The Associated Press published the election results. Here are the details, plus some calculations I did to see by what margins Biden won battleground states.
- Very clear popular vote (plurality) for the presidency: 75,215,431M (50.6%) for Biden, 70,812,515M (47.7%) for Trump. Difference: 4,402,916 votes out of 146M. The count is not finished and the recounts will need to be taken into consideration. I am quoting here the results given by the AP at 10:00 am PST.
- Translation of these results in electoral college slices: 290 voters for Biden, 214 for Trump. The total is 538, the absolute majority 270.
- For battleground states, the figures are:
States Electoral college Margin (Biden) total votes Comment Michigan 16 146 123 5.4M clear Wisconsin 10 20 540 3.24M narrow Georgia 16 10 195 4.9M narrow Arizona 11 18 610 3.2M narrow Pennsylvania 20 41 223 6,6M narrow - Florida, Texas, South Carolina, Iowa, were clearly for Trump. Remember that Biden’s margins in disputed states are much larger than Trump’s in 2016.
- For the Senate, no democratic blue tsunami but a nail biter: 46 Democrats, 2 independents (who will have a lot of power, practically), two seats in Georgia that will be disputed in January, against 50 Republicans (including 2 who are in the process of being confirmed in North Carolina and Alaska). Even if two Democrats are elected in Georgia, no major decision can be made by majority without calling for a vote by the vice-president. Tensions will be very strong as soon as the new government is put in place.
Results, from my point of view: the constitutional checks and balances of the electoral college and the senate continue to play their basic, anti-democratic role, seventy-five years after the second world war. This role is to protect the institutions of the republic but also to ensure that the accumulation of all created wealth goes to a narrowly defined minority — certainly capable and merit-driven but including many who inherit culture and power—, rather than to the whole society. The existence of the electoral college and the choice of two senators per state — be it Alaska (pop .: 731,000) or California (pop .: 39.5M) — are awful brakes on democratic decision-making. Nothing solid can be done without the Senate, for example, when more than 40M citizens are not represented there. This is in addition to the over-representation of the conservative right in a majority of states (governors, local senates, and chambers of deputies). This over-representation is the result of political divisions that the Republican Party has encouraged since at least Nixon, say the 1970s. Cultural and moral war (religion and abortion), as well as immigration and latent racism, have served as a cover for anti-social programs that are much more costly for society and eventually for those who vote on the right: lower taxes on profits and increased inequalities, very conservative internal and foreign security policy, budgetary restrictions aimed at destroying social security (pensions) and Medicare / Medicaid, impossibility of setting up a universal health program.
Given the structure of the American republic and the economic, social, cultural, and moral divisions that exist, what can Biden, the Democratic House, and a divided Senate do?
Let’s think of the possibilities, let’s dream. Fortunately, certain elements of the economy are favorable. Public treasuries can borrow huge sums at very low cost. At least that’s what we’re told. So Biden may well be able to fund both the jobless created by the pandemic and his climate and job creation program. Perhaps some of the GOP representatives would join him in this. There may also be a real effort on labor laws (maternity or paternity leave, sick leave, and most importantly, a decent minimum wage): I very much doubt it, however, when we see that the deceptive ideology of the “independent contractor” continues to wreak havoc in California (I am thinking of Uber and Proposition 22, which passed easily). What about a universal health program, or at least one with a public option? Perhaps the loss of insurance due to the pandemic will make many rethink their opposition to Medicare for all. Further: can one have more regulation of deposit banks and big investment banks? I don’t believe it will happen either, although there certainly might be one or more study committees … Next, eliminate the taxation law passed in 2017 and so disadvantageous in the long run to the vast majority of Americans? I don’t think it can even be seriously discussed, because the opposition will be too strong. As for foreign policy, there are lots of positive: support of NATO, reintegration into the World Health Organization, rejoining the Paris climate accord, perhaps also the resumption of negotiations on the Pacific treaty (strategy of “Containment” of China, but too late perhaps? The horse bolted out of the barn…). As for Iran, let’s hope Biden will be loyal to Obama’s plan and will work with Europeans, Russia, and China, on reintegrating Iran in the global economy. The opposition of Israel’s present government and the two parties will be very strong, however. Biden himself felt compelled to approve of the “treaties” made between the emirates and Israel, and didn’t say a word, as far as I know, about the complete lack of quid pro quo …