Who is winning the election: Trump leads the presidential race with 198 delegates against 109 for Kamala Harris

The 2024 U.S. presidential election between former President Donald Trump and current Vice President Kamala Harris has turned into one of the most closely watched races in recent history. As of the latest count, Trump has secured 198 electoral votes, while Harris has earned 109. With both candidates vying for the 270 votes needed to claim victory, the final outcome remains uncertain due to several crucial swing states that are still tallying votes.

This election cycle has been marked by heightened polarization, with much of the attention focused on key “battleground” or “swing” states. These are states where voter preferences have varied in recent elections, making them pivotal to either candidate’s success. Given the Electoral College structure, which grants each state a set number of delegates based on its population, these swing states have the power to determine the ultimate outcome.

Key battleground states in 2024: The role of highly contested states

In a race where every vote counts, states like Pennsylvania, Michigan, Wisconsin, Arizona, Georgia, Nevada, and North Carolina have become the focus of national attention. These states carry a significant number of electoral votes and have traditionally been highly contested between the two major parties. Here’s an overview of the situation in these critical states and how they could impact the race:

• Pennsylvania: With 20 electoral votes, Pennsylvania has historically been a tipping point in past elections. Both parties have campaigned vigorously here, given its swing potential.
• Michigan and Wisconsin: These Rust Belt states, with 15 and 10 electoral votes respectively, have emerged as essential battlegrounds. Each played a decisive role in recent elections, where every vote counted.
• Arizona and Georgia: Located in the Sun Belt, Arizona and Georgia offer 11 and 16 electoral votes. They have shown a shift towards the Democrats in recent years, making them critical targets for both campaigns.
• Nevada and North Carolina: With 6 and 15 electoral votes, Nevada and North Carolina also remain influential. The outcomes in these states could add substantial weight to the electoral count of the winning candidate.

Collectively, these battleground states hold a total of 93 electoral votes, making them essential for either candidate to cross the 270-vote threshold. With many ballots yet to be counted, each shift in these states is watched closely, as a change in one or more of them could dramatically alter the dynamics of the race.

Campaign strategies and tactics in critical regions

To secure victory, both candidates have honed their campaigns to appeal to voters in these swing states. The strategies they have adopted aim to resonate with the local electorate, taking into account each state’s unique political landscape. Here are some of the main tactics each candidate has used to sway undecided voters:

1. Focus on economic and social issues: In states like Michigan and Wisconsin, where local economic issues and labor concerns are prominent, Trump has promoted a message centered on bolstering industry and creating jobs.
2. Commitment to healthcare and civil rights: Harris, on the other hand, has focused on themes of public health and social inclusion in states like Georgia and Nevada, aiming to win support from minority and younger voters.
3. Intensive use of social media: Both candidates have utilized social media to reach their supporters. Through daily posts and targeted ads, they can communicate directly with voters, especially in densely populated areas where undecided voters are common.
4. In-person and virtual rallies: Rallies remain a critical tool, particularly for Trump, who has held large-scale events in states like Pennsylvania and North Carolina. Harris, by contrast, has leaned into virtual events to reach a broader audience without physical travel constraints.

Chronology of major election events up to now

To understand the current state of the election, it is helpful to examine the timeline of key events and how each influenced the electoral landscape. Here’s a chronology of significant moments leading up to the current standings:

• Start of primary season: Candidates began positioning themselves and defining campaign strategies to secure support, particularly in key states.
• Super Tuesday: This pivotal event gave an initial glimpse into voter preferences across multiple states and helped clarify the battleground map.
• Debates and interviews: Both candidates participated in debates and interviews that highlighted their visions and policy proposals, directly influencing undecided voters in swing states.
• Final days of campaigning: In the final stretch, Trump and Harris focused their visits and events on battleground states, aiming to solidify voter support.

Possibility of a tie: Scenarios and potential outcomes

While rare, there remains a possibility of an electoral tie, with each candidate receiving exactly 269 electoral votes. In this scenario, the decision would move to Congress, where the House of Representatives would elect the president and the Senate would choose the vice president. Though unlikely, this outcome would add a dramatic twist to an already high-stakes election, extending the decision-making process and increasing national media attention.

Due to the complex distribution of votes and the structure of the U.S. electoral system, an even split of 269 votes is a conceivable outcome in such a polarized race. If this were to happen, the Congressional tiebreaker would be invoked, adding another layer of suspense to the process and delaying the final decision.

Understanding the U.S. Electoral College voting system

To appreciate the mechanics of this election, it is essential to understand how the Electoral College functions. Unlike direct popular vote systems, where the candidate with the most votes wins, the U.S. relies on an Electoral College system. In this setup, each state awards a specific number of delegates based on population size, and the candidate who secures the most votes in a state typically receives all of that state’s delegates.

This system amplifies the impact of larger states like California, Texas, and Florida, while also drawing attention to smaller states that could be swayed by specific local issues. As a result, candidates focus on both highly populated areas and smaller swing states to secure a combination of votes that will bring them closer to the 270-delegate mark.

Social and economic implications of the 2024 election in the U.S. and abroad

The U.S. presidential election has implications that reach beyond the nation’s borders, affecting economic and political landscapes globally. Depending on the election result, the country may adopt policies that influence international economics, trade, and environmental policy. Investors, for instance, are closely monitoring the election, as a win for either the Republican or Democratic candidate could shape areas such as:

• Financial and tax regulation: Trump’s agenda historically includes tax cuts and incentives for the private sector, while Harris is expected to support tax reforms aimed at funding public initiatives.
• Environmental policy: Environmental concerns are central for Democrats, who advocate for carbon emission reductions and renewable energy investments. Trump’s approach favors traditional energy sectors like oil and gas, emphasizing energy independence.
• International relations: U.S. foreign policy often shifts significantly depending on the party in power. Trump typically favors a more protectionist stance, while Harris is expected to pursue greater collaboration with international organizations.

Changes in 2024 voting trends by state compared to 2020

Compared to the last election, the 2024 race has highlighted shifts in voter preferences in several states. Arizona and Georgia, for example, were historically Republican strongholds but have shown an increasing lean toward Democratic candidates, influenced by demographic diversification. Conversely, states like Ohio and Iowa, once considered battlegrounds, have demonstrated a stronger Republican inclination.

These shifts reflect demographic and economic changes that directly impact voter preferences and reshape the electoral map. Furthermore, differences between urban and rural voting behaviors continue to underscore regional divides, compelling each campaign to adjust its strategy to align with local voter priorities.