David Wassel: Dissecting the 2020 election

At first blush, the Democrats prevailed, although with considerable nuance and caveats. Here’s a rundown.

Vice President Joe Biden didn’t win the broad sweep of states that was advertised. But only the 270 Electoral College vote threshold, which he crossed, matters.

Democrats didn’t win expected Senate seats, denying them a majority. Control will be determined by two run-off elections in Georgia.

Predicted House seat pick-ups didn’t occur. A number of Democratic incumbents lost their races, ensuring a reduced majority.

Expected flips for control of state legislatures didn’t materialize. Instead, there were Democratic losses, including in the Pennsylvania House and Senate.

Two of three Democratic row office candidates in Pennsylvania lost their bids for election. This all is possibly due to the end of straight-party voting, giving Democrats a greater opportunity to split ticket, and Republicans who voted for Biden remaining faithful down ballot.

What does this mean, apart from there being no blue wave? Executive orders aside, an obstructionist GOP-controlled Senate will constrain Biden’s ability to enact his agenda. For 30 years this has occurred when Democratic presidents faced Republican majorities, and there’s no reason to expect that to change. However, making an infrastructure bill the central feature of his early agenda might attract bipartisan support, if details could be worked out both between and within parties.

Demands from the progressive wing of Biden’s own party can be anticipated. Regarding itself as a key, but reluctant, component to Biden’s victory, they will expect him to implement policies which he never really embraced. Sniping between progressive and more conservative Democratic members of Congress has commenced. Rep. Conor Lamb, surviving a close election, blamed progressive members of his caucus. Sen. Joe Manchin stated that he won’t vote for the progressive wish list. Rep. Alexandria Ocasio Cortez countered that a weak social media operation and bad candidates caused Democratic losses.

Republican-controlled state legislatures, including in Pennsylvania, will control legislative reapportionment. Even with a favorable map, Democrats in Pennsylvania didn’t pick up three targeted congressional seats and came close to losing three embattled seats. Minor adjustments to these districts could spell disaster for Democrats.

No broad repudiation of President Trump occurred. After a dismal four-year record and being grossly outspent, he showed considerable and unexpected electoral strength. Claims that he couldn’t grow his base aside, Trump did exactly that, receiving 73 million votes. In Pennsylvania, he added at least 400,000 more votes than in 2016. Democratic victories in 2018 were a result of Trump not being on the ballot.

Biden’s margins in swing states and those that he flipped were thin, although unchallengeable. Scenarios where those margins favor the other side, propelling Trump to a second term, are easy to imagine. If Trump had held Arizona, Georgia and Wisconsin, he would have accrued the necessary 270 electoral votes. That’s a 22,502 vote difference, a smaller margin than Clinton’s 2016 loss.

What if Trump had been empathetic over the pandemic, had made the pre-pandemic economy the centerpiece of his message or a potential vaccine had been made public two weeks earlier? One can only surmise.

Lacking evidence, Trump’s legal challenges to the election results have been largely dismissed. Perhaps their purpose is to delay final counts and certification of elector slates in enough states to deny Biden the necessary 270 electoral votes. Republican-controlled state legislatures could then set favorable slates. If no such slates are set, U.S. House state delegations, a majority of which are Republican-controlled, could award him the presidency. Piecing together such a strategy in multiple states would be difficult, but Sen. Lindsey Graham suggested that the Pennsylvania state Legislature do just that, and Trump, desperate and out of other options, shouldn’t be underestimated.

A cornerstone of Biden’s campaign was that of all the Democratic candidates, only he could attract votes in the essential states of Michigan, Minnesota, Pennsylvania and Wisconsin. Given the largely unsuccessful diversions into more marginal states, flipping back these states proved necessary.

Biden’s desire for unity is sincere. His victory speech didn’t demonize or belittle Trump voters, and moving ahead will require reconciliation. It remains to be seen if his most adamant supporters, or his opponents in Congress and those who voted against him, will agree. The roadblocks are immense.

Short term, Trump’s support and Democratic ticket-splitting prove one thing: The presidential contest was determined by whether more voters hated or loved Trump with no effect down ballot. That’s probably how it was always going to be.

Biden’s performance, and that of down-ballot contests, in Allegheny County, is illustrative. Biden made inroads in many suburban municipalities outside of Pittsburgh, but this didn’t filter down. Democrats lost one state Senate and House seat in the county. They also came up short in vulnerable Republican-held state House districts.

Longer term, Trump, although adept at exploiting divisions and grievances, is a symptom of a systemic problem, 55 years of Republican politics and partisanship in general. It should be no surprise if Trump creates a “government in exile,” questioning the legitimacy of the election, cowing elected Republicans, exacerbating divisions by preaching a “stab in the back” conspiracy and preparing a comeback.

Celebrate victory at the top of the ticket, but recognize the down-ballot disaster and implications, and don’t be surprised when things don’t unfold as expected. Most of all, don’t believe that this is necessarily over. As the Chinese curse says, we live in interesting times.

David Wassel is a McKeesport attorney and political consultant.