In the upcoming presidential election, the stakes couldn’t be higher: the victor will preside over a diverse nation of over 330 million individuals. Interestingly, the fate of this election will hinge on just a handful of votes—likely decided by a mere few tens of thousands across a select number of states.
This year, only seven out of the fifty states are genuinely competitive, with the rest leaning comfortably towards either the Democratic or Republican parties, as gauged by public sentiment polls.
Among these crucial battlegrounds, Pennsylvania emerges prominently. As the most populous state among the contenders, it stands poised to play a decisive role in determining whether Democrat Kamala Harris or Republican Donald Trump claims the presidency.
The candidates have tailored their strategies to reflect this reality. They are pouring most of their advertising budgets and campaign efforts into these pivotal seven states that switch between party loyalties.
In a scenario where the election results in a 269-269 electoral vote tie, the responsibility of selecting a winner falls to the US House of Representatives. Here, each state’s delegation casts a single vote—an outcome experts suggest could tilt in favor of Donald Trump.
So, why isn’t the election determined by a straightforward national popular vote?
Unlike the elections for other federal offices or state positions, the presidential race functions differently. The mechanism known as the Electoral College assigns electoral votes based on state outcomes, where the candidate who wins a state collects its electoral votes. This system is heavily influenced by population numbers.
To secure victory, a candidate must amass a majority of the total 538 electoral votes, requiring at least 270. It’s worth noting that this can happen even if the candidate receives fewer total votes nationwide, as demonstrated when Donald Trump won the presidency in 2016 despite losing the popular vote.
Returning to the potential tie, if a candidate achieves a 269-269 deadlock, the decision reverts to the House of Representatives with each state’s delegation casting a solitary vote, likely favoring Trump, according to analysts.
Should all states beyond the battlegrounds vote as anticipated, Vice President Harris would secure 226 electoral votes, while Mr. Trump would end up with 219. The remaining 93 electoral votes would still be competitive.
What states are in the mix for contention?
On November 5, seven states are in play: the Rust Belt trio of Pennsylvania, Michigan, and Wisconsin, alongside the southern quartet of Arizona, Georgia, Nevada, and North Carolina.
For decades, Michigan, Pennsylvania, and Wisconsin formed a strong bastion of support for Democratic candidates. However, this solid “blue wall” crumbled in 2016 when Donald Trump narrowly won all three, leading to his unexpected triumph over Democrat Hillary Clinton.
Fast-forward four years, and Joe Biden flipped the script by regaining Pennsylvania, Wisconsin, and Michigan for the Democrats. He also made surprising inroads in Georgia and Arizona, states that had traditionally leaned Republican.
How closely contested is this election?
Extremely tight. As of October 16, tracking data from The New York Times shows that all seven battleground states are virtually neck and neck.
If Kamala Harris falters in Pennsylvania, she must rely on either Georgia or North Carolina to stay in the running. As it stands, Trump enjoys a slim two-point advantage in Arizona, with the remaining swing states hovering within a point, indicating an ultra-competitive race.
Indeed, this contest appears tighter than in 2020. That year, a mere 43,000 votes shifting from Biden to Trump across three states—less than one-third of a percentage point nationally—would have flipped the election in Trump’s favor.
Now, why does Pennsylvania hold such pivotal importance?
Simply put, Pennsylvania boasts 19 electoral votes—more than any other battleground state. It’s often labeled as the likely “tipping point” state, meaning it could be the one that pushes a candidate over the critical 269 electoral votes threshold.
If Donald Trump were to lose Pennsylvania, he would need to secure victories in either Wisconsin or Michigan. Conversely, if Kamala Harris doesn’t win the state, then North Carolina or Georgia must be hers, as they’ve only voted Democrat three times in the past forty years.
Both campaigns have fixated on Pennsylvania, investing significant time and resources there. By October 7, they had collectively dumped $279.3 million into broadcast advertising in the state, which far surpasses Michigan’s second-place total of over $75 million, according to AdImpact reports.
Why is a single congressional district in Nebraska garnering such attention?
While 48 states allocate their electoral votes on a winner-takes-all basis, Nebraska and Maine divide theirs: one vote goes to the winner of each congressional district. In 2020, Biden managed to snag one electoral vote from Nebraska, while Trump did the same in Maine.
The electoral vote from Nebraska’s 2nd Congressional District, which encompasses Omaha, is highly competitive, although analysts currently lean towards Harris winning it. Both political parties have invested millions in advertising targeted at the Omaha market.
This lone electoral vote could prove pivotal if Harris wins Michigan, Pennsylvania, and Wisconsin, while Trump takes the other battleground states. Ultimately, Nebraska’s 2nd District could determine whether the election concludes in a tie or if Harris emerges victorious.
Edited by: Ali Musa
alimusa@axadletimes.com
Axadle international–Monitoring
