In a 269-269 tie, the Constitution mandates that the decision is made by the state delegations in the U.S. House of Representatives. That is, each state delegation would have a single vote. As things currently stand, despite the large Democratic majority, Republicans control 26 state delegations, Democrats 23, one, Pennsylvania, is tied. And Michigan is technically tied, but former-Republican anti-Donald Trump independent Rep. Justin Amash likely kicks the state to the Democrats. (We should root for Amash to win reelection. Also, we should be extra motivated to win single-district House races in Alaska and Montana. Heck, we should be motivated to win all House races...)
Anyway, while there are a lot of potential 269-269 combinations, I’m making a big assumption: the only states that are competitive are Arizona, Florida, Georgia, Michigan, North Carolina, Pennsylvania, and Wisconsin. (Along with the swing single-district electoral votes in Maine and Nebraska, the only two states who split up their votes that way.)
It doesn’t mean that other states might not flip, just that if Joe Biden loses Colorado, Minnesota, New Hampshire, or Nevada, the election is already lost. Those are all second- or third-tier opportunities for Republicans, meaning that there’s little chance of Trump winning them while, say, losing North Carolina or Florida.
Similarly, if Biden wins Iowa, Ohio, (or even Texas), he’s already en route to a massive Electoral College landslide. No way he wins those states while losing the election.
Therefore, with those rules in place, the most likely 269-269 scenarios are as follow:
That Maine rural district will be tough for Democrats to hold. Trump won it easily in 2016, and its demographics play to the GOP’s strengths. The odds of losing Pennsylvania while winning Arizona, Michigan and Wisconsin is, however, a bit far-fetched.
If we do hold that Maine rural electoral vote, however, this map is a very realistic possibility:
Of the seven key battlegrounds, the two that lean most Democratic are Michigan and Pennsylvania, for sure. So losing Arizona, Florida, Georgia, North Carolina, and Wisconsin could very well happen. The most unrealistic part of this scenario is holding the Maine rural electoral vote.
If we do hold it, here’s another possibility:
Like the first scenario, it’s hard to imagine winning Arizona while losing Michigan and Pennsylvania. But given that all these states will be within a couple of points from one another, any number of factors (amplified by COVID-19 unknowns) could make such a map a reality.
Of the seven battlegrounds, Georgia is the least likely to flip blue. But again, with all seven states balanced so precariously, winning Georgia (and Arizona) while losing Michigan and Pennsylvania is within the realm of possibility. I’d still say it would be quite unlikely.
In any case, that’s four realistic 269-269 maps. What does that mean? It means that we can’t ignore that single electoral vote in Nebraska.
Based around Omaha, Barack Obama actually won the district in 2008, 49.97% to 48.75%. In 2012, after the lines were tweaked during reapportionment, Mitt Romney won it 52.85% to 45.70%. Keep in mind that Obama also ran several points below his 2008 numbers, all around the country. So is it really that competitive? Well, in 2018, with little outside investment by liberal groups, Republicans barely held on to that district 51-49.
The entire district is in Douglas County (Omaha) and the suburbs of western Sarpy County.
| 2018 House, Nebraska 2nd District |
bacon (r) |
Eastman (D) |
| Douglas County (83% OF DISTRICT) |
46 |
50 |
| Sarpy County (17% OF DISTRICT) |
63 |
37 |
Let’s see how that compares to 2016 results:
Unlike other parts of the country, Democrats didn’t make gains in suburban Omaha. The House margins remained roughly the same (a Libertarian candidate took votes in 2016, but none was on the ballot in 2018). So to win this district and take its electoral vote, Biden will have to drive more turnout in Douglas County, and make inroads in the suburbs. Tough? Sure, but doable. Look at voter performance:
| % registered voters voting, 2018 |
|
| Douglas County (83%) |
58 |
| Sarpy County (17%) |
60 |
| % registered voters voting, 2016 |
|
| Douglas County (83%) |
70 |
| Sarpy County (17%) |
74 |
In Douglas County, in 2016, 76% of registered Republicans voted, while just 70% of registered Democrats did the same. In 2018, once again, registered Republicans outvoted Democrats in the county, 63% to 61%. That’s 50,000 votes that Democrats left on the table, in an election we lost by 5,000 votes.
Trump won the district by around 9,000 votes in 2016, with 40,000 Democrats in Douglas Country staying home.
I couldn’t find partisan turnout in Sarpy County, but as is usually the case, turnout exceeded that of urban Douglas. Sure, that is frustrating, given our ages-old problem in turnout with our core demographics—Sarpy is 89% white, Douglas is 76% white. That said, it does mean that Democrats have more room to grow—if they can turn out their core demographics, there are enough Democrats in the district to both win that House race this year, and deliver its electoral vote to Joe Biden.
There is no reason to not contest this district, and there is every reason to fight for it like hell. Hopefully, Biden wins, and does so with a nice unambiguous cushion. But we can’t assume that going into the election, and we have to make sure that we fight for every single winnable electoral vote.
Comments are closed on this story.