We are not directly addressing down-ballot races here, but this is not the kind of Electoral College situation where Democrats could be plausibly expected to win either the House or the Senate majority. It may also be that Democrats are being caught at a low point right now—but, it must be reiterated, Biden was trailing before the debate anyway. So maybe he could pull some of the bluer states back from the brink as the election got closer, but the really important states at the center of the electorate are quite possibly a different story.
Meanwhile at Axios Jim VandeHei and Mike Allen note:
The pressure to step aside as a candidate has been rising to intolerable levels, especially over the past few days.
- Democrats fully expect polls after the Republican National Convention to show a possible blowout that could bring down Democrats in Congress, too.
- “His choice is to be one of history’s heroes, or to be sure of the fact that there’ll never be a Biden presidential library,” one of the president’s close friends told us. “I pray that he does the right thing. He’s headed that way.”
- Yesterday’s AP poll, showing nearly two-thirds of Democrats want Biden to withdraw from the presidential race, ricocheted through the White House and Congress.
The Fair Model, updated with the BLS’s estimate of real per capita GDP growth, predicts that if he remains President Biden will not receive a majority of the popular vote. To remind you the Fair Model is neither a political analysis nor does it reflect opinion polls. It is an econometric model which has shown pretty fair accuracy over the last half dozen or so election cycles. Importantly, it also predicts that the Democratic share of the popular vote will actually decline if President Biden does not run.
That may provide us with an opportunity to see if my prediction, that complaints about the undemocratic character of the Electoral College will evaporate should Trump receive a larger percentage of the popular vote than Biden, holds true.
So you are claiming that if the person who wins the popular vote also wins the electoral vote there will be less complaining about the electoral college? Since the complaint about the electoral college is that it lets the person with many fewer votes win the election that doesnt seem like an especially difficult prediction. It will become less of an issue but it wont go away.
Steve
It won’t go away. Like a whale it will resurface periodically. You appear to assume that the complaints are anything but instrumental. You may be able to find isolated, highly principled individuals for whom the complaints are not instrumental. I believe those are rare.
The last time Republicans won the popular vote in a Presidential election is 2004; when Bush had both incumbency and 9/11. Before that, it was Bush in 1988.
Probably something like 40-50% of electorate have never experienced an election where Republicans won the popular vote in a Presidential election outside of freak circumstances.
In a democratic republic, I know such a rare thing can happen; but definitely wait to see it occur before counting the chickens.
We need to have the GOP win the popular election but lose the electoral vote. Then listen to the complaints. Anyway, it’s the system we have. Seems kind of flawed to me but maybe it made sense in the 18th century. Doesnt really matter since there is no way to fix it. Whoever holds an advantage due to the electoral college will block any changes.
Steve
I’ve seen elections in which Democrats won with a majority of the popular vote and a majority in the Electoral College, elections in which Republicans won with a majority of the popular vote and a majority in the Electoral College, and elections in which Republicans have won with a minority of the popular vote but a majority in the Electoral College. I don’t believe I have ever seen an election in which Democrats won with a minority of the popular vote but a majority in the Electoral College.
In nearly every quadrennial election SOMEBODY says about one party or the other: “This is the end for the XXX”. News flash: neither party is going away.
“I don’t believe I have ever seen an election in which Democrats won with a minority of the popular vote but a majority in the Electoral College.”
Yes, you have. Bill Clinton won with 43% and 49% of the popular vote.
The observation is we haven’t seen Democrats lose the plurality of the popular vote and win the electoral college.
Nate Silver is showing a spike in support for Trump in the polls, apparently from the assassination attempt. I think this will be temporary, but he’s close to the level of support that won him the election in 2016.
He’s also posted a criticism of the 538 model that he wants people to know is not his. I listened to the podcast in which 538 launched the new model, and the guy who replaced Silver explained his opinion that fundamentals are more reliable than polling at that time, so polls were only contributed to 10% of the polling average. As the election went on, the mix would shift to primarily polling. I was and remain skeptical that this is a normal election and that past elections can serve as models for incumbency boosts and economic factors. I think he said that in the polls-only model, Trump was winning, but there does not appear to be the functionality on the website to look at just the polls model as there has been in the past.
Kerry almost won the EC in 2004. You may remember there was a kerfluffle in Ohio about votes.
My view is that the recent mismatches and close calls between the EC and PV are entirely the product of the House not growing for well over 100 years. A bigger House would mean more EC’s and greater fidelity to the PV, to include the dilution of Senate EC votes.
I agree with PD that it’s a weird election, which is why I trust poll-focused models like Silver’s compared to fundamentals-focused ones like 538.
“Seems kind of flawed to me but maybe it made sense in the 18th century. Doesnt really matter since there is no way to fix it”
Called the tyranny of the majority. A remedy for populist passions run wild.
The founders were not ignorant, but ignorance and arrogance abound today.
God save the constitution.
“Yes, you have. Bill Clinton won with 43% and 49% of the popular vote.”
That’s why I avoid saying majority of votes and specify winning the popular vote ie getting the most.
Steve
I guess they no longer teach the Federalist Papers anymore. The Founding Fathers opposed democracy (pure majority rule) and littered the Constitution with various features to prevent it: the Bill of Rights; the Senate; the Electoral College; the Supreme Court (although that’s really Marshall’s doing).
In a democracy, minorities have no rights, none. A majority of one-half plus one has absolute power over everything, and can do anything to anyone. The House of Commons in the UK runs on purely democratic procedures, and it can do anything it wants to the Monarchy and House of Lords. Until recently, British courts had no authority to review acts of Parliament. Now they do, because Parliament gave them the power. There are many MP’s who want to take that power away from the courts, and they could do so if they wished.
The greatest danger to our liberty is the attempt to overthrow the Republic and replace it with a democracy.
bob sykes: I guess they no longer teach the Federalist Papers anymore.
The primary author of the Federalist Papers, James Madison, argued for the direct election of the president. That wasn’t politically tenable due to the higher concentration of voters in the North than the South. Many of the people in the South were enslaved, so the 3/5 compromise was adopted to balance political power based on the demographics of the time.
Madison was wrong.
Also a loser, and one of the biggest losers from his time.
We- are- a – Republic.