President Trump rescinded President Biden’s executive order that ensured the inclusion of all residents, regardless of immigration status, in the census count used for apportionment of House seats and Electoral College votes. This reversal reinstates the Trump administration’s attempt to exclude undocumented residents, a move previously blocked by the Supreme Court. The decision potentially paves the way for the creation of gerrymandered districts advantageous to Republicans, building on prior efforts to collect citizenship data at the neighborhood level. The implications of this action on the 2030 census remain to be seen, with ongoing debate surrounding the inclusion of non-citizens in apportionment counts.
Read More
Donald Trump’s 2024 victory, while securing 312 electoral votes, fell short of a claimed “massive mandate,” achieving only 49.8% of the popular vote. His Electoral College win was exceptionally narrow, hinging on razor-thin margins in Wisconsin, Michigan, and Pennsylvania. A shift of fewer than 115,000 votes across these three states would have given the victory to Kamala Harris. This highlights the highly contested nature of the election and undermines Trump’s claims of widespread support.
Read More
The 2024 US presidential election saw high turnout, yet an estimated 90 million eligible Americans did not vote—a number exceeding the votes for either major candidate. Many non-voters cited the Electoral College as rendering their votes insignificant in their respective states. Other reasons included dissatisfaction with both candidates, a perception that neither represented working-class interests, and policy disagreements, particularly regarding the candidates’ stances on issues like Israel and climate change. Finally, some expressed disillusionment with the two-party system and extreme political polarization.
Read More
Despite falling just short of a popular vote majority at 49.97%, President-elect Trump achieved his highest ever percentage in a presidential election, surpassing his previous totals from 2016 and 2020. This narrow margin underscores the nation’s deep political divisions, with the result representing only a marginal shift to the right. While Trump secured a decisive Electoral College victory, Republican gains in Congress were less substantial than anticipated. Lower than expected turnout in several states, coupled with reduced Democratic support for Harris compared to Biden in 2020, contributed to Trump’s improved popular vote showing.
Read More
Despite Republican claims of a “landslide” victory for Donald Trump, his margin of victory was minimal, both in the popular vote (1.6 percentage points) and the electoral college (307 votes, significantly fewer than several previous presidents). Furthermore, the “coattails” effect, where a strong presidential showing boosts the party’s congressional performance, was limited, with Republicans only narrowly securing the Senate and House majorities. This contradicts the narrative of a sweeping mandate for Trump’s agenda, highlighting the disconnect between Republican rhetoric and the actual election results.
Read More
Despite President-elect Trump’s claim of a “powerful mandate” following his electoral college victory, his narrow popular vote margin—near the bottom for American presidents—raises questions about the extent of public support for his agenda. While Republicans cite his electoral success and control of Congress as evidence of a mandate, Democrats argue the results do not justify circumventing established processes, such as Senate confirmation for Cabinet members. Scholars further dispute the very concept of a presidential mandate, highlighting its historical misuse and potential for undermining democratic balance of power. Ultimately, Trump’s ability to enact his ambitious policies hinges on his approach to governing and whether he can build consensus beyond his base.
Read More
The current electoral college system allows for a presidential candidate to win without securing the national popular vote, as evidenced by recent elections. This system disproportionately focuses campaigning efforts on a few swing states, ignoring the concerns of voters elsewhere. A winner-take-all allocation of electoral votes disenfranchises voters in states leaning heavily towards one party. Reforming the system to proportionally allocate electoral votes based on the popular vote within each state would ensure every vote counts and lessen the chance of a popular vote loser winning the presidency. This reform, while potentially maintaining the electoral college, would address many of its current flaws.
Read More
Despite Donald Trump’s claim of an “unprecedented mandate,” his victory was narrow, with a popular vote margin smaller than Hillary Clinton’s 2016 margin and falling short of a majority. His Electoral College win, while significant, was also less substantial than previous victories by Obama and Bush. Furthermore, Republican control of Congress is tenuous, potentially hindering his agenda. Therefore, the assertion of a powerful mandate is unsubstantiated by the election results.
Read More
Trump Won Less Than 50 Percent. Why Is Everyone Calling It a Landslide?
Trump’s victory, while significant, didn’t achieve a majority of the popular vote. This raises the question: why the “landslide” narrative? The perception of a landslide victory seems to stem from several interconnected factors.
One contributing factor is the historical context. A Republican hasn’t won the popular vote in two decades, making Trump’s win, regardless of the margin, a notable event for the party. This rarity inflates the perceived significance of the victory.
Furthermore, the initial election night reporting played a crucial role in shaping public perception. Early vote counts showed a significant lead for Trump, fueled by a comparatively slower count of Democratic votes.… Continue reading
Despite Republican claims of a mandate, President-elect Trump’s victory was narrow, with a popular vote margin of roughly 2.4 million votes—smaller than Hillary Clinton’s margin over Trump in 2016. This close victory, representing less than 50% of the popular vote, contradicts initial perceptions of a landslide. Nevertheless, figures like House Speaker Mike Johnson are leveraging this outcome to justify controversial cabinet picks and push for an agenda they frame as reflecting the popular will. This assertion of a mandate is being used to promote significant changes within government agencies.
Read More
John Q. Hosedrinker 
Matt Underwood