When it’s “too close to call”

I was talking recently with a friend who was thinking about hosting a watch party on election night. But, with a sigh of frustration, he said maybe he wouldn’t because we likely would not know the results that night anyway. He was wearied by the prospect of yet another vote that would be, in the dreaded words of our time, “too close to call.”

My friend is too young to remember the landslide victories Ronald Reagan enjoyed over Jimmy Carter in 1980 and Walter Mondale in 1984. It would be easy to pine for the days when presidential elections were less contentious and when people were not afraid of violence, disorder, and chaos erupting after a long and bitter campaign season.

In 1988, George H.W. Bush defeated Michael Dukakis—and did so convincingly. The 1992 election was deeply combative, especially with the entrance of third-party candidate Ross Perot relatively late in the campaign. But even then, Bill Clinton won decisively, with an electoral victory of 370 to 168 over the elder Bush. The election of 1996 was the last contest that we might consider a resounding win, if not a landslide: 379 electoral votes went to Clinton and 159 to Bob Dole.

If we take American history more broadly, we find few elections that proceeded serenely. Entire books have been written describing the famously rancorous 1800 election, like John Ferling’s Adams vs. Jefferson: The Tumultuous Election of 1800. John Adams, bitter over his defeat, refused to attend Thomas Jefferson’s inauguration (much like Donald Trump not going to Joe Biden’s swearing-in ceremony in 2021), leaving the Executive Mansion in the inky pre-dawn hours of Inauguration Day.

Everyone knows how bitter the 1860 election was, in which the Democratic Party split in two and the Republican Party did not even distribute ballots in 10 Southern states, knowing that Abraham Lincoln could afford to write off the South.

Don’t forget the 1876 election, in which Republican Rutherford B. Hayes defeated Democrat Samuel Tilden by one electoral vote but lost the popular vote. Hayes won the election only after Democrats insisted that the military occupation of South Carolina and Louisiana come to an end—the famous Compromise of 1877. And how could we forget the 1960 (John F. Kennedy over Richard Nixon) and 2000 (George W. Bush over Al Gore) elections? These two represent the most recent examples of razor-thin victories.

Many elections have seen more than two serious candidates for president. There have been eight elections in which three or more candidates received at least 10 percent of the popular vote. On two occasions, in 1800 and 1824, the House of Representatives had to step in and select the winner. Five electoral contests saw the winning candidate emerge with the majority of electoral votes but losing the popular vote. One presidential election sparked a civil war in 1860, and another very nearly did in 1876.

An overlooked feature of presidential elections is the percentage of eligible voters who actually vote. Except on rare occasions when voter turnout was less than 50 percent, Americans have historically been extremely enthusiastic about casting their ballots for the commander in chief. When voters are fired up, the contests are hot-blooded, and most elections have found a large majority of eligible voters show up to their polling places. Only two presidential contests since 1828 saw voter turnout fall below 50 percent, in 1920 and 1924, and in those cases, just barely. By contrast, voter turnout exceeded 60 percent in 26 elections, and 15 elections drew more than 70 percent of eligible voters. In the most recent presidential election of 2020, there was a 65.9 percent turnout of the electorate. That was the highest percentage since 1900. When Clinton defeated Dole in 1996, voter turnout was 51.7 percent, the lowest since 1924.

On Nov. 5, we may very well experience the disappointment of not knowing who will occupy the White House for the next four years before we call it a night and go to bed. By all accounts, it will be a close race. About half the people who vote will be frustrated, angry, and generally long-faced when the final results are tallied. We should act like adults on our social media accounts and be watchful for our safety in the days and weeks ahead.

But this is normal for us. The 2024 election is not Armageddon. Democracy is not at stake. Our electoral system has been tried and tested, and it is supple and resilient. Whatever happens on Election Day and the days or weeks or months that follow, we can be confident that the losing party will get another shot in 2028. Politics is not ultimate. God is ultimate. Let us live carefully under His gaze.