2020 Presidential Election Analysis
In 2016, Donald Trump shocked the nation by winning the Presidential Election. Polls had consistently shown Hillary Clinton leading in key states, leaving many confused and questioning: What went wrong for Clinton? What went right for Trump? Why did the race come down to electoral votes instead of the popular vote? These questions lingered in the minds of political scientists and the American public alike. Fast forward to 2020, and although Joe Biden won the election, the margin was narrower than predicted. Once again, political scientists found themselves asking similar questions. By analyzing the factors that influenced both the 2016 and 2020 elections, we can better understand Joe Biden’s victory and the broader dynamics at play in presidential elections.
2020 was an undeniably challenging year, and the presidential election was no exception. While COVID-19 was a significant factor, it was not the only one. Public opinion, the economy, and the incumbency all played crucial roles. The Electoral College, as always, was a defining feature, emphasizing that presidential elections are often decided by a few key states rather than the national popular vote. Both candidates ran extensive campaigns, but how much did these actually influence the outcome? This year saw record-breaking campaign spending, with the media playing its usual role. Ultimately, however, it was the voters who determined the winner.
Fundamentals were the most significant factors in this election, as they are in every election. Many of my friends at the University anticipated a landslide victory for Biden, likely because they were exposed to a consistent narrative from the media and underestimated the importance of these fundamentals. Public opinion is deeply polarized, and partisan politics have become more entrenched. Political scientists often rely on job approval ratings to predict election outcomes, and Trump’s consistently low approval ratings—falling to 39 percent after his loss—made reelection difficult (Brenan 2020). However, it’s important to note that Trump’s supporters, particularly during the pandemic, were more challenging to survey, which may have skewed poll results. Trump’s appeal to rural voters frustrated with traditional politicians, coupled with voters harboring racial resentment, made the race closer than expected (Cramer Reading). Yet, these attitudes were ultimately outweighed by voters angered by racism and the administration's handling of COVID-19.
The 2016 election marked the beginning of a shift toward identity politics, and this trend continued in 2020, especially after the murders of George Floyd, Breonna Taylor, and other Black Americans. Exit poll data from The New York Times reveals that voters who prioritized racial inequality, pandemic response, or healthcare policy (who overwhelmingly supported Biden) made up 48 percent of the electorate, compared to 46 percent who prioritized the economy or crime and safety (who leaned toward Trump). The economy, typically a significant factor in elections, was less critical in 2020 due to the pandemic. Voters’ views on the economy were divided, with 35 percent citing it as their top issue this year, compared to 52 percent in 2016. Notably, 83 percent of those who prioritized the economy voted for Trump, a sharp contrast to 2016 when 52 percent of economically focused voters supported Clinton. This statistic alone highlights the economic confusion among voters.
The Electoral College, another critical factor, transforms the national election into 50 statewide contests, each with different rules and priorities. Instead of the popular vote deciding the presidency, the outcome often hinges on a few states, and even several counties. The Electoral College disproportionately favors Republicans, who have won the popular vote only once in the past 24 years but have controlled the presidency for 12 of those years. This advantage stems from the overrepresentation of small states, a feature originally designed to protect slave states and oppose women’s suffrage (Amar 2000, Course Reading). In 2020, 16 states were considered swing states, accounting for 45 percent of the voting-eligible population (Mejia and Skelley 2020). Within these, only seven states were decided by a margin of three points or less, representing just 25 percent of eligible voters. This underscores the narrow path Trump had to victory—had he garnered about 300,000 more votes in key states, the outcome could have been different. However, could a better campaign have secured a win for Trump?
The short answer is likely no. While Clinton might have won in 2016 with a better strategy, the margins in her critical battleground states were closer than those Trump faced in 2020. Biden learned from Clinton’s mistakes, staying on the offensive throughout the election rather than relying on favorable polls. His main strategy was to remain visible, which he successfully did. Although many believe that campaigns are crucial, in today’s hyper-partisan environment—where 94 percent of Republicans and Democrats vote for their party’s candidate—campaigns have less impact on swaying voters (The New York Times exit polls). The most effective use of campaign funds is not in changing minds but in mobilizing voters.
Money played a significant role in the 2020 elections, reaching an all-time high. Despite Biden’s pledge not to accept dark money, he still raised an enormous amount. The 2020 election cycle cost $14 billion, with nearly $3 billion spent on the presidential race alone (OpenSecrets 2020). These figures doubled those from 2016, leading to record spending in Senate, House, and presidential races. Although Democrats outspent Republicans in both 2016 and 2020, they did not see overwhelming victories, indicating that money alone does not determine electoral outcomes. Most campaign funds were concentrated in battleground states, with Biden spending $8 million in Pennsylvania in just one week, not including spending by outside groups (Kamisar 2020). The media perpetuates this spending frenzy.
As media consumption diversifies, campaign spending increases due to the growing number of platforms. However, media’s influence on elections is limited, especially given the deep distrust many Americans, particularly Republicans, have toward the media. Republicans distrust over 20 of the 30 major news sources, while Democrats distrust eight (Jurkowitz et al 2020, Course Reading). Media outlets, driven by profits and objectivity, often cater to specific audiences, focusing on sensational stories to boost ratings. This “horse race” coverage emphasizes polls, which are merely snapshots and have proven inaccurate, especially in 2020 due to COVID-19. Polls were skewed because many working-class voters, typically Democrats, were home and more likely to respond, resulting in a distorted picture (Silver 2020). Media’s focus on profitability means they will air anything about a candidate, regardless of its accuracy. For example, the 2016 recording of Trump speaking inappropriately about women initially caused a dip in his support, but voters ultimately rallied back. Negative ads, which have long been a campaign staple, are often more informative and cite more sources than positive ads, but in today’s world, where misinformation is rampant, these ads may contribute to the spread of falsehoods and deepen political polarization (Geer 2002, Course Reading). One example is the repeated mispronunciation of Kamala Harris’s name by media sources and ads, which was not corrected and led to a trend of disrespect from Republicans toward the Vice-Presidential candidate (Janes 2020).
Voters were the final and most crucial factor in this election, showing up in unprecedented numbers. Black voters were instrumental in Biden’s victories in states like Georgia, Michigan, and Wisconsin, voting for him at rates around 87 percent. Women, who make up 53 percent of the electorate, supported Biden at 57 percent, while young voters, who turned out in higher numbers than usual, voted for Biden at 60 percent, despite often finding voting inconvenient (Lecture). Voter turnout in 2020 was the highest in a decade, with 41 states breaking records. Anthony Downs theorized that people vote when the benefits outweigh the costs, and clearly, Biden voters believed that to be true. First-time voters made up 14 percent of the electorate, compared to 10 percent in 2016, and they overwhelmingly supported Biden at 64 percent. However, voter turnout was not universally high—some groups did not vote. There is evidence that Trump’s rhetoric about mail-in voting being fraudulent suppressed his own vote in Georgia, where approximately 25,000 Republican primary voters did not vote in the general election, likely due to these concerns (Niquette and Newkirk 2020).
In conclusion, a thorough analysis of the factors at play in 2020 reveals the path to Joe Biden’s victory. The fundamentals, particularly public opinion and the pandemic, were decisive, while the Electoral College presented challenges. Biden’s significant fundraising advantage and well-executed campaign strategy, focusing on visibility and voter mobilization, were critical but not overwhelmingly decisive. The media played its usual role, but its influence on voter behavior was limited. Ultimately, it was the record voter turnout, driven by a highly engaged electorate, that secured Biden’s win.
Works Cited
“2020 Presidential Race.” OpenSecrets. OpenSecrets, 2020. https://www.opensecrets.org/2020-presidential-race.
“National Exit Polls: How Different Groups Voted.” The New York Times. The New York Times, November 3, 2020. https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2020/11/03/us/elections/exit-polls-president.html?action=click.
Alter, Charlotte. “Joe Biden Wins 2020 Presidential Election: How He Did It.” Time. Time, November 7, 2020. https://time.com/5907674/joe-biden-wins-2020-election/.
Brenan, Megan. “Public's Mood Sours -- 16 percent Satisfied, 39 percent Approve of Trump.” Gallup.com. Gallup, December 02, 2020. https://news.gallup.com/poll/328106/public-mood-sours-satisfied-approve-trump.aspx.
Janes, Chelsea. “Mispronouncing 'Kamala': Accident or Message?” The Washington Post. WP Company, October 25, 2020. https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/mispronouncing-kamala-accident-or-message/2020/10/23/5927f120-13b3-11eb-ad6f-36c93e6e94fb_story.html.
Kamisar, Ben. “Meet the Press Blog: Latest News, Analysis and Data Driving the Political Discussion.” NBCNews.com. NBCUniversal News Group, April 15, 2020. https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/meet-the-press/blog/meet-press-blog-latest-news-analysis-data-driving-political-discussion-n988541/ncrd1244916.
Lewis, Justin. “Constructing Public Opinion: How Politicians and the Media Misrepresent the Public.” Accessed December 01, 2020. https://www.csub.edu/~mault/publicopinion.htm.
Mejia, Elena, and Geoffrey Skelley. “How The 2020 Election Changed The Electoral Map.” FiveThirtyEight. FiveThirtyEight, December 8, 2020. https://projects.fivethirtyeight.com/2020-swing-states/.
Niquette, Mark, and Margaret Newkirk. “Trump Attacks on Voting by Mail Cost Him in Georgia, GOP Official Says.” Bloomberg.com. Bloomberg, November 17, 2020. https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2020-11-17/trump-attacks-on-vote-cost-him-in-georgia-gop-official-says.
Ruthhart, Bill, and Jonathon Berlin. “Campaign Trail Tracker: Where Trump, Biden and Their Running Mates Have Traveled in Presidential Race's Final Weeks.” chicagotribune.com. Chicago Tribune, November 5, 2020. https://www.chicagotribune.com/politics/ct-viz-presidential-campaign-trail-tracker-20200917-edspdit2incbfnopchjaelp3uu-htmlstory.html.
Sides, John, Daron R. Shaw, Matthew Grossmann, and Keena Lipsitz. Campaigns and Elections: Rules, Reality, Strategy, Choice. New York, NY: W.W. Norton and Company, 2019.
Sides, John, Michael Tesler, and Lynn Vavreck. Identity Crisis the 2016 Presidential Campaign and the Battle for the Meaning of America. Princeton: Princeton University Press, 2019.
Silver, Caleb. “2020 Election: Jobs, Trade, and the Economy Explained.” Investopedia. Investopedia, December 01, 2020. https://www.investopedia.com/democratic-debate-policy-cheat-sheet-4691340.
Silver, Nate. “Do You Buy That ... COVID-19 Was A Factor In Polls Underestimating Republican Turnout?” FiveThirtyEight. FiveThirtyEight, November 23, 2020. https://fivethirtyeight.com/videos/do-you-buy-that-covid-19-was-a-factor-in-polls-underestimating-republican-turnout/.