The 2024 presidential election is tied. Again. As I write this, Nate Silver’s forecast is literally 50-50. And that’s bad news for America.
I’m not just saying this because it defies logic that a man who was twice impeached, convicted of 34 felony counts and found liable for sexual assault (just to mention three of Donald Trump’s greatest hits) is a whisker away from winning the presidency. Nor am I saying this because the tight polls are causing Democrats to feel increasingly apoplectic — a situation that surely isn’t good for their mental health.
I’m saying this because the last thing we need is another super-close election. It doesn’t strain credulity to imagine that a close race could lead to a disputed outcome, which could then lead to violence.
If that prospect isn’t dicey enough, consider the possibility of a literal tie in the electoral college of 269-269. The winner would be determined based on which party controls the most state delegations in the House of Representatives, meaning that Trump would very likely emerge victorious.
It’s hard to imagine the toll that process might take on our nation.
It is in everyone’s best interest for the winner — whoever that turns out to be — to receive a decisive victory. But even if you rule out the nightmare scenarios that could be triggered by a close election, our 50-50 nation is symptomatic of a larger problem.
With a few exceptions (such as Barack Obama’s 2008 victory), we have been a divided nation for about a quarter of a century.
We kicked off the 2000s with the Bush v. Gore recount in Florida, which left many Americans feeling disaffected. Next, in 2004 — the only time a Republican has won the popular vote since 1988 — the election came down to Ohio (leading some on the left to advance a vote fraud conspiracy theory).
George W. Bush won a popular vote majority in 2004 by turning out the Republican base, on the theory that there weren’t that many persuadable voters worth persuading. It was a shrewd, if fateful, strategy.
The 2012 election might have ended decisively, but it was like watching a football game that felt close until the very end. Even Mitt Romney didn’t see the end coming.
In 2016, Trump won the presidency by virtue of just 77,744 votes in three states (while losing the popular vote by almost 3 million). And in 2020, Joe Biden won by virtue of a mere 42,844 votes in three states.
The days when Ronald Reagan could win a 49-state landslide, and come away with at least something resembling a mandate, are long gone.
Nowadays, nearly half the country feels perpetually disenfranchised.
A confluence of factors have given us a nation where at least 45 percent of voters on each side are unshakably locked into their respective parties, no matter what happens (as Trump has boasted, he could shoot someone on Fifth Avenue and not lose any voters; he was clearly correct).
How did we get to be so tribal? Political and geographic sorting have conspired to insulate us from making friends with whom we disagree.
The rise of partisan animosity since the 1990s has reduced our willingness to compromise (why would you compromise with evil?) — and has undermined our openness to persuasion or even ticket splitting.
And innovations such as talk radio, cable news, podcasts, YouTube and social media have allowed us to hide in our echo chambers, hardening our tribal identities — while simultaneously radicalizing us by exposing us to some of the worst and most extreme voices from the other side.
Now, you might think that an evenly divided nation is all well and good — that perpetual close competition forces the parties to compete for our votes. But in a two-party system designed for consensus, the opposite is true. The party out of power can assume that they will win the next time, so why bother to improve or change, much less compromise with the party in power? Look no further than Trump’s decision to kill the border bill for evidence.
Conversely, upon winning office, newly elected leaders assume their tenure is fleeting. So they follow a “go big or go home” legislative strategy (see the mistakes Joe Biden made early on in his administration, when he postured as the next FDR or LBJ) — an ambitious conceit that often becomes a self-fulfilling prophecy.
Watching this race end in what looks to be a virtual tie makes me worry that it’s Groundhog Day once again. While the outcome of the 2024 presidential race is hard to predict, it’s a safe bet that it’s going to be close — and this alone makes the coming weeks and months very dangerous.
A close outcome makes it easier for someone to claim the election was stolen. A close outcome makes it more likely there will be political violence. And a close election continues the vicious cycle that we have been stuck in for decades.
Breaking this spell will require one party to eventually emerge as dominant. It’s tighter than a tick, and that’s a problem.
Matt K. Lewis is a columnist, podcaster and author of the books “Too Dumb to Fail” and “Filthy Rich Politicians.”