Clear Presidential Result or Deja Vu 2000

Whilst most polls give Joe Biden a clear lead in the popular vote, is the United States heading for a clear presidential result or could it just be déjà vu 2000?

In a vote for President, one could be forgiven for thinking that nothing would be easier than just totting up the ballots and thereby elect the candidate with the most votes.  But that is not how it works in the world’s greatest democracy.

The voting system was devised in the 1700s when voters were not really trusted.  Although everyone votes, a system of electors, otherwise known as the electoral college, has been created to choose the president.  When a vote is cast for Trump or Biden, the electorate is really voting for the electors who have been lined up to cast their votes for the candidate.

Each state starts off with two electoral votes which represents the two senators from each state.  Added to that are as many electoral votes as the state has members of the House of Representatives.  Representation in both Houses of Congress is not strictly according to population and states with smaller populations have disproportionate sway in the Senate which carries over to the electoral votes for small states.

The upshot of that is that the presidential candidate with the most votes may not succeed in his bid for the presidency.  In the albeit relatively short history of the US, before Donald Trump’s election in 2016 four candidates had succeeded in their presidential bids despite losing the popular vote: John Quincy Adams, Rutherford B Hayes, Benjamin Harrison and George W Bush.

It will be remembered that in 2000 the presidential contest was fought between the then vice-president Al Gore, the hot favourite, and Governor George W Bush, son of former President Bush.  In order to succeed, a candidate needs 270 electoral college votes.  With only Florida to declare each candidate had 269.  There were all sorts of arguments about recounts, how to recount, and whether the recount was valid, which resulted in two hearings before the Supreme Court.  On each occasion, the Supreme Court (which had a Republican majority) voted narrowly in favour of Governor Bush.  Thus, Bush was finally declared President in early December with just 271 electoral college votes despite Al Gore’s lead of 543,895 in the popular vote.

That was the first time a President had been elected with what might be described as such an enormous deficit in the popular vote.  But Trump did vastly better than that in 2016 without the assistance of the courts.  He managed to achieve 304 electoral college votes against Hilary Clinton’s 227 despite Clinton achieving a staggering 2.87 million more popular votes.

So what can we expect next Tuesday.  If either candidate obtains a decisive electoral college victory, probably not much.  But if it comes down to the line with Trump the narrow loser, be prepared for weeks of tussle, civil disobedience and court hearings.  But bear in mind also that Trump has also loaded the Supreme Court heavily with Republican nominated judges and, regrettably, it does not take much to work out how that is likely to end up.

The democratic veil is gradually slipping from the face of the world’s self-styled principal hegemon.  Democracy, so called, is not always as straightforward as we would like it to be.  It is one of those words that slips beautifully from the tongue but covers all manner of sins.  The western world holds up democracy as the only way to be and asserts that everyone should be like us.

But as it does so China is re-emerging at pace, the silk roads are being carefully re-dressed and in the not too distant future the balance of world power may well change.