-Muhammad Rakibul Islam (Rakib)
As the 2024 presidential election draws to a close, voters are watching a contest between Kamala Harris and Donald Trump that promises to be as closely fought as any in recent history. National polls show Harris with a narrow lead in popular support, but the unique nature of the U.S. electoral system means that Trump could still emerge victorious. Understanding this distinction—between the popular vote and the Electoral College—reveals why the race is too close to call and why key battleground states will likely decide the outcome.
In the United States, winning the presidency doesn’t mean capturing the most votes overall; it means winning the majority of electoral votes. Each state has a set number of electoral votes based on its population, and winning a state’s popular vote secures all of its electoral votes for that candidate, with the exception of Maine and Nebraska, which use a proportional approach. To win the election, a candidate must reach at least 270 electoral votes out of 538. As a result, presidential candidates focus heavily on states with large numbers of electoral votes and those known as “battleground states,” which tend to swing between Democratic and Republican preferences and can decide the outcome in a tight race.
Harris Leads Nationally but Faces Tight Races in Key States
According to polling data gathered by FiveThirtyEight, Harris holds a slight lead in the national popular vote, with a weighted average support of 47.36% compared to Trump’s 46.94%. This national lead suggests a small edge in overall popularity for Harris, but it does not guarantee a win under the Electoral College system. While Democratic-leaning states like California and New York could contribute heavily to Harris’s popular vote totals, those large margins won’t help her in battleground states like Arizona, Georgia, and Wisconsin—states where Trump remains highly competitive.
Our analysis, using polling data and weights developed by FiveThirtyEight, assesses each candidate’s standing in these battleground states. Two weights were used in this calculation: pollscore, which measures a pollster’s historical accuracy, and transparency score, which assesses the disclosure level of each poll’s methodology. These weights help prioritize recent, reliable polling and provide a refined look at each candidate’s support across states. By examining polls from October 20 onward, our analysis captures the most recent shifts in voter sentiment.
Battleground States: The Deciders of 2024
Battleground states are critical in this election, and neither candidate has a clear, decisive lead across all of them. Here’s where each candidate stands in these key states:
State | Harris Weighted % | Trump Weighted % | Lead |
Arizona | 47.23 | 49.69 | Likely Trump (2.46%) |
Georgia | 47.70 | 49.22 | Likely Trump (1.52%) |
Michigan | 48.48 | 46.95 | Likely Harris (1.53%) |
Nevada | 48.62 | 48.41 | Likely Harris (0.21%) |
North Carolina | 48.32 | 48.88 | Likely Trump (0.56%) |
Pennsylvania | 48.90 | 48.80 | Likely Harris (0.10%) |
Wisconsin | 49.15 | 48.85 | Likely Harris (0.30%) |
The data reveals that Harris is slightly ahead in states like Michigan, Nevada, Pennsylvania, and Wisconsin, while Trump maintains leads in Arizona, Georgia, and North Carolina. The margins are slim across the board, with many falling within typical polling error ranges, underscoring how quickly these leads could change.
The Electoral College and Popular Vote Divide
The divide between the popular vote and Electoral College outcomes has been a recurring phenomenon in U.S. history, most recently in the 2016 election, when Hillary Clinton won the popular vote but lost the Electoral College to Trump. This discrepancy often arises from the winner-takes-all rule in most states, where a candidate can win all of a state’s electoral votes by a single vote. In highly populated states, this can amplify the effect of small margins, particularly in battlegrounds. Harris’s national popularity does not guarantee that she will win the electoral votes in these states. Her minor lead in the popular vote could be offset if Trump can narrowly win battleground states, capturing enough electoral votes to secure victory even with a smaller share of the national vote.
Simulation: Harris Holds a Slight Edge, but Victory Is Far from Certain
Using the national and battleground state polling data, we ran a simulation to project the potential outcomes. Out of 100 possible scenarios:
Harris Wins: 51 times
Trump Wins: 48 times
Draw: 1 time
This suggests that Harris has a slight advantage in electoral scenarios, reflecting her small national lead and her edge in some crucial battleground states. However, Trump’s competitiveness in states like Arizona and Georgia keeps him within reach of the 270 electoral votes needed. Even a minor shift in turnout or late-breaking support could swing the race in his favor, especially given the historical tendency for polls to overestimate Democratic support in battleground states.
Polling Bias: A Complicating Factor in Predictions
One critical consideration is the polling bias observed in recent elections, where polls have tended to overestimate Democratic support. This bias, likely due to sampling challenges and turnout modeling errors, has led to underestimations of conservative support, particularly in rural and suburban areas. If this bias persists, Trump’s standing in battleground states may be stronger than polls suggest, making Harris’s leads in states like Michigan and Pennsylvania more tenuous than they appear.
A Race Defined by Battlegrounds and Margins
The 2024 election is shaping up to be a contest defined by tight margins, with battleground states again holding the keys to the White House. While Harris holds a slight edge in both the popular vote and in some battlegrounds, Trump’s pathway remains viable, particularly if the polling biases of previous elections re-emerge.
In this electoral landscape, the final outcome could hinge on even small shifts in voter turnout, especially in battlegrounds where Trump remains competitive. The election’s outcome may not reflect the national popular vote, underscoring the pivotal role of the Electoral College. For now, Harris holds a narrow lead, but Trump’s performance in key states means the race remains anyone’s to win.
This election, like others before it, is a reminder of the unique dynamics of the Electoral College system, where national popularity may be less critical than strategic wins in battleground states.
About Author:
Muhammad Rakibul Islam, known as Rakib, is a data analyst & scientist whose expertise bridges private industry knowledge and expertise with public interest and public policy making. Driven by a commitment to transparency, Rakib’s work addresses complexities and biases within data, algorithms, and statistical or machine learning models to ensure accuracy and integrity in predictive analysis. In addition to his data-driven pursuits, Rakib has been a pivotal player in political data analysis and strategy, contributing to multiple successful election campaigns in New York over the years. His approach merges rigorous analytical skills with a commitment to fair and insightful outcomes, making him a significant voice in both data analysis / science and political strategy.
Comentários