Dan Snow's History Hit: "Will This Be America's Closest Election Ever?" - Episode Summary
Introduction In this riveting episode of Dan Snow's History Hit, historian Dan Snow delves into the intricacies of the U.S. presidential electoral system, exploring whether the 2024 election could become the closest in American history. Through a comprehensive analysis of past elections, Snow provides listeners with a deep understanding of how close races have shaped the nation's political landscape.
1. The Current 2024 Election Landscape Timestamp: [00:29]
Dan Snow sets the stage by highlighting the precarious nature of the November 2024 U.S. presidential election. With seven swing states—Alaska, New York, South Dakota, and others—remaining undecided, the race appears to be within a mere two percentage points of the polling margin. This razor-thin gap has led pundits to label it potentially the closest election ever.
Notable Quote:
"With a few days to go and it is a coin toss. There are seven states in the union that will decide who the next President will be."
— Dan Snow [00:29]
2. Understanding "Close" in Elections Timestamp: [03:10]
Snow emphasizes that the term "closest election ever" must be contextualized within the extensive history of U.S. presidential contests, dating back to 1796. With 57 contested elections, several have come exceedingly close, sometimes decided by mere hundreds of votes with profound national and global consequences.
Notable Quote:
"We have a pretty large data set to compare it to. And sure enough, when we do so, we discover some close races. Some really, really close races."
— Dan Snow [03:15]
3. The Electoral College Explained Timestamp: [07:00]
Delving into the mechanics of the Electoral College, Snow explains its origins as a compromise by the framers of the Constitution to balance power between populous and smaller states. He contrasts this system with direct democracies like ancient Athens and modern France, where the popular vote directly determines the winner.
Key Points:
- Senate and House of Representatives: Balancing act between equal representation in the Senate and proportionate representation in the House.
- Electors: Each state appoints electors based on population, who then formally elect the President.
- Historical Context: The compromise accounted for the disenfranchisement of enslaved individuals by counting them as three-fifths of a person, thereby increasing the electoral power of slave-holding states.
Notable Quote:
"The Electoral College [...] is a mechanism for translating raw votes into electoral outcomes."
— Dan Snow [07:00]
4. Historical Precedents of Close Elections
a. The Election of 1876 Timestamp: [15:00]
One of the most contentious and closest elections in U.S. history, the 1876 election between Rutherford B. Hayes and Samuel Tilden, is dissected. With Tilden initially leading in the popular vote and needing just one more electoral vote to secure the presidency, allegations of voter suppression and electoral fraud in southern states led to the Compromise of 1877. This deal ended Reconstruction and effectively ceded southern political power back to white supremacists, profoundly impacting African American rights and the political landscape.
Notable Quote:
"In the election of 1876, 8.5 million votes cast [...] it all came down to 889."
— Dan Snow [15:00]
b. The Election of 1880 Timestamp: [25:35]
Following closely, the 1880 election is highlighted for its razor-thin margins. Grover Cleveland narrowly defeated James Garfield by approximately 1,898 votes nationwide. Despite Cleveland's victory in the popular vote, the Electoral College favored him with a more substantial margin, underscoring the complexities and potential discrepancies inherent in the system.
Notable Quote:
"The popular vote totals of the two main candidates were separated by 1,898 votes. That is 0.1 of a percent, the smallest margin in the national popular vote counts ever recorded."
— Dan Snow [25:35]
c. The Election of 1884 Timestamp: [28:30]
The 1884 election between Grover Cleveland and James Blaine further illustrates the volatility of electoral outcomes. Cleveland's victory hinged on a narrow win in New York by just 1,150 votes out of nearly 1.1 million, emphasizing how pivotal swing states can be in determining the presidency.
Notable Quote:
"The difference between them was around 1,150 votes. So out of 1.1 million votes cast in New York, the Democrats won by 0.09 of a percent."
— Dan Snow [28:30]
d. The Election of 1916 Timestamp: [37:30]
In 1916, Woodrow Wilson's narrow victory over Charles Evans Hughes was decided by a mere 3,420 votes in California. This slim margin secured Wilson's presidency despite a relatively comfortable lead in the Electoral College, demonstrating the critical impact of key swing states.
Notable Quote:
"It all came down to California, which was decisive, and actually the national popular vote was pretty close as well."
— Dan Snow [37:30]
e. The Election of 1960 Timestamp: [45:00]
The iconic 1960 election between John F. Kennedy and Richard Nixon is revisited, questioning the longstanding myth that televised debates swayed the outcome in Kennedy's favor. Snow reveals that the popular vote was incredibly close, with Kennedy winning by only 0.17%, and highlights how narrowly shifting votes in key states could have altered the result.
Notable Quote:
"It was a close result. Just listen to this. It's the election that gave us everyone's favorite US election fact."
— Dan Snow [45:00]
f. The Election of 2000 Timestamp: [50:00]
The 2000 election between George W. Bush and Al Gore is examined as one of the closest and most controversial elections in U.S. history. The Florida recount, ultimately halted by the Supreme Court, decided the presidency by a mere 537 votes in Florida's Electoral College, despite Gore winning the national popular vote by half a million.
Notable Quote:
"Bush was ahead by a margin of 537 votes. That's 0.009% of the total votes cast in Florida."
— Dan Snow [50:00]
5. Implications for the 2024 Election Timestamp: [04:50]
Drawing parallels between historical close elections and the current 2024 race, Snow posits that while the 2024 election is exceptionally tight, it may not surpass historical precedents in terms of closeness. Nevertheless, the episode underscores the significant impact that swing states and the Electoral College will play in determining the outcome.
Notable Quote:
"Will this election be the closest ever? Probably not. Will it be unusually close? Not particularly."
— Dan Snow [04:50]
Conclusion Dan Snow wraps up the episode by reflecting on the suspense and high stakes of close elections. He contemplates the drama unfolding in real-time compared to historical battles, emphasizing the enduring relevance of understanding electoral mechanisms and historical precedents to comprehend and navigate contemporary political landscapes.
Notable Quote:
"Imagine watching that stuff when real things, when actual history is available. What a world."
— Dan Snow [50:46]
Closing Thoughts Throughout the episode, Dan Snow masterfully intertwines historical analysis with contemporary relevance, offering listeners a nuanced perspective on what constitutes a "close" election and how the Electoral College continues to influence presidential outcomes. By revisiting past elections, Snow not only educates but also engages his audience in contemplating the future of American democracy.
Additional Resources For listeners eager to delve deeper into the mechanics of presidential elections and historical close races, Dan Snow recommends subscribing to History Hit for early access, ad-free episodes, and bonus content. Engage with the community and share your thoughts by reaching out via email at ds.hh@historyhit.com.
Subscribe: History Hit Subscription
Note: Advertisements and non-content segments have been excluded from this summary to maintain focus on the substantive discussions presented by Dan Snow.