The Prospect of a Tie in the Upcoming Election

As the election draws near, Kamala Harris and Donald Trump are locked in a fierce battle, with every vote counting significantly towards the ultimate outcome. While the likelihood of a tie remains remote, it is not entirely out of the question, given the complex workings of the US Electoral College. This system employs a winner-takes-all approach that determines which candidate will ascend to the presidency.

The Electoral College consists of 538 votes allocated among the fifty states and the District of Columbia. To secure the presidency, a candidate must attain a majority—currently set at 270 electoral votes. However, a scenario in which both Harris and Trump each receive 269 electoral votes, resulting in a deadlock, is theoretically possible.

Such stalemates have occurred in US history, specifically in the elections of 1800 and 1824.

What Historical Ties Reveal About the Electoral Process

During the election of 1800, Thomas Jefferson’s Democratic-Republicans triumphed over the sitting Federalist President John Adams. Back then, presidential candidates had a running mate from a different state, a practice that bears resemblance to the modern arrangement of vice presidential candidates. Electors were required to cast two votes each: the candidate with the most votes would assume the presidency, while the runner-up would become vice president.

However, the Democratic-Republicans struggled with coordination, leading to a situation where Jefferson, their presidential nominee, ended up with the same number of votes as his running mate, Aaron Burr. This unprecedented tie prompted the House of Representatives to step in and decide the election through a one-state, one-vote mechanism after a prolonged deadlock that nearly escalated into military conflict, as noted by Sanford Levinson, a legal scholar at the University of Texas.

To address such issues, the 12th Amendment was introduced, which continues to govern presidential elections. It stipulates that electors must clearly distinguish between their votes for president and vice president, thereby minimizing the chance of ties arising from candidates hailing from the same political party.

However, the risk of a scenario where no candidate secures a majority remains. This occurred in 1824, where Andrew Jackson garnered 99 electoral votes, John Quincy Adams received 84, William Crawford had 41, and Henry Clay obtained 37. All candidates belonged to the same Democratic-Republican party, which had fractured into various regional factions.

Understanding the Contingent Election Process

The 12th Amendment outlines the protocol for such situations, mandating that the House of Representatives must select the president from the top three candidates based on electoral votes. Votes are cast by state, with each state having a single vote and a simple majority required to elect the president.

• Interestingly, this means that Wyoming, the smallest state with a population under 600,000, wields the same electoral power as California, which boasts nearly 40 million residents. Wyoming has only three electoral votes while California has 54.

Moreover, the outcome of the presidential election would hinge on the composition of the House of Representatives, which is concurrently elected alongside the president.

Assessing the Likelihood of a Tie

Although a tie may seem improbable, it remains a scenario worth considering, as outlined by the website 270toWin. One potential outcome could see Trump winning Pennsylvania and Georgia, while Harris claims victories in Wisconsin, Michigan, Arizona, Nevada, and one electoral vote in Nebraska—one of the few states that divides its electoral votes.

Another, albeit less likely, scenario might involve Harris winning all the states that Biden previously secured, plus North Carolina, which current polling suggests may lean Republican. If Trump were then to reclaim Michigan, Pennsylvania, Wisconsin, and also win Nevada for the first time, the result could culminate in a 269-269 tie.

This would trigger a “contingent election,” where the House of Representatives would be tasked with electing the president for the first time in two centuries, requiring a simple majority of 26 state votes.

Given the current polarization of the country, newly elected members of Congress would find themselves under immense pressure, often needing to choose between supporting their party’s candidate or the one who garnered the most popular votes in their state (notably, there is no obligation for state delegations to adhere to the results of their state’s vote).

This process would likely unfold on January 6, following Congress’s determination that no candidate has achieved a majority, as analyzed by the Congressional Research Service.

Even more remarkably, this tie scenario could lead to a situation where a Republican president coexists with a Democratic vice president, or vice versa. According to the 12th Amendment, in the event that no candidate secures a majority, the Senate selects the vice president from the top two candidates based on electoral votes, with each senator casting a single vote (the US Senate comprises 100 members, with two senators elected from each state).

Thus, if a president is not chosen by Inauguration Day, January 20, the newly elected vice president would assume the role of acting president. This is a scenario that remains largely unfathomable to many in the United States today.