Why was the US election this close?

[Klaralven]

Well, this certainly isn't how lots of people thought the US election would go. Most of the polls — may they rest in peace — foresaw a decisive Biden win. After all, Trump lost the popular vote in 2016 and didn't seem to care much about expanding his base since. Even when the economy boomed before COVID-19, his approval rating never even neared 50 percent. Then, of course, came the pandemic, and with it the worst short-term economic downturn since the Great Depression.

So why was this thing even close at all? Here are some preliminary thoughts.

For one, Trumpism is a viable and resilient political force. For about half of American voters, close to 70 million people now, either the style of Trumpism (a gratifyingly vulgar challenge to high-handed liberal "elites" ) or its substance (conservative justices, tax cuts, deregulation, decimating immigration) has a real, visceral appeal. In a deeply polarized country, Trump is selling what millions of people struggling with economic inequality, cultural anxieties, or racial resentment want to buy.

For another, Trump's coalition actually did grow — it got more female and... browner? The president lost some ground among his base of white male voters, but he padded his numbers among white women and, crucially, among voters of color. Black voters broke for Biden by a 60-point margin, but that's 8 points smaller than what Hillary Clinton did in 2016.

One particular spotlight at the moment is Trump's improved showing among the (hardly monolithic) "Latino vote". Two thirds of Latinos supported Biden, but Trump's standing improved by 3 points nationally, and by 12 points in Florida (where many Cuban American and Venezuelan American voters are especially suspicious of leftwing politics). In one heavily Mexican American district of Texas, meanwhile, there was a 55-point swing to Trump.

There are many potential reasons for Trump's growing shine among Latinos, but among them are his appeal for religious conservatives (on policy if not personal conduct), his pro-business policies, and his hard line on immigration, which many recently naturalized citizens in fact support. Biden's weak outreach to Latino voters, outside of Nevada at least, certainly didn't help.

https://www.gzeromedia.com/why-was-the-us-election-this-close

[SheltieLover]

1. Voting machines

Human behavior of standing in lines for hours, day after day across the country does not occur when people are happy.

Only discontent & a desire for change drives this type of behavior on a large scale.

Speaks volumes!

[Lunabell]

2. I could give the Democrats a few reasons

but I'm sure a lot of centrist Democrats don't want to hear that right now.

We'll talk later.

[melman]

5. Exactly

It's not possible to answer that question here.

[miyazaki]

19. You got that right.

Ever see a virtual stoning here?

[George II]

27. "Centrist Democrats" are the voters who won this election.

[Drunken Irishman]

3. It really wasn't.

[FreeState]

46. This

That it was close is spin.

[stopdiggin]

49. well the swing states were certainly close

granted we haven't got the final count in some places but ----
PA .5 -.6%
GA .15%
WI .6%
AZ .6%
MI a bit better at 2%

and national figures are way closer than projections as well
not sure how that amounts to spin

(one thing I am on board with though -- NOT going to allow the Trumpers to own the narrative on this. You LOST, plain and simple)

[Drunken Irishman]

50. I mean, that's why they're called swing states.

[Drunken Irishman]

51. I mean, that's why they're called swing states.

[stopdiggin]

53. AND polling was badly off there as well

OP: Why was the US election this close
DIrishmen: It really wasn't

by almost any definition available -- it was

[Drunken Irishman]

54. It wasn't, tho.

On a scale of close races since, say, Kennedy-Nixon in 1960, it's not.

2016 was closer
2012 was closer
2004 was closer
2000 was closer
1976 was closer
1968 was closer
1960 was closer

The fact most those races have come in the 21st Century makes it all the more impressive.

[stopdiggin]

56. razor thin margins in key states

(with the exception of FL 2000)
Has not been the norm. And that is why 2016, and 2000, stood out as an exception. (prior to 2020). And the EC has rarely been in play at all .. with those few elections as key exceptions. (which, incidentally allowed the media to "call" the elections -- most times on election eve.)

It's not that I don't see your argument. I just don't agree with the statement that this was not close. This election was up for grabs. Much more so than we thought.
----- -----

[Drunken Irishman]

59. What do you mean it hasn't been the norm?

John Kerry won Wisconsin by 11,000 votes, lost Iowa by 10,000 votes, lost New Mexico by 6,000 votes, won New Hampshire by 9,000 in 2004.

This was not a very close election.

The only difference, and something the Democrats are going to have to face the reality of, is that the once solid blue wall is increasingly becoming conservative. The polls were always close in Michigan, Pennsylvania and Wisconsin. It looked like they were breaking for Biden late, and he'll likely win by a fairly comfortable margin in Michigan (about three-points), but those states are not the lock they used to be for Democrats.

The difference is that Biden put WAY MORE states in play than any Democrat has since Clinton in 1996.

Biden is likely to win Georgia, a state Clinton, Obama, Kerry and Gore lost fairly comfortably.

Biden is likely to win Nevada by a wider margin than Hillary, a state Kerry and Gore lost.

Biden is likely to win Arizona, a state that has gone roughly 10+ points to pretty much every Republican candidate since Clinton last won it in, what, 1996?

Biden is going to do better in North Carolina than any Democrat outside Obama in 2008 - yes, coming closer to flipping that state than Obama did in 2012 and Hillary in 2016.

Biden won Virginia by ten points. That's the largest margin any Democrat has won the state since FDR carried it in 1944 (bigger margin than Obama in 2008, 2012 and Clinton in 2016).

Biden won Minnesota by seven, after Hillary won it by just a point four years ago. Biden won Colorado by 13 points. Hillary only won it by six in 2016.

Biden did better than any Democrat in Texas since Clinton in 1996.

It's not close. It only feels close because the electoral college is changing. The problem is that the Democrats' gains haven't quite caught up to it. In four years, though?

It wasn't close.

[Algernon Moncrieff]

4. My theories

1) More people favor authoritarian ideals than you might think
2) The economy. One group is doing well in this recovery. One group is terrified of what would happen with another shutdown.
3) Trump is a demagogue who is a master of social media.
4) Religon/faith is a huge driver. "Traditional values" is a concept that resonates.

[lagomorph777]

7. "this" recovery?

That won't begin until the COVID recovery begins.

[Algernon Moncrieff]

37. Not for everyone

Many white collar workers are working from home and are doing fine. Construction (especially residential remodeling) is killing it.

On the other hand, restaurants, tourist / travel - those businesses are still getting killed.

[underpants]

8. It's hard to knock out an incumbent

Frankly the DNC messed up all over and got themselves pinned in with protesters and BLM. It looks like Trump lost but it was really close despite his horrendous performance.

Look at W, he cleared got caught lying us into a war but yet he still rode 9/11 to a second term. Obama came into a mess and had a relentless coordinated media attack on him but he was able to be re-elected. Poppa Bush had the misfortune of a dipping economy and an incredible campaign/candidate in Clinton.

[orwell]

12. +1 n/m

[Algernon Moncrieff]

35. Agree 100%

Bush 1, I think, was viewed by many as a Reagan 3rd term. By '92, the public was ready for a baby boomer that understood their lives.

[lagomorph777]

6. Brainwashing machines.

We need to buy out and flip the messages on Fux, hate radio, Falsebook, and Twit.

We will need help from billionaires, techies, psychologists, and marketing gurus.

[Reader Rabbit]

9. People lying to pollsters?

I read a theory in the past few days that people lied about who they were voting for, because they were embarrassed to admit they were going to vote for Trump.

This seems particularly heinous, since they were aware enough to know voting for Trump was something to be ashamed of, but they went ahead and did it anyway.

[stopdiggin]

17. sounds suspiciously right

and has the virtue of being both simple -- and fundamentally true.
(Science is a pretty amazing thing -- and there was tons of data going in to multiple models and projections -- that all pointed in pretty much the same direction. i.e., It wasn't bad science -- it was bad (dishonest) data.)

People flat out lied -- and they did that because they knew their choice was odious, immoral -- and ultimately indefensible. Sad day for America.
----- --- --- -----

[ProfessorGAC]

34. I Have My Doubts

While I agree with all your points, I can't buy the lying part.
There may have been fundamental errors demographic weighting & silo selection by the pollsters, but lying is a hard pill to swallow. The bad data seems to be caused by more foundational flaws
I can't accept that virtually all polling organizations got polluted data due to lying across multiple demographics & geographic regions.
That would require a massive, concerted effort, the odds of keeping a secret would asymptotically approach zero.
And, given the open & shrill support of trumpets, why would they lie while being an anonymous respondent to a phone poll?
I think the science of the polling was flawed.
Then the aggregators had models using flawed data. The outcomes were useless as a prediction.

[stopdiggin]

42. upon some reflection

(and a bit more reading) I think you're right. And the "shy Trump voter" was either not a thing at all -- or was a very small (most likely insignificant) factor.

What seems more likely is that polling just isn't reaching certain people and demographics. And that is a problem. One that we apparently do not currently have a solution to. I'm thinking that tangential types of analytics (preferences, attitudes and behaviors involving unrelated areas) are going to become a much bigger factor. And getting a particular "pool" of people to answer questions about politics -- much less so.
----- -----

[ProfessorGAC]

43. Cool!

Also, I think there is a lack of crossing variables to determine interactions.
Finding interactive variables that aren't autocorrelated would completely change the weighting given to each & the crosses.
Right now the selection models are confounded.
I think getting that understanding would help good ideas better, instead of silly stuff like "tax cuts, good".
They sold that rotting fish successfully for 40+ years.

[cwydro]

44. I never believed the polls. Not this time.

And so many here using the tired, “2020 is different from 2016.” Smh.

I’m glad we pulled out a win, but I’m sorry we didn’t have more success in the other races.

[Algernon Moncrieff]

38. I think pollsters are reaching the wrong people.

I read an article on Socisl Media analysis that showed the race neck and neck about 2 weeks prior. Also, in the week or so leading up, Trumps approve/ disapprove rating ticked up. Not to great levels, but about where he was when he took office.

[Liberal In Texas]

10. I still think the constant stream of unfiltered propaganda on radio and TV

for about 40 years has permeated the minds of the sort-of educated population. They listen during the day in their workshops and as they drive around in their pickups between job sites. At night they sit in front of the TV watching Fox or OAN. They don't read and if they go to the internet for news it'll be someplace like Daily Caller.

I really think somehow a wide progressive network of radio stations has to start up and play catch up with what's out there. One of the ways that might start is by putting the ownership rules back that were made almost nonexistent decades ago.

There are other things with the media that could be ramped up as well, a discussion for another time.

[LizBeth]

11. How many mail in ballots are sitting in the post office and not delivered to be counted?

[mnhtnbb]

13. There are 99,000 NC outstanding absentee ballots

Those are absentee ballots requested and not returned. It would be interesting to know the percentage of unreturned absentee ballots in other states. NC did return 977,186 absentee ballots.

[LizBeth]

15. Interesting. Thanks for the numbers. I am really wanting to be looking at the numbers.

Miami Dade is way too hinky in the numbers.

[meadowlander]

14. A third of Americans don't know or don't care how America works.

Another third can't be bothered to get off their asses.

Republicans cheat and never face any consequences for it because every time we do win we just "move on" or "try to heal our fractured nation" instead of saying "cheating is illegal and you're going to jail for it".

Same story, new decade.

Let's just hope we can keep the energy going into the midterms.

[Willto]

16. Because of the Electoral College Bullshit

That's the only reason it was close. Hillary got 3 million more votes than this orange asshole and lost because of the EC. We are talking about how underwhelming Biden did despite the fact that so far he has expanded that margin to 4 million more votes. Name me any other country that holds democratic elections where the candidate who got 4 million more votes would be still be sweating the math 3 days post election day.

This bullshit system should have been shit canned back around the time we strung up the first telegraph wires in this country.

[stopdiggin]

25. the deficiencies are well established

(and becoming more recognized and understood in a better informed electorate)

But .... That doesn't change the facts that constitutional amendments are fairly hard to come by. (just ask the ERA)

And in the case of the EC -- you would be placing states (with lesser population) in the position of voting explicitly against their own vested interest. A lot of people have wondered whether the altruism of our citizens runs quite that deep?

[The Revolution]

28. Repeal Reapportionment Act of 1929

Repeal the Reapportionment Act of 1929. This doesn't require an amendment. Bring our representative:voter ratio much more in line with other countries. This mostly fixes the EC and other imbalances, except the senate.

[misanthrope]

32. And we have a winner

The House cap has to go.

[stopdiggin]

40. How large a number of reps

would you be OK with?
(assuming a somewhat workable institution?)

(not saying I'm against the idea -- just asking what that would look like)

[The Revolution]

41. 1556

If we use the 1911 levels of 212,000 people per rep, we end up with 1556. Why not? Can that really not be managed? Madison envisioned one rep per 30,000 people.

Or we can use the Wyoming rule and then end up with 600 and some. Or we could set some other number if we want an even 1000 or 750 or whatever number sounds good.

https://wheresmyfuckingmoney.com/2020/05/repeal-the-reapportionment-act-of-1929

[stopdiggin]

47. 15 hundred might be reasonable

(although none of the governments provided as an example in your link has a chamber that large)

And 11,000 (as per Madison) -- seems like it might be a bit of a problem. But -- as you suggest, we can set the number at anything we wish -- and even doubling the number would provide some correction. (although not circumvent the overall issue)

[JHB]

48. That won't do it by itself. I tried estimating the 2016 EC vote with the "Wyoming rule"...

...and Trump actually still won by an even larger EV percentage.

The big blue states had more to play with, but there were enough medium-sized red states that together overwhelmed the blue gains.


I'm not saying that action shouldn't be taken to bring the ratio more into line with reality, but let's also keep an eye out for unintended consequences.

[The Revolution]

55. Yeah, not sure about Wyoming rule either.

Certainly better than what we have, but we should consider using the 1911 ratio of 212,000 voters for each rep. That would get us 1500+ reps. Which is large, but not impossible to handle in my opinion. The UK has 650 and are a much smaller country. China has almost 3000, but of course they aren't democratic.

Basically, have enough so that the EC more closely mirrors the popular vote.

[Spider Jerusalem]

18. Because white people really like racism (n/t)

[misanthrope]

33. I lean toward this as well

Too many Americans are in deep denial about the reality of our history and culture.

[treestar]

20. The EC

have a look at the Popular vote and it won't feel so close.

[NameAlreadyTaken]

21. Hacking the vote

[Earthshine2]

22. Trump is not the only driver. Many of his so-called supporters are simply Republicans being tribal.

We do the tribal thing too. When did you ever not vote for the Democrat?

Trump was so bad, we did get Republican voters who went for Biden with a Republican down-ticket. I know one.

[Spazito]

23. Close elections are more normal than not I believe...

just looking at this historical look at all elections since the beginning, 1789. I found it fascinating to look at them all.


Historical Presidential Elections

https://www.270towin.com/historical-presidential-elections/

[Lars39]

24. We were warned about interference...

I'm going to wait and see what the alphabet agencies have to say.

[Willto]

26. Close Elections are common

Under this current electoral system this is pretty common. These races have been very close for 20 years now. Look at 2000. That race came down to a few hundred votes in one state.

I am already sick of hearing this meme the press has hopped on to about how the democrats under performed. What's wrong with our message? Democrats need to do some soul searching. Blah, blah, blah.

We are on pace to win the presidential race by 306 electoral votes to their 231.

Bush won with 271 in 2000 and 286 in 2004. I don't remember the press saying anything was wrong with the Republican party because the margin was so slim.

[Zing Zing Zingbah]

31. Seems repubs literally need to do soul searching. Where did their souls go?

They seem to be soulless.

[crickets]

39. +1

[Bettie]

29. It isn't close by the numbers voting for each candidate

the EC is the only reason it is even within stealing distance.

[Zing Zing Zingbah]

30. Exactly n/t

[Hermit-The-Prog]

36. Because BUTTERY MALES FROM BENGHAZZZZIII! Or a racist, sexist, Nazi death cult coalition.

Manipulation of the cult's fee-fees paid for by wannabe oligarchs and dictators.

The Rush to fascism (and against liberals, particularly a smart, professional, black, female liberal) aided by Fascist Oligarch eXtremists.

[DFW]

45. In terms of the Electoral College, it was close. In terms of people, it wasn't

A margin of Four Million votes is not "close," even in the United States. The fact that Trump got to the White House due to 80,000 votes spread out over three reasonably populous states after losing the popular vote by 3,000,000 is ridiculous. For that matter, the fact that Joe Biden will be president due to a similarly thin margin spread out over a few states after having won the popular vote is equally ridiculous.

James Madison being creative by tweaking the new rules so that the colonies of Delaware, Rhode Island and Connecticut wouldn't refuse to join their budding new nation was one thing. Madison never envisioned places like North Dakota, South Dakota, Idaho, Utah, Oklahoma, Wyoming and Montana, etc., having the ability, especially through having two Senators each, to determine (or block) national policy, when they are essentially one state in terms of mentality and size of population.

[UCmeNdc]

52. The US voting machines and hidden computer coding for counting votes at state level

Votes are being flipped

[alarimer]

57. Wait until all the votes have been counted.

I think a 5% margin for Biden is what we'll see in the end in the popular vote. And never underestimate the weirdness of campaigning during a pandemic. And obviously, Dems could do better, but I think it's not as dire as people think.

[uponit7771]

58. Biden got better voter percentage than JFK, Trump lost plurality vote and still was an asshole