Here’s the scary way Trump could win without the electoral or popular vote
In
a ‘contingent election’, he could lose the popular vote, electoral
college and all his legal cases and still end up the legal US president
Mon 18 Sep 2023
Last modified on Mon 18 Sep 2023 10.47 EDT
In
an ordinary time, under ordinary political conditions, the specter of
another Trump presidency would be strictly the stuff of nightmares. The
former president is facing 40 criminal charges for his mishandling of
classified documents, and will have to interrupt his campaign next
summer to defend himself in court. Those charges are apart from the 34
felony counts of falsifying business records he faces in New York. And
then there’s the rape defamation lawsuit, which will begin in January,
and which he will almost certainly lose.
The American people, however, can be awfully forgiving. In current polling, Joe Biden and Donald Trump
are tied nationally; no Republican nominee has emerged to challenge
Trump. But, as we have been learning pretty much continuously since
2000, the will of the majority of the American people no longer matters
all that much in who is running their country.
The
abstruse and elaborate mechanisms of the US constitution relating to
elections, which used to be matters for historical curiosity, have
become more and more relevant every year. In 2024, there is very much a
way for Donald Trump to lose the popular vote, lose the electoral
college, lose all his legal cases and still end up president of the
United States in an entirely legal manner. It’s called a contingent
election.
A contingent election is the process
put in place to deal with the eventuality in which no presidential
candidate reaches the threshold of 270 votes in the electoral college.
In the early days of the American republic, when the duopoly of the
two-party system was neither desired nor expected, this process was
essential.
There have been two contingent
elections in US history. The first was in 1825. The year before, Andrew
Jackson, the man from the $20 bill, had won the plurality of votes and
the plurality of electoral college votes as well, but after extensive,
elaborate negotiations, John Quincy Adams took the presidency mostly by
offering Henry Clay, who had come third in the election, secretary of
state. Jackson, though shocked, conceded gracefully. He knew his time
would come. His supporters used the taint of Adams’s “corrupt bargain”
with Clay to ensure Jackson’s victory in 1828.
Jackson
was a patriot. He put the country’s interests ahead of his own, to
preserve the young republic. The United States is older now, and the
notion of leaders who would put the interests of the country ahead of
themselves and their party is archaic. The 2022 midterms were
unprecedented in terms of how many election-deniers were appointed to
serious office.
“Many 2020 election deniers and
skeptics ran for office in the 2022 midterm elections, with 229
candidates winning their elections,” a University of California report
found. “A total of 40 states elected a 2020 election denier or skeptic
to various positions, from governor to secretary of state to attorney
general to congress.”
The American people are
already disinclined to believe in the legitimacy of any election that
doesn’t conform to their own desired outcome anymore, left or right. In
2016, at the inauguration of Donald Trump, the crowds chanted “not my
president”. As of August, the percentage of Republicans who think that 2020 was stolen is near 70%.
So
the possibility of the electoral college releasing a confusing result,
or being unable to certify a satisfying result by two months after the
election, is quite real. The electoral college, even at its best, is an
arcane system, unworthy of a 21st-century country. Maine and Nebraska
don’t necessarily have every elector go to the party that won the state
as a whole. There have been, up to 2020, 165 faithless electors in
American history – electors who didn’t vote for the candidate they had
pledged to vote for.
In 1836, Virginia
faithless electors forced a contingent election for vice-president. If
the 270 marker has not been reached by 6 January, the contingent
election takes place automatically. And the contingent election isn’t
decided by the popular votes or the number of electoral college votes.
Each state delegation in the House of Representatives is given a single
vote for president. Each state delegation in the Senate is given a
single vote for vice-president.
The basic
unfairness of this process is obvious: California with its 52
representatives, and Texas with its 38 representatives, would have the
same say in determining the presidency as Wyoming and Vermont, which
have one apiece. State delegations in the House would favor Republicans
as a matter of course. In the struggle for congressional delegates,
Republicans would have 19 safe house delegations and the Democrats would
have 14, as it stands, with more states leaning Republican than Democrat.
All
that would be required, from a technical, legal standpoint, is for
enough electoral college votes to be uncounted or uncertified for the
contingent election to take place, virtually guaranteeing a Republican
victory and hence a Trump presidency. It would be entirely legal and
constitutional. It just wouldn’t be recognizably democratic to anyone.
Remember that autocracies have elections. It doesn’t matter who votes.
It matters who counts.
In 2021, I published a
book about American political decline, The Next Civil War, which
examined the structural crises underlying the collapse of the American
political order, but I didn’t include a chapter on the electoral system
because it seemed too far-fetched, the stuff of historical figments.
Those deep structural crises are now, rapidly, overtaking the electoral
system itself. A contingent election would be, in effect, the last
election, which is the title of the new book
I co-wrote with Andrew Yang about exactly that possibility. The rot is
advancing faster than anybody could have imagined. Figments from history
are now hints to the future.
Polls aren’t
worth much at the best of times but this year they are particularly
meaningless. Democrats have taken comfort from a recent New York
Times/Siena College poll that showed how the Republican advantage in the
electoral college, which was 2.9% in 2016, rising to 3.8% in 2020, has
diminished to less than a single percent, according to the most recent
data. None of it matters.
The real danger of
2024 isn’t even the possibility of a Trump presidency. It’s that the
electoral system, in its arcane decrepitude, will produce an outcome
that won’t be credible to anybody. The danger of 2024 is that it will be
the last election.