The victor of November’s US presidential election will lead a nation of over 330 million citizens, yet the outcome is likely to hinge on just tens of thousands of voters, a minuscule segment of the population, in a select few states.
This is due to the fact that only seven out of the 50 states are genuinely competitive this year, while the remainder are solidly Democratic or Republican, based on public opinion surveys.
Among these seven battleground states, Pennsylvania, the most populous, emerges as the most pivotal state that could decide whether Democrat Kamala Harris or Republican Donald Trump becomes the next president.
The strategies of the candidates highlight this situation, as the majority of their advertising expenditures and campaign appearances focus on these seven states that fluctuate between political parties.
In the case of a 269-269 tie, the US House of Representatives will select the winner, with each state’s delegation casting a single vote, a situation that analysts believe would likely favor Donald Trump.
Why isn’t the election determined by the national popular vote?
Unlike elections for other federal positions and statewide offices, the presidential election does not rely entirely on the popular vote.
Instead, it operates under a system known as the Electoral College, whereby the winning candidate in each state, along with Washington, DC, receives that state’s electoral votes, which are primarily based on population.
A candidate must secure a majority of the 538 electoral votes available, specifically 270, which can be accomplished even while losing the overall national vote, as Donald Trump did in his victory in 2016.
In the event of a 269-269 tie, the US House of Representatives chooses the winner, with each state’s delegation casting a single vote, a scenario analysts say would likely favor Donald Trump.
If every state outside of the battlegrounds votes as anticipated, that would result in Vice President Harris acquiring 226 electoral votes and Mr. Trump garnering 219, leaving 93 votes up for contention.
Which states are considered competitive?
On November 5, there are seven states that could swing either way: the Rust Belt trio of Michigan, Pennsylvania, and Wisconsin, and the Sun Belt quartet of Arizona, Georgia, Nevada, and North Carolina.
Michigan, Pennsylvania, and Wisconsin have historically established a “blue wall” for Democratic candidates over the past generation.
However, in 2016, Donald Trump narrowly won all three, contributing to his surprise victory over Democrat Hillary Clinton.
Four years later, Joe Biden captured the presidency by reclaiming Michigan, Wisconsin, and Pennsylvania for Democrats, along with unexpected wins in Georgia and Arizona, states that had traditionally leaned Republican.
How close is this election?
It’s as close as it gets.
As of October 16, according to a New York Times public poll tracker, all seven battleground states were nearly tied.
If Kamala Harris loses Pennsylvania, she would need to win either North Carolina or Georgia to have any hope of victory.
Mr. Trump maintained a slim two-point lead in Arizona, while the other six swing states were all averaging within a point, as shown by the tracker.
The race appears even tighter than in 2020. That year, just a shift of 43,000 votes in three states—less than one-third of a percentage point of all voters nationwide—from Joe Biden to Donald Trump would have sufficed for Mr. Trump to achieve reelection.
Why is Pennsylvania so crucial?
The simplest answer is that the state possesses 19 electoral votes, more than any other battleground.
Pennsylvania is widely regarded as critical to either Ms. Harris’ or Mr. Trump’s chances of securing the White House and is considered the most likely “tipping point” state, the one that could propel a candidate past the necessary 269 electoral votes.
If Donald Trump loses Pennsylvania, he would need to win either Wisconsin or Michigan.
If Ms. Harris loses Pennsylvania, she would need to capture either North Carolina or Georgia, states that have collectively voted Democratic only three times in the past four decades, to have any viable path to victory.
Conversely, if Donald Trump loses Pennsylvania, he would require victories in either Wisconsin or Michigan, which have only supported a Republican candidate once since the 1980s, specifically for Mr. Trump eight years ago.
Both campaigns have prioritized Pennsylvania as the most significant battleground, with Ms. Harris and Mr. Trump dedicating more time there than in any other state.
Through October 7, the campaigns and their affiliates spent $279.3 million on broadcast advertising in Pennsylvania, surpassing Michigan by over $75 million, according to tracking firm AdImpact.
Why is a single district in Nebraska capturing so much attention?
Forty-eight states allocate their electoral votes on a winner-takes-all basis, but two states, Nebraska and Maine, assign one electoral vote to the winning candidate in each congressional district.
In 2020, Joe Biden secured one of Nebraska’s five votes, while Mr. Trump claimed one of Maine’s four votes.
The solitary electoral vote in Nebraska’s 2nd Congressional District, centered around Omaha, is considered competitive, despite independent analysts leaning towards Kamala Harris to win it.
Both parties have invested millions on ads targeting the Omaha market.
That single vote could prove decisive. If Ms. Harris wins Michigan, Pennsylvania, and Wisconsin while Donald Trump takes the other four battlegrounds—an entirely feasible scenario—Nebraska’s 2nd District would determine whether the election ends in a tie or if Ms. Harris emerges victorious.
