Map courtesy of 270ToWin.com
It was around this time four years ago that I began to observe that the position of Hillary Clinton relative to Donald Trump in the Electoral College was slipping. At the time, I did not assign enough importance to this development, assuming that her continued polling lead was the key point to consider in forecasting the ultimate outcome of the race. I thought she was far enough ahead that some slippage would not matter. Like most election forecasters, I was wrong.
After Trump pulled out his upset victory, I began considering why I and so many others missed what was happening. In my case, I identified three considerations that I missed and resolved not to miss again.
- Events matter. It became clear, based on exit polling of late deciders in 2016, that the James Comey announcement, late in the race, that he was reopening the FBI investigation into Clinton, moved late deciders heavily in the direction of Trump, clearly flipping Florida, Pennsylvania, Michigan and Wisconsin out of the Clinton column and into Trump’s.
- All polls matter. I was too dismissive of polling that came from Republican outlets, which clearly showed movement in Trump’s direction in key states, particularly Florida and North Carolina, in the final days of the race, and I left such polling out of the state-by-state polling averages.
- The trend matters. In past elections, the actual polling numbers have often been a lagging indicator, and it is the trend that gives us a better view of how the race is going. Two key examples: the elections of 1980 and 1948. In 1980, President Jimmy Carter and Ronald Reagan were in a dead heat going into Election Day, but Reagan ended up winning in a blowout. In 1948, President Harry Truman trailed Thomas Dewey, but the trends had been moving in his direction for weeks, and Truman won by a surprisingly decisive margin.
In 2016, the polling trend was clearly moving against Clinton by this point in the race, so much so that I was revising her status downward in every swing state. I didn’t miss the trend, but I missed what it meant.
It is clear now that Biden has been suffering some slippage since my last forecast 40 days ago, with his national lead over Trump falling from 8.6% to 7.2%. While this is still a solid lead, the trend–particularly some concerning slippage (on average) in the battleground states–should be a matter of concern for the Biden campaign and his supporters.
In short, all three of the key areas of consideration that I missed in 2016 are showing movement in Trump’s favor. Events are moving in his favor as COVID is no longer a novelty and the public has, to some degree, gotten used to it; polling averages are moving in his favor; and polling trends are moving in his favor.
Several other factors are also concerning for Biden. A fourth factor in play is that Biden, according to virtually all available polling, is suffering slippage among Latino and Black voters relative to Clinton and certainly as compared to Barack Obama. This slippage could pose problems for him in states like Arizona, Nevada and even New Mexico if not reversed. Virginia may still be safe for Biden, even with slight slippage in its significant Black vote, due to its educational demographics; the same is true for Colorado, even with slight slippage for Biden among Latinos.
The fifth factor that poses a problem for Biden is that more people surveyed continue to view Trump as stronger on the economy than Biden would be, despite the economic turmoil that has racked the country due to the administration’s bungled COVID-19 response. As Democrats too often do, they are leaving it to the voters to connect the dots, which is a mistake. They seem to be banking on the idea that voters will independently deduce that Trump’s mismanagement of the pandemic response has been the cause of the economic downturn. While this may seem like an obvious fact to Democrats, the general public seems to be disconnecting the two issues. Democrats’ failure to make that connection for voters is reminiscent of the John Kerry campaign’s failure in 2004 to knock down the Swift Boat allegations that damaged his image as a war hero.
And there is a sixth factor that should be particularly concerning for Team Biden: his slowness to act. His failure to go to Kenosha swiftly after the police shooting of Jacob Blake and the ensuing riots was a colossal mistake, opening the door for Trump to capitalize on that mistake by going himself. As we have repeatedly seen over the last few decades, Democrats are consistently too passive and slow to act, while Republicans are consistently proactive and quick to seize opportunities that Democrats fumble. Biden finally went to Kenosha this week, but his flat-footedness is a matter of concern.
As a result of negative, or at least concerning, developments in these six areas, I am revising my ratings in 16 states in Trump’s direction. While I still rate Biden as the favorite, Team Biden needs to be thinking about playing to win rather than trying to run out the clock, and they especially need to be doing a better job with Latino voters.
I am, at this time, making the following ratings changes:
SAFE BIDEN to LIKELY BIDEN (5 electoral votes): New Mexico (5).
LIKELY BIDEN to LEAN BIDEN (38 electoral votes): Michigan (16), Minnesota (10), Nevada (6), New Hampshire (4), Maine-at-large (2).
LEAN BIDEN to TILT BIDEN (71 electoral votes): Florida (29), Pennsylvania (20), Arizona (11), Wisconsin (10), Nebraska-02 (1).
LEAN BIDEN to TILT TRUMP (15 electoral votes): North Carolina (15)
TILT BIDEN to LEAN TRUMP (16 electoral votes): Georgia (16).
TILT TRUMP to LEAN TRUMP (25 electoral votes): Ohio (18), Iowa (6), Maine-02 (1).
LEAN TRUMP to LIKELY TRUMP (38 electoral votes): Texas (38).
LIKELY TRUMP to SAFE TRUMP (9 electoral votes): South Carolina (9).
The upshot is that I now show Biden winning the Electoral College 319-219, down from my 350-188 projection 40 days ago, with North Carolina flipping to “Tilt Trump” and Georgia flipping to “Lean Trump.” But that is a very soft 319 for Biden, with only 210 electoral votes in the “safe” or “likely” category for him, and 270 needed to win.
In the U.S. Senate, I continue to maintain that it is highly unlikely that any state will produce a split result in which a presidential candidate of one party and a Senate candidate of the other party both win. At this time, I now expect Republicans to maintain their majority in the Senate by a bare 51-49 margin, with Democrats picking up seats in Arizona, Colorado, and Maine and losing a seat in Alabama.
With Biden’s fortunes clearly on the decline in North Carolina, and with the slippage of Democratic Senate candidate Cal Cunningham as well in recent polls, my expectation at this time is that the GOP will hang onto that Senate seat, unless the trajectory of the race turns back in the Democrats’ favor. I continue to maintain my view that Democrat Steve Bullock is not just an underdog in Montana, but a significant underdog. I also discount the chances of Democratic contenders in Kansas, Kentucky and South Carolina due to the fact that partisan polarization has created a very significant correlation between presidential and Senate results during presidential election years.
Additionally, I expect Democrats will make small gains in the House of Representatives. In 30 days, I will do a full analysis on the House.
The bottom line is that Democrats cannot expect to just run out the clock and win this election. Team Biden and the rest of the Democratic contenders need to be not just active, but proactive, and they need to both define Trump (rather than assuming that events will define Trump for them) and demonstrate that they will do better than Trump. Although some Democrats may consider it obvious that Biden will do better than Trump, they would do well to remember that nothing in politics should ever be considered obvious. You have to draw the voters a picture. If the Democrats don’t, the Republicans will.