As 2024 race enters a new stage, the polls come with a caveat

[LetMyPeopleVote]

Kamala Harris’ polling lead might be real, but our system makes it easier for Republicans to win the White House, even when they receive fewer votes.

Link to tweet

Every time I see a poll showing Harris with a modest lead, I have the same thought:

The electoral college tilts the playing field, and Harris has to try to run up the score to prevent losing, even if she "wins" the popular vote by millions of people.

https://www.msnbc.com/rachel-maddow-show/maddowblog/2024-race-polls-kamala-harris-donald-trump-presidential-election-rcna169333

But a Politico report from the holiday weekend touched on a detail that’s worth keeping in mind as the data makes the rounds.

Because of Republicans’ advantage in the Electoral College, a race that Harris leads nationally by between 2 and 4 percentage points, on average, is the equivalent of a knife fight in a phone booth, and it’s set to be decided in a smaller-than-usual number of states.

I can appreciate why this might seem counterintuitive. After all, in a normal democratic election in a normal democratic system, candidates who win the most votes prevail. In American presidential elections, it’s vastly more complicated, and candidates who receive fewer votes can — and occasionally do — take office, while candidates who receive more support end up with nothing but disappointment.

It’s one of the reasons 2024 polling that shows Harris with a modest national lead comes with caveats, including one important detail: Trump’s Electoral College advantage is so significant that small polling leads for Harris are, for all intents and purposes, deficits.

Writing for The Washington Post four years ago, Paul Waldman explained: “Turnout projections are running at around 150 million [in 2020], which would mean that ... Biden could win by 3 million to 4.5 million votes and still have less than a 50 percent chance of becoming president.”......

But it’s not quite that simple. In fact, in American history, the candidate who received less public support was declared the winner in five presidential elections, and two of the five instances have happened in the 21st century.

It’s precisely why Harris isn’t popping any champagne in response to polls showing her with modest leads: Even if the surveys are largely accurate, our system makes it easier for Republicans to win the White House, even when they receive fewer votes.

The Democratic candidate will need to try to run up the score, not just to deliver a historic rebuke to a corrupt rival, but to ensure her inauguration.

[Walleye]

1. In the 20th and 21st century, the only candidates to have won the presidency, losing the popular vote are Republicans

I remember politicians used to be worried about that, because they wouldn’t have a mandate to govern by. Republicans don’t need no stinking mandate.

[stopdiggin]

2. I think pretty much everyone is aware

that Harris must win states - rather than the popular vote. By this point, if someone is still unaware of the EC and its relevance to the WH ... Pretty much living under a rock.

[AZSkiffyGeek]

4. Yeah, but that's not going to stop MSNBC from being alarmist

[Omnipresent]

3. I used to hear that young, new voters...

Registering prior to or during this election year, we’re going to tilt the balance of power towards Democrats.
I guess we will have to see if that’s really a thing?

[Elessar Zappa]

6. We really need Gen Z women to turn out.

They’re the most liberal generation in history, around 70%+ support Harris. (the men of Gen Z unfortunately are about 50/50 for Trump).

[Elessar Zappa]

5. I think we'll end up winning the popular vote by 10 million but

the EC might still be close. Nonetheless, I like our chances.

[Polybius]

11. I think we win by 5 million, similar to Biden's win

That should be enough to still win.

[Elessar Zappa]

12. I think he won by 7 million, no?

[Polybius]

13. You are correct, my mistake

I still think she wins by 5-7 million votes though but 10 million might happen.

[Wounded Bear]

7. The Electoral College is the original gerrymander, along with the Senate...nt

[jimfields33]

8. The senate is probably the only one of the three completely fair.

2 senators per state. They used to be chosen by the state legislature. But changed to popular vote.

[CoopersDad]

9. By population, the Senate is not fair. California has 68X the population of Wyoming.

I get your point about popular vote for Senators, but Wyoming has 1/68 the population we do but equal power in the Senate.

[jimfields33]

10. I sorta see that. But really that's why they made the house

so that they represent the people. I guess it made sense to them. To have 435 in the house and 435 in the senate would be a lot.

[lees1975]

14. Polling indicates she is leading in 6 of the 7 battleground states as well.

But I guess the news media doesn't notice polls its own network doesn't commission.