I was not a successful high school \u201cmath\u201d student. In fact, I was a \u201cmath block kid\u201d. If you put a number on the blackboard (chalk dust and \u201csqeeeeeeek\u201d), I usually froze. But I still had to make it through Geometry class. And while I don\u2019t remember much, other than Coach Parker licking that chalk dust off his fingers, there are a few things that still stick.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
In solving a geometry problem you have different sets of data.\u00a0\u00a0The first set is the \u201cgivens\u201d, the things that are true about the problem.\u00a0\u00a0Those \u201cgivens\u201d are inflexible, a \u201cgiven this, then solve that\u201d sort of thing.\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0In looking at the American electorate of 2024, we need to start with those givens, or in more modern political parlance, the \u201cbaked-in\u201d parts of our voting equation.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
We know (it\u2019s given) that the United States is about 45% Republican and 45% Democrat.\u00a0\u00a0But that given isn\u2019t quite as monolithic as it sounds.\u00a0\u00a0Really about 35% of today\u2019s Republicans are MAGA Republicans, and really about 40% of the Democrats are \u201cYellow Dog Democrats\u201d. The remainders\u00a0\u00a0just \u201cusually\u201d vote for their party, but aren\u2019t \u201cdiehards\u201d.\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0Regardless, the Presidential race will be determined not by that 90%, but by the 10% remaining.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
We also know that there\u2019s not<\/strong> a lot of people, even in the 10%, who will make a binary choice between Trump or Harris.\u00a0\u00a0Some will vote for Trump or choose an independent like Kennedy or Oliver (Libertarian). Or they will sit out the election all together.\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0On the other side, some will vote for Harris, or Stein or West, or more likely, choose not to vote at all.<\/p>\n\n\n\n So the strategy for both sides should be: make sure you get your 45% out to vote, then convince 5% plus one to choose your side. And that would make perfect sense if this was a simple algebra equation (yep, I switched math classes), one where the greatest sum wins. But we don\u2019t choose Presidents that way here in the United States.<\/p>\n\n\n\n While the popular vote has its place, in the end the US holds a series of fifty-one separate elections,\u00a0\u00a0to choose electors from each state and the District of Columbia.\u00a0\u00a0Those 538 electors are the ones who decide the President and Vice President.\u00a0\u00a0In all but two states, if a candidate wins the majority of popular votes, they get ALL of the electoral votes.\u00a0\u00a0And this means that in a large sense, the votes of a whole lot of people really don\u2019t matter all that much (ask Hillary Clinton).<\/p>\n\n\n\n Maine and Nebraska divide their electoral votes. The state popular vote winner gets two, and then the vote winner of each Congressional District in the state gets one. So Nebraska usually is four for Republicans and one for Democrats (Omaha). Maine is usually the reverse \u2013 three for Democrats and one for Republicans (Northern Maine). <\/em><\/p>\n\n\n\n Let\u2019s take California. In 2020 over 17 million people voted in the Presidential election. Biden got over 11 million votes, and Trump 6 million. That result was really \u201cbaked-in\u201d before the election even started. California is a secure Democratic state. So Biden got all 55 of California\u2019s electoral votes, and the 6 million folks who voted for Trump, got cancelled out. <\/p>\n\n\n\n Conversely, South Carolina, the state where the 2020 Democratic primary put Joe Biden in control, had a 72% turnout in the general election. Out of almost 2.5 million votes, Trump got 55% and Biden 44%. So Trump got ALL of South Carolina\u2019s 9 electoral votes, and Biden\u2019s 1.1 million votes didn\u2019t change a thing.<\/p>\n\n\n\n All of this creates a whole new \u201cgiven\u201d.\u00a0\u00a0Given that most states in the US are clearly one party or the other, then getting their electoral votes is simply \u201cdefending\u201d the base.\u00a0\u00a0Which means that the Presidential election all comes down, not that 10%, but to the few states where it\u2019s uncertain which candidate will win. It’s the 10% voter who lives in a swing state that makes all the difference.<\/p>\n\n\n\n We all know the litany of \u201cswing states\u201d:\u00a0\u00a0Nevada, Arizona, Georgia, Wisconsin, Michigan, Pennsylvania.\u00a0\u00a0And we all know the \u201cpossible swing states\u201d; New Mexico, New Hampshire, North Carolina (Democrats have aspirations for Florida and Texas, but they haven\u2019t come true.\u00a0\u00a0And, sadly, Ohio doesn\u2019t seem to \u201cswing\u201d anymore)<\/em>.\u00a0\u00a0That\u2019s where the Presidential elections in the past decade were won or lost; the swing and \u201cpossible\u201d states.\u00a0\u00a0All the rest are \u201cgivens\u201d.\u00a0\u00a0This election will be decided by the very slim margins that determine the outcomes in those swing states.\u00a0\u00a0In 2016, it was about 77,000 votes that decided for Trump.\u00a0\u00a0In 2020, it was around 45,000 that decided for Biden.\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0<\/p>\n\n\n\n So why all of this talk about the \u201cmath\u201d of Presidential elections?\u00a0\u00a0Because when Democrats changed \u201chorses in mid-stream\u201d, switching from Biden to Harris; it\u2019s wasn’t just about the 10% in the middle.\u00a0\u00a0The question came down to the targeted swing states:\u00a0\u00a0which candidate, irrespective of age, is likely to eke out a win in the swing states that will decide our next President?<\/p>\n\n\n\n There\u2019s different pivotal groups in those states: White men, Women, Black voters and young and old voters.\u00a0\u00a0Biden\u2019s \u201csuper power\u201d in 2020, was his ability to maintain his 45%, then gain votes beyond with older Americans, and particularly among middle aged white men.\u00a0\u00a0(Middle aged white men are notoriously Republican these days, but Biden was able to win a greater share than most Democrats).\u00a0\u00a0<\/em>As the last two elections were won \u201con the margins in the swing states\u201d, Biden was able to do what Hillary Clinton could not.\u00a0\u00a0His super power made the difference in Pennsylvania, Michigan and Wisconsin.<\/p>\n\n\n\n So the question is:\u00a0\u00a0 now that Democrats changed candidates, what is the impact on these \u201cslivers of slivers of demographics\u201d in the swing\u00a0\u00a0states?\u00a0\u00a0Our first given (or hope<\/em>):\u00a0\u00a0assume the already chaotic Democratic Party chooses not to commit political suicide by having an open convention.\u00a0\u00a0(It\u2019s not that Dems shouldn\u2019t be \u201cdemocratic\u201d, it\u2019s that the wounds opened in the contest would never heal before election day)<\/em>.\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0Given that, now Democrats turned to the serving Vice President as replacement, what difference will Kamala Harris make?\u00a0\u00a0<\/p>\n\n\n\n Certainly the Vice President would have less appeal to older Americans than the President did.\u00a0\u00a0And it\u2019s just as certain there will be a \u201cnegative\u201d impact by the first Black and West Asian woman to run as a major party nominee for President.\u00a0\u00a0Before you throw down the \u201cracist\/sexist card\u201d, the facts are just the facts.\u00a0\u00a0There are many Americans who didn\u2019t vote for Hillary Clinton because she was a woman, or Barack Obama because he was Black.\u00a0\u00a0Those voters haven\u2019t disappeared \u2013 though it\u2019s more than likely those folks are voting for Trump anyway.\u00a0<\/p>\n\n\n\n Harris has a different \u201csuper power\u201d.\u00a0\u00a0She is likely to increase the turnout among the Black community, among White suburban women, and with younger voters as opposed to Biden. She might perform a mathematic miracle by changing the \u201cgiven\u201d, and making the 45% greater by getting normal non-voters to the polls. So while Biden influences the 5%, Harris may bring more voters to the equation all-together.<\/p>\n\n\n\n She will have to.\u00a0\u00a0Harris won\u2019t cut into the Western Pennsylvania (White men) vote like Biden did, but she may well increase the vote from Philadelphia (Black) and its suburbs (Women) enough to offset the difference.\u00a0\u00a0She could run even stronger in Georgia than Biden.\u00a0\u00a0And\u00a0Harris won\u2019t run as well as Biden in the rural country of Wisconsin.\u00a0\u00a0But she might be able to drive up the vote in Madison (University of Wisconsin) and urban Milwaukee.<\/p>\n\n\n\n So here\u2019s the simple math (thank goodness for simple!). It takes 270 Electoral votes to win the Presidency. The \u201cbase\u201d Democratic electoral votes \u2013 just the \u201csafe\u201d states; add up to 223.\u00a0\u00a0Add Pennsylvania\u2019s 19, Michigan\u2019s 15, and Wisconsin\u2019s 10 and there\u2019s only\u00a0\u00a0three more votes needed. Enter Maine, with a likely 3 of 4, and the Democrat is President again.\u00a0\u00a0(Watch who Harris chooses for her Vice Presidential candidate. Don’t be surprised if it’s Josh Shapiro, the Governor of Pennsylvania. He checks a lot of the boxes). <\/em><\/p>\n\n\n\n It\u2019s hard to believe, but Democrats still have an easier path to the Presidency than MAGA-Republicans.\u00a0Trump\u2019s base is unassailable, but it\u2019s also difficult to grow.\u00a0\u00a0Nothing he\u2019s done so far, including surviving an assassin, is making his base bigger.\u00a0\u00a0But the MAGA base is motivated:\u00a0\u00a0they will show up.\u00a0\u00a0Democrats have the ability to expand the number of voters, just like Biden did in 2020 (he received the most votes ever cast for a President, almost 12 million more than Obama in 2008).<\/p>\n\n\n\n For Harris, where does that expansion have to occur? It better be in Pennsylvania, Michigan, and Wisconsin \u2013 then hold the rest.\u00a0<\/p>\n\n\n\n That\u2019s the \u201cgiven\u201d we all have to face.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"Fifty-One Elections<\/h3>\n\n\n\n
Change Horses<\/h3>\n\n\n\n
Slivers<\/h3>\n\n\n\n
Super Powers<\/h3>\n\n\n\n
Bring More to the Table<\/h3>\n\n\n\n