We have finally come to Election Day when all pollsters, analysts, pundits, and editorial boards must step aside and let the American voter decide the country's future for the next four years.
The consensus on who will likely win tomorrow (if the results will be known by then) is that no one knows.
Battleground states point to a Trump win. For months, we have focused on the seven battleground states of Pennsylvania, Michigan, Wisconsin, North Carolina, Georgia, Arizona, and Nevada.
The latest RealClearPolitics average shows Trump leading in five of these states, with Harris ahead in Michigan and Wisconsin. Trump has come back to maintain a lead in four of the five states that he lost to Biden—Pennsylvania, Georgia, Arizona, and Nevada. He carried North Carolina in both 2016 and 2020.
If Trump were to win all the states he did in 2020 (the possibility of which is remarkably high), his lead in those four battlegrounds would elect him as the 47th president. Basic electoral college math tells us why. The combined electoral votes for Nevada, Arizona, Georgia, and Pennsylvania add up to 52 electoral votes (Nevada: 6; Arizona: 11; Georgia: 16; Pennsylvania: 19). In 2020, Biden won 306 electoral college votes, with those 52 votes powering his victory, while Trump only won 232. Adding those 52 votes to the Trump column this time will put Trump at 284 votes, more than the 270 needed to win the presidency. Even losing Iowa (6 electoral college votes) is ok for Trump because 278 is still good enough.
Harris's Wrong Track numbers also indicate a Trump victory. Our TIPP Online Tracking Poll of 1,603 voters conducted between October 30 and November 1 showed that 63% of Americans are dissatisfied with the country's direction. The spread (difference) between those satisfied (34%) and those dissatisfied is 29 points. If we examine historical trends, these numbers are ominous for the Harris campaign.
Wrong Track analysis. The Roper Center at Cornell University has analyzed right track/wrong track numbers going back to 1980.
Americans defeated the incumbent in each reelection instance when the wrong track number was above 57%. The 57% was recorded in 2000, when the United States Supreme Court stopped a statewide count in Florida on December 12, nearly 34 days after Election Day. Bush defeated Gore by 537 votes, clinched Florida, and became president by the closest margin in American history. Gore won the popular vote.
In the other four cases, the wrong track numbers were higher, and the impact more pronounced.
In 1980 (79% wrong track for Carter), Ronald Reagan crushed his opponent to win two consecutive terms.
In 1992 (76% wrong track for George HW Bush), Bill Clinton eked out a victory with the help of Ross Perot, who won 19% of the popular vote but no state. Clinton beat Bush, with a 370-168 lopsided win.
In 2008 (75% wrong track), Obama handily defeated McCain/Palin, trying to run a disastrous Bush 43 third term. Everything was terrible for the GOP that year. Bush had messed up in Iraq and Afghanistan, with Osama Bin Laden still at large after seven years of war. The subprime mortgage crisis tanked the American economy to lows not seen since the 1929 Great Depression. McCain was a poor candidate, and Palin was worse. Obama was making history, and the election was over within a few hours of the results coming in.
In 2016, Obama's wrong track numbers were 62%, and Hillary, running for Obama's third term, fell significantly short, losing to Trump.
To be sure, 2024 is technically not a reelection with Biden not being on the ticket, and Harris is trying hard to drive home that message through her "Turn the page" ads. Americans, however, know that Harris is running for Biden's second term. She is traveling around the country as the Vice President, with all the trappings of that high office. In addition, Harris has struggled to distance herself from Biden's policies, repeatedly saying she wouldn't have done anything different from him. So, a 63% wrong track number can be lethal.
The RealClearPolitics average of the wrong track number across nine different pollsters is remarkably consistent with our TIPP poll, also showing a wrong track number of 63%.
Analysis of the Spread. Looking at just the wrong track numbers is inconclusive. To draw a fuller picture, we should examine The Spread - the difference between positive and negative among people directly answering the question about the country's direction.
Our TIPP spread is more generous to Harris at -29%, meaning it is the difference between those who say they are satisfied (34%) and those not satisfied (63%). The RCP spread, however, is more problematic for Harris at -36.4%. [The nearly seven-point difference between TIPP and RCP spreads can be traced to people ignoring our wrong track question altogether or answering "Not Sure."]
Historically, any spread worse than 30 points has been a disaster for the incumbent.
In 2016, the spread for Hillary was -31%. Trump ended up winning the Electoral College 304-227.
In 1980, the spread for Carter was -59%. Reagan won 489 Electoral College votes.
In 2008, the spread for McCain running for Bush 43's third term was -65%. Obama won 365 EC votes.
The only anomaly was Gore, in 2000, at just an 18-point spread. As we said before, this was Florida's "hanging chad," "dimpled chad," and "butterfly ballot" nonsense, so it is safe to ignore this outlier.
While the above analysis predicts a Trump victory, we must caveat it with this statement. While there's a strong correlation between right/wrong track polls and election outcomes, a strong correlation alone does not statistically mean that an election outcome can be caused by it. In other words, correlation does not equate to causation. Other factors (likeability, age, Trump's policy accomplishments balanced against his loose rhetoric, Harris's never-ending flip-flops, Harris's screaming personality expressing faux rage at anything Trump) are all in the stew.
No matter who wins, there’s one sure winner: The American voter who can finally leave all the nastiness behind and return to living life.
