politics
/
November 19, 2024
Donald Trump received less than 50 percent of the popular vote, and the gap with Kamala Harris narrowed significantly as all the votes were counted.
Advertising policy
Former President Donald Trump speaks after being declared the winner of the 2024 presidential election at the Palm Beach County Convention Center on November 6, 2024 in West Palm Beach, Florida.
(Javin Botsford/The Washington Post via Getty Images)
“America has given us a powerful and unprecedented mission,” President Donald Trump declared in the early morning hours of November 6, 2024, after all votes had been counted. In fact, he claimed to have won “the greatest political victory our country has ever seen, nothing like it.” President Trump was excited by the numbers showing he had established a huge lead over his Democratic rival, Vice President Kamala Harris, with well over 50 percent of the popular vote.
Unfortunately for the president-elect, the U.S. will take longer to count the 155 million votes, and it’s unclear whether 1 million votes will be given or taken, and the actual result will take away Trump’s bragging points. .
President Trump can no longer claim that powerful mandate. According to the most rational method, the starting point for such a claim in a two-party system is a supermajority of votes in favor of your candidacy. Trump doesn’t have that anymore.
Over the weekend, as California, Oregon, Washington and other Western states neared completion of their counts, Trump’s share of the popular vote fell below 50%. And it looks like his margin of victory is much smaller than initially expected. In fact, out of the 59 presidential elections held since the founding of the United States, after all votes are counted in 2024, only five popular vote winners will have won by a narrower margin than Trump.
President Trump’s lead in the popular vote has steadily declined since election night. As of Monday afternoon, Mr. Trump had an approval rating of 49.94%, while Ms. Harris had 48.26%, according to the authoritative Cook Political Report, which tracks results from official sources in states across the country. And as Democratic-heavy states on the West Coast finish counting their votes, the Republican total is expected to continue to decline.
Trump still leads Harris in the popular vote. He also maintains a lead in the decisive, if absurdly anti-democratic, electoral college count, slightly fewer than Barack Obama in 2012 and slightly less than Joe Biden in 2020. This is based on winning patterns in battleground states. Therefore, even if Trump does not win a majority, he will not lose the presidency. But he has lost the ability to suggest he has defeated Democrats. In fact, she currently trails him in the vote share by just 1.68%.
Latest issue
To put this in perspective: Trump’s popular vote this year is higher than Biden’s in 2020 (51.3), Obama’s in 2012 (51.1), Obama’s in 2008 (52.9), and George’s in 2004. That’s lower than W. Bush (50.7). , George H.W. Bush in 1988 (53.2), Ronald Reagan in 1984 (58.8), Reagan in 1980 (50.7), or Jimmy Carter in 1976 (50.1). And, of course, Mr. Trump’s numbers are an “unprecedented, strong, ” far lower than the numbers for presidents who reasonably won the mandate. percent. As President Trump’s approval ratings continue to decline, he will fall below the standards achieved by most presidents over the past century.
Harris, on the other hand, looks like a much stronger finisher than she did on election night. In fact, Democrats currently receive a higher percentage of the popular vote than President Trump in 2016 (46.1), President Bush in 2000 (47.9), President Clinton in 1992 (43), and President Nixon in 1968 (43.4). I am doing it. She also ranked Trump in 2020 (46.8 points), Trump in 2016 (48.2 points), Mitt Romney in 2012 (47.2 points), John McCain in 2008 (45.7 points), and Trump in 2000 (45.7 points). has fared significantly better than recent candidates from major parties, including George W. Bush. (47.9), Bob Dole in 1996 (40.7), George H.W. Bush in 1992 (37.4), Michael Dukakis in 1988 (45.6), Walter Mondale (40.6), Carter in 1980 (41). ), or Gerald Ford (48) in 1976.
Yes, some of these historic results were influenced by the presence of strong third-party candidates. But most were not. And the bottom line is that the gap between Trump and Harris is narrower than the gap between major party candidates in most American presidential elections.
Why focus on all the presidents who had better elections than Trump? Why discuss the narrowness of his advantage over Harris? Moreover, why consider that the Republican majorities in the House and Senate are among the narrowest in modern American history? It will help members of both parties understand how to respond if the president insists on honoring a “strong” mandate and accepting unattractive candidates and policies.
Trump’s victory was not on an “epic” or “historic” scale. There was no “landslide” for the former and future president, as Fox News repeatedly suggested in its post-election headlines. The election did not result in Trump’s “decisive victory,” as the Associated Press called it shortly after the vote. Nor did it result in a “big defeat” for Harris, which the Associated Press simultaneously reported.
That doesn’t matter to Mr. Trump, who insisted on a mandate even though he lost the popular vote in 2016 by about 3 million votes. Four years later, Trump has refused to accept defeat by more than 7 million votes and denied that his majority support for Biden in the 2020 election amounted to a mandate.
These numbers are more favorable to Democrats than those recorded on election night, many experts continue to suggest. But that doesn’t mean a clearer picture of the results should deter Democrats from looking for ways to reform the party. Even if the margin was narrower than initially imagined, it is true that the party could not defeat President Trump and the Republican Party, which espouses the destructive politics of not only presidential candidates but also billionaires. be. Now, as part of the necessary consideration of how to build a multi-racial, multi-ethnic working class coalition that can win decisively, and not just at the presidential level, we must take seriously the mistakes we have made and the challenges ahead. It’s time to reflect. He will also participate in the fight to regain control of the House and Senate in 2026.
Advertising policy
But what the numbers give Democrats and progressives is an argument against despair and capitulation, especially now that discussions have begun over President Trump’s Cabinet appointments, judicial nominees, and legislative priorities. .
“Despite their tenuous connection to reality, research suggests that mandate claims can be effective in influencing legislative action,” he says in “Delivering the People’s Message: The Politics of Presidential Mandates.” Julia Azari, associate professor of political science at Marquette University and author of “Change,” points out. . “Political science research shows that legislators will change their behavior in response to their perceptions of delegated elections, but only over time.”
popular
“Swipe left at the bottom to see other authors”Swipe →
The first months of Trump’s presidency will go a long way in defining the character of his second term. Democrats and a few thoughtful Republicans have the potential to moderate President Trump’s worst excesses and ensure that the constitutionally mandated system of checks and balances is maintained. When Trump pushes back against congressional oversight by insisting that his appointments and policies reflect the will of voters, members of the House and Senate explain that the majority of Americans did not vote for him. You can refute that plausible claim.
we can’t retreat
We are now facing a second Trump presidency.
You have nothing to lose. We must use fear, sadness, and yes, anger to resist the dangerous policies that Donald Trump is unleashing on our country. We rededicate ourselves to our roles as journalists and writers of principle and conscience.
Today, too, we will brace ourselves for the upcoming battle. It requires fearlessness, informed minds, intelligent analysis, and humane resistance. We face the enactment of Project 2025, a far-right Supreme Court, political authoritarianism, rising inequality and record increases in homelessness, a looming climate crisis, and conflicts overseas. The nation comes together as a community to uncover, advocate and nurture investigative journalism, and to keep hope and potential alive. In good times and bad, our nation’s efforts continue to develop alternative ideas and visions, deepen our mission of truth-telling and in-depth reporting, and further strengthen the unity of our divided nation. will be done.
Armed with an incredible 160 years of bold, independent journalism, our mission remains the same today as it was when abolitionists first founded The Nation. It is about upholding the principles of democracy and freedom, serving as a guide through the darkest days of resistance, and imagining and envisioning the future. Strive for a bright future.
The days are dark and the troops in line are tenacious, but as the late Nation editorial board member Toni Morrison wrote, “No!” This is precisely when artists get to work. There is no time for despair, no place for self-pity, no need for silence, no room for fear. We speak, write, and use language. That’s how civilization heals. ”
Please stand with The Nation and make a donation today.
from now on,
Katrina van den Heuvel
Editorial Director and Publisher of The Nation
See more nation
Will they be able to stand up to even the scariest of these candidates? I’m not optimistic.
joan walsh
Palestine may not have swung the election one way or another. But there is no doubt that Democrats paid a high price for refusing to hold Israel accountable.
YL Al-Sheikh
Once Trump takes control of the federal government, he will have to turn to the states if he wants to use real power to stop his egregious policies.
van goss
It’s easy to blame activists, but far more powerful forces are causing Democrats to ignore the real crisis facing Americans.
Waleed Shahid
His inner circle includes establishment hawks and cranky outsiders who are more likely to bring about global anarchy than world peace.
Jeet Heer
