Vice President Kamala Harris faces a pivotal moment in American politics. Her potential victory in the popular vote could set a historic record for Democrats.
Yet, this achievement highlights a deeper issue within the U.S. electoral system, where popular support doesn’t always equate to governing power.
Historic Popular Vote Success
If Vice President Kamala Harris secures the popular vote in November, Democrats would achieve a victory unparalleled since the inception of the modern party system nearly 200 years ago. Winning the popular vote has become a hallmark of Democratic success, with the party having secured it in seven of the last eight presidential elections. Despite this, their triumphs have not consistently translated into governing power.
Historically, parties winning such records, like Republicans in the Theodore Roosevelt era, also controlled Congress and influenced national policies profoundly. During Franklin D. Roosevelt’s years, Democrats maintained similar dominance. Yet, modern Democrats face a stark contrast; winning the popular vote has rarely resulted in unified governance, with the party losing the Electoral College twice despite more votes.
Challenges in Gaining Governing Power
Despite potential popular vote victories, today’s Democrats are challenged by the structure of the Electoral College and Congressional seats, making it difficult to convert this success into legislative power. Unlike their historical counterparts, Democrats have struggled to maintain control of Congress, even when they control the White House. This struggle is evident when compared to the early 20th-century Republicans and mid-20th-century Democrats who advanced their agendas effectively with unified government control.
The disparity in governing power becomes apparent when considering Supreme Court appointments. Modern Democrats have had limited influence over the Court, appointing fewer justices compared to historical precedence. Paul Pierson, a political scientist, commented on this imbalance, highlighting that a long record of popular vote victories has not aligned with actual governing power.
Electoral College vs. Popular Vote
The divergence between the popular vote and the Electoral College results has become more frequent in recent years. Since 1992, Democrats have won the popular vote seven times but failed to secure the White House twice. Such a scenario was rare historically and underscores the challenges of the Electoral College in translating popular support into presidential office.
The Democrats’ struggle is highlighted by the comparison to historical Republican and Democratic dominance, where popular vote victories consistently aligned with Electoral College wins. The current system does not favour Democrats, whose votes are concentrated in fewer states, while Republicans benefit from their broader distribution.
Impact of Senate and Congressional Dynamics
Democrats face additional hurdles with Senate dynamics, where smaller states hold disproportionate sway despite representing a smaller portion of the national population. This structural imbalance favours Republicans, who have often maintained Senate control without representing a majority of the populace. The Democratic challenge is compounded by Republican use of the filibuster, which hinders legislative progress.
House dynamics present less of an imbalance, though Republicans have benefited from gerrymandering and vote distribution that exceeds their national vote share. While Democrats win the popular vote, these other factors critically impede their ability to govern effectively and implement their agenda, as seen in their fewer years of unified government control compared to historical precedents.
Strategic Adjustments and Party Responses
Despite repeatedly securing the popular vote, Democrats have shown concern about their inability to win the Electoral College and consolidate Senate control. This has led to internal debates on the need for strategic adjustments to become competitive in more regions.
The GOP, conversely, has shown little interest in altering its strategy, benefiting from the electoral system’s structure. Republican pollster Patrick Ruffini notes that while repeating popular vote losses may symbolically affect the party, the Electoral College’s configuration remains optimised for narrow, non-majority victories.
Implications of a Potential Harris Victory
A Harris popular vote win would be a significant milestone, marking another chapter in the Democrats’ record streak. However, the implications of such a victory raise questions about the structure of American democracy. If Harris wins but is again thwarted by Electoral College results, it signals a profound disconnect between popular sentiment and political power, challenging the concept of majority rule.
Historically, achieving a long series of popular vote victories has paved the way for greater governmental control and policy implementation. The possibility of failing to convert these victories into electoral wins prompts a reevaluation of how democratic principles are applied in U.S. elections.
As Harris stands on the brink of making history with a popular vote victory, the challenges of translating this success into effective governance remain looming.
The situation underscores the intricacies of American democracy, where winning the popular vote may not guarantee a path to implementing policy changes.
