ME and NB use what is known as the District Plan under which the statewide winner receives two Electors and the remaining Electors are selected by the popular vote winner within each Congressional District. This method has often been cited as a possible reform to the entire system as it would split the vote and give candidates the chance to win Electors they otherwise would not have a chance at (think Republicans winning a few Electors in CA and Democrats winning a few Electors out of Alabama). If this system was in place, Romney would have very narrowly beaten Obama in 2012 while losing the nationwide popular vote. But that is a discussion for future post...
Lets look at some maps - best for us visual types!
All maps are courtesy of 270towin.com
Starting map with Solid and Tossup states
The below map has states colored as either solid or leaning for each candidate with toss-up states in grey. This is from polling conducted through late April 2020 and how states have historically voted over the past few cycles.
Note that there are only a few true toss-up states. Arizona, a GOP lock most years is now up for grabs. The same with North Carolina. Demographic changes in both states (Hispanics in AZ and wealthy middle class whites in NC) have made them more favorable for Democrats in the last decade. Virginia has continued its Democratic trend (the DC beltways is about as blue as any Northeastern urban area). However, former battlegrounds Ohio, Iowa, and Missouri have become more reliably Republican (due to working class and rural voters trending more Republican). Three states are key as they are most years - PA, MI, and FL. Trump carried all three by very narrow margins in 2016 and needs to win them again if he has any hope of reelection in 2020.
One other to watch is Texas. Deep red since 1980, it is trending more purple and Trump won it by a comparatively close 9 points in 2016. If Texas goes blue, game over.
Biden: Landslide Scenario
The below is a best case scenario for Biden with Trump's support collapsing and a blue wave sweeping Biden into office.
Biden wins nationwide by 8% to 11% nationwide. Trump loses all leaning GOP states and even more reliably GOP bastions such as Texas by close margins. Democrats regain their advantage around the Great Lakes that Trump cracked in 2016. Florida and Georgia are are breached by Biden (Trump won GA by only 5% in 2016). Pennsylvania where Biden has roots flips easily. Losing Texas is obviously catastrophic for the GOP, but not implausible given high turnout among Hispanics and youth voters. I hesitated on Iowa and Ohio as they are tending red, but Obama did win those states twice so I kicked them to the blue team.
Bear in mind this map is based on an overwhelming Democratic wave. For something of this scale to occur there would need to be an economy in Depression and for the Trump to be on the receiving end of public ire. It also assumes white suburbanites and women vote for Biden - or against Trump in massive numbers. Add an energized African American and Hispanic turnout to flip states like AZ, NC, GA and TX.
The GOP base vote does come out, but ongoing demographic shifts and a severe loss of white suburbanites doom Trump to winning only in those areas where his base is a true majority.
Trump - A Close Win Scenario
Based on conditions as of early May 2020, I do not foresee Trump winning in anything approaching a landslide. However, it is quite plausible that he wins reelection in a fairly close race.
In this case Trump wins a very close nationwide vote, probably in the 1% to 2% range. Note that I have kept Michigan blue. But Prof - polling in Michigan was off in 2016, why not in 2020? I am basing this call on Trump winning MI in 2016 by only 0.02% and his overall favorability in MI has declined considerably. However, current polling remains close in such battlegrounds as NC, WI, and FL and Trump wins these states by modest margins. The President ends not being widely blamed for the Recession in this scenario and his base (rural and working class) come out in unprecedented numbers. Minority turnout is about the same as 2016, allowing Trump to retain PA (albeit very closely) and AZ. An added bonus of this scenario is that the GOP does not have to spend resources to defend Texas.
You may ask why Trump doesn't perform better and match his 2016 win. I am basing my analysis on both nationwide and state polling and Trump favorability which has been mired in the mid 40s. Yes, it IS early and these assumptions may (and likely will) change as time and conditions progress, but almost everything needs to break Trump's way for him to serve another four years. And so onto how I would call this as of May 2, 2020...
The Prof's May 2020 Prediction
As of this writing I see 2020 being a roughly 4% to 7% Biden victory nationwide. Biden successfully flips FL, PA, MI, WI, NC, and AZ. Minority turnout is critical for Biden to flip these states. Biden betters Clinton's performance among white suburbanites which makes VA and importantly PA early calls for Biden. Massive turnout in liberal urban areas of Wisconsin (much like the recent WI judicial election ) return it to the Democratic fold. Biden also does surprisingly well in solidly red states such as SC due to an energized Black turnout.
Ironically a sizable slice of Republicans and Independent leaners who held their nose and voted for Trump in 2016 will flip to Biden as he is a relative moderate and promises a return to political normalcy. This is why the Democratic Party movers and shakers (rumor has it President Obama was among these) favored Biden over Sanders as Sanders' policies would be concerning enough for middle class moderates to vote for Trump again - close-pins firmly on noses.
Trump holds on by a small margin in Ohio. GA and IA are very close, but Trump squeaks them out. But it simply is not enough as far as the math is concerned. Trump does not flip any states that Clinton won in 2016 as Biden performs better in all of the blue states from 2016. NH and Colorado are firmly out of reach and Biden is able to focus resources on the Great Lake states and Florida.
Texas ends up very close as well, forcing Trump to spend resources that would have been of better use elsewhere.
A note on third parties
In 2016, Libertarian Gary Johnson and Green candidate Jill Stein won 3.27% and 1.06% respectively. One can certainly argue that "wasted" votes for Stein cost Clinton MI and WI. It also can be argued that many Johnson voters were anti-Trump Republicans and may have cost Trump NH. Does the Libertarian candidate (probably former MI Congressmen Justin Amash) affect the race in either direction? Does a wealthy individual like Mark Cuban decide to pull a Ross Perot and siphon a significant number of votes? All this remains to be seen.
Typically third party candidates have little real effect on a presidential race, but in Nader in 2000 and Perot in 1992 absolutely had significant influence on the final results. Remember Nader won 97,000 votes in Florida - a state that was ultimately declared for George W. Bush by only 537 votes and delivered him the presidency.
In conclusion
All of my analysis is based on my best guess as of today, It does not necessarily reflect what I want to happen as my role here is to facilitate and not to advocate for any one side. See you very soon!
Onwards!
The Prof
