Morning Digest: How America could elect the president by popular vote—by 2028
Democrats need wins in these key states to make it happen
Leading Off
National Popular Vote
A plan to allow the United States to elect its president according to the nationwide popular vote is now closer than ever to taking effect—and could do so in time for the 2028 elections.
That plan is known as the National Popular Vote Interstate Compact, a multistate agreement under which member states pledge to cast their electoral votes for the winner of the national popular vote—regardless of the outcome in their own states.
The compact currently has 18 members who together account for 209 votes in the Electoral College. It can only come into force, though, when the electoral votes of its members collectively total at least 270—enough for a majority—so it's currently 61 votes short.
With Democrats broadly in favor of the idea and Republicans generally opposed, the road to 270 likely runs through the swing states. To go that last mile, Democrats will almost certainly have to take power in several more states where control of government is currently divided or in Republican hands, as well as hold onto some critical gains made in recent years. The path is challenging but within reach.
Below we discuss the seven most promising target states and what precisely Democrats must do to prevail in each. And for more insight into the elections for state legislature that will play a critical role in each of these states, please consult our new guide.
Arizona (11 electoral votes)
Democrats have made great strides in Arizona in recent years, most importantly—for the purposes of the compact—picking up the governorship in 2022. They did, however, fall just short of flipping the state legislature, as Republicans clung to their narrow two-seat advantage in each chamber: 16-14 in the Senate and 31-29 in the House.
But with all 90 seats up once again this year, Democrats have an excellent shot at finally winning control of the legislature for the first time since the 1964 elections. If they do, they'll be able to pass legislation joining the compact and send it to Gov. Katie Hobbs for her signature in 2025.
Michigan (15)
Democrats retook the Michigan legislature in a shocker two years ago, but efforts to join the compact stalled after a committee in the state House approved legislation to enter the agreement on a party-line vote last year. To pick up where they left off, Democrats will need to defend their narrow 56-54 margin in the House (the Senate is not up in November) and pass that same measure in both chambers. Democratic Gov. Gretchen Whitmer would then be able to sign off on the bill.
Nevada (6)
Democrats, who control Nevada’s legislature, have as many as three different ways of getting the job done. Their biggest obstacle is Republican Gov. Joe Lombardo, who opposes the compact. That’s why Democratic lawmakers approved a ballot measure last year under which the state would join the compact. Lawmakers must then pass the measure a second time after the 2024 elections before it can go before voters in 2026.
Democrats could also get around Lombardo by keeping their current supermajority in the state Assembly and winning a supermajority in the state Senate this fall, both of which are strong possibilities. That would allow them to override a Lombardo veto and would let Nevada join the compact in 2025.
If those supermajorities don’t come about, though, Democrats can look to defeat Lombardo at the ballot box in 2026. With a Democratic governor and legislature, Nevada could enter the compact in 2027.
New Hampshire (4)
Even though New Hampshire backed Joe Biden by 7 points in 2020, its state government remains in Republican control thanks to an unusually volatile electorate, a popular governor who's been willing to break with Donald Trump, and gerrymandering. But the GOP's grip is not strong.
Gov. Chris Sununu has opted to retire rather than seek a fifth two-year term. That gives Democrats a good chance to win the governorship for the first time since 2014. Meanwhile, Republicans hold just the slimmest of majorities in the state House.
The Senate is more stubborn, but New Hampshire is prone to big swings depending on the broader political environment, and Democratic candidates for the legislature collectively won more votes than Republicans in 2022. A Democratic takeover of the state is therefore very much in the cards. That would permit New Hampshire to enter the compact as soon as 2025.
Pennsylvania (19)
Democrats won a shocking upset two years ago when they took a one-seat majority in the state House thanks to newly un-gerrymandered districts approved by the state's redistricting commission. Republicans, however, still hold a 28-22 advantage in the Senate, whose map did not change as much.
A major difficulty is that only half of the Senate's seats are up every two years, and Democrats only have three realistic targets this fall. That means they could tie the chamber, but Democratic Lt. Gov. Austin Davis would not be able to break ties on legislation like the kind that would have the state join the compact.
Therefore, unless they obtain some support from Republicans, Democrats would likely have to wait until they can win an outright majority in 2026. If Democratic Gov. Josh Shapiro can win a second term that year, Pennsylvania could join the compact in 2027.
Virginia (13)
Virginia Democrats reversed the setback they experienced in 2021 by regaining control of the state House and holding the state Senate last year. But they’ll also need to reclaim the governorship in 2025 and hold the House that year (the Senate will not be up). The good news is that Virginia is the bluest state on this list, so there’s a strong chance it could enter the compact in 2026.
Wisconsin (10)
Wisconsin is about to experience a political upheaval—in a good way. After liberals won their first majority on the state Supreme Court in 15 years last year, the new-look court threw out the state’s legislative maps, which Republicans had gerrymandered beyond all recognition.
Now, with new, much fairer maps, Democrats have a realistic shot at flipping the state Assembly this year. The Senate, however, will likely take two cycles, since only half of all seats are up every two years. But if Democrats can retake the legislature by 2026, and if Gov. Tony Evers or another Democrat can also hold the governorship that year, then Wisconsin could join the compact in 2027.
Together, these seven states have 78 electoral votes, so victory in all of them is not required to hit 270, but it's always better to have the maximum margin of error possible. Winning control of each of these states won't be easy, but the path to electing the president by the national popular vote is a real one.
Site News
Babka
It's the most delicious time of year: The Downballot's annual election prediction contest, generously sponsored by Green's Bakery, is back! We ask you, our extremely well-informed readers, to guess the outcomes of a variety of Senate, House, and downballot races across the country—and the top four entrants all win gooey babka goodness. Click here for instructions on how to enter!
There's one important change, though: You'll need to be a paid supporter of The Downballot to be eligible for prizes. If you haven't upgraded to a paid subscription yet, this is the perfect occasion to do so. Just click the button below:
Senate
PA-Sen
A Democratic-aligned group called Defend Our Constitution is airing ads on Fox News to promote the nominee of the conservative Constitution Party, Marty Selker, at the expense of Republican Dave McCormick. Politico's Ally Mutnick writes that the outfit has spent at least $370,000 on spots ahead of next week's Senate race in Pennsylvania.
The commercial slams McCormick for having "made a fortune investing in building the Chinese military," which is similar to the messaging that Democratic Sen. Bob Casey and his allies have used. The narrator, though, continues by touting Selker as "[t]he choice for true conservatives" who will "stand with Trump and put America first for a change."
Ballot Measures
OH Ballot
The Ohio Supreme Court unanimously ruled on Wednesday that Republican Attorney General Dave Yost had improperly rejected a proposed constitutional amendment to expand and protect voting access, but thanks to the court's nine-month delay, the decision comes far too late to put the measure on this year's ballot.
The proposal, put forth by voting rights advocates, would establish sweeping new protections for voters in a state where Republicans have for years sought to impose restrictions.
It would deem voting a "fundamental right" and bar any policies or procedures that have the intent or effect of denying or unreasonably burdening the right to vote. It would also, among many other things, set up a system to automatically register voters; allow for same-day voter registration; and greatly expand early voting by removing a GOP-imposed limit of one site location per county, regardless of population.
Late last year, however, Yost rejected the plan based on the title of the initiative, originally named the "Secure and Fair Elections" amendment, saying it was not "truthful." Supporters then rebranded it the "Ohio Voters Bill of Rights" but were rebuffed again on the same grounds.
They responded by filing a lawsuit in early February, but the GOP-majority Supreme Court refused to expedite the case. As the months went by without a ruling, organizers were unable to start gathering the 413,000 signatures they needed to put their amendment before voters this year.
The court finally ruled this week in an 18-page opinion that Yost lacked the authority to review the titles of amendments and only had the power to scrutinize their summaries, ordering him to review the summary organizers had proposed within 10 days. Should Yost greenlight the amendment, it would then go to the Ohio Ballot Board, a Republican-dominated panel, for final approval.
Only then would supporters be able to start collecting signatures. The groups behind the effort issued a statement hailing the new ruling but did not address their plans. However, the soonest their amendment could appear on the ballot would be a year from now.
Poll Pile
AZ-Sen: RABA Research: Ruben Gallego (D): 49, Kari Lake (R): 34 (45-43 Harris)
MI-Sen: Suffolk University for USA Today: Elissa Slotkin (D): 47, Mike Rogers (R): 45 (47-47 presidential tie) (mid-Sept.: 45-43 Slotkin)
MI-Sen: SSRS for CNN: Slotkin (D): 48, Rogers (R): 42 (48-43 Harris) (Aug.: 47-41 Slotkin)
MI-Sen: Beacon Research (D) and Shaw & Company Research (R) for Fox: Slotkin (D): 51, Rogers (R): 47 (48-46 Harris) (July: 51-46 Slotkin)
MN-Sen: SurveyUSA for KAAL-TV, KSTP-TV, and WDIO-TV: Amy Klobuchar (D-inc): 52, Royce White (R): 35 (51-43 Harris) (late Sept.: 52-35 Klobuchar)
MN-Sen: Embold Research for MinnPost: Klobuchar (D-inc): 52, White (R): 40 (48-45 Harris) (early Sept.: 52-41 Klobuchar)
NE-Sen-A: YouGov for The Economist: Deb Fischer (R-inc): 50, Dan Osborn (I): 43 (55-40 Trump)
NJ-Sen: Rutgers University–New Brunswick: Andy Kim (D): 49, Curtis Bashaw (R): 26 (55-35 Harris)
PA-Sen: YouGov for CBS: Bob Casey (D-inc): 48, Dave McCormick (R): 42 (49-49 presidential tie) (mid-Oct.: 50-42 Casey)
PA-Sen: SSRS for CNN: Casey (D-inc): 48, McCormick (R): 45 (48-48 presidential tie) (Aug.: 46-46 Senate tie)
PA-Sen: Quinnipiac University: Casey (D-inc): 50, McCormick (R): 47 (47-46 Trump) (early Oct.: 51-43 Casey)
PA-Sen: Susquehanna Polling & Research (R) for La Torre Live: Casey (D-inc): 49, McCormick (R): 46 (46-46 presidential tie) (late Sept.: 48-40 Casey)
PA-Sen: Beacon and Shaw: Casey (D-inc): 50, McCormick (R): 48 (48-48 presidential tie) (late Sept.: 53-44 Casey)
TX-Sen: Cygnal (R): Ted Cruz (R-inc): 49, Colin Allred (D): 45 (51-43 Trump) (April: 45-36 Cruz)
WI-Sen: SSRS for CNN: Tammy Baldwin (D-inc): 49, Eric Hovde (R): 47 (51-45 Harris) (Aug.: 51-45 Baldwin)
WI-Sen: Marquette Law: Baldwin (D-inc): 49, Hovde (R): 47 (46-44 Harris) (late Sept.: 51-45 Baldwin)
NC-Gov: SurveyUSA for WRAL: Josh Stein (D): 52, Mark Robinson (R): 37 (47-47 presidential tie) (late Oct.: 50-34 Stein)
NC-Gov: Beacon and Shaw: Stein (D): 57, Robinson (R): 41 (49-47 Trump) (late Sept.: 56-41 Stein)
NH-Gov: Saint Anselm College: Kelly Ayotte (R): 49, Joyce Craig (D): 46 (51-46 Harris) (early Oct.: 47-44 Ayotte)
CO-08: Emerson College for The Hill: Yadira Caraveo (D-inc): 48, Gabe Evans (R): 46 (49-48 Harris) (early Oct.: 44-44 tie)
MI-07: Emerson for The Hill: Tom Barrett (R): 47, Curtis Hertel (D): 45 (49-49 presidential tie)
NE-02: YouGov for The Economist: Tony Vargas (D): 50, Don Bacon (R-inc): 46 (52-44 Harris)
NH-01: Saint Anselm: Chris Pappas (D-inc): 50, Russell Prescott (R): 43 (50-47 Harris) (early Oct.: 50-41 Pappas)
NH-02: Saint Anselm: Maggie Goodlander (D): 51, Lily Tang Williams (R): 43 (52-45 Harris) (early Oct.: 50-38 Goodlander)
MA Ballot: Emerson for WHDH: Allow rideshare drivers to unionize measure: Yes: 57, No: 33 (59-36 Harris)
MA Ballot: Emerson: Legalize natural psychedelics measure: Yes: 50, No: 44
MA Ballot: Emerson: Raise minimum wage for tipped employees measure: No: 51, Yes: 42
Earlier polls from YouGov and SurveyUSA shown in trendlines may have been conducted for other clients.
In our discussions today, let's make sure we don't forget the immortal words of Skaje:
As the years go by we'll more easily see 2020's vote method polarization for the massive outlier that it was. Simply no way to recreate the dynamic where paranoid liberals, many of whom had voted election day their whole lives, all rushed to mail in their ballots ASAP because of covid and fears over post-office delays...while at the same time the GOP president was telling everyone mail voting was fraud and that true patriots needed to wait to vote in person on election day, since covid wasn't a big deal. The amount of reversion that was bound to happen this year was inevitable. Republicans like voting early now. Democrats are fine with waiting longer to vote, or just showing up in person next week Tuesday. Any comparison to 2020 is absolutely useless.
And as Paleo reminded us as well, independents also vote.
Just back from my former home in PR and the governor's race there is brewing up to be very interesting. The PNP (statehood) party candidate, Jenniffer Gonzalez, is narrowly ahead in polls (2%ish) over *not* the PPD (status quo) party, but the PIP (independence) party candidate, Juan Dalmau. Dalmau had forged an alliance with other minor parties and many PNPs who dislike Gonzalez. She offers statehood, corporatism, and conservatism. Only the first item really has any broad appeal in PR. Dalmau has forged his alliance by pledging to solve problems first and worry about status after major issues are fixed. That's an approach lots of people have been hoping for, for decades.
In addition, a new 3rd party (Dignidad) is also pulling votes from the PNP. Their candidate has a track record for fixing things locally, like the municipal water system, but the party is very religiously conservative (antiLGBT, pro-forced birth), so they are also siphoning votes from PNP and socially conservative PPD voters.
Everyone I know there under age 35 is voting for Dalmau as are many over age 35. Even if he loses, if he pulls 30%, it'll be a massive disruption to politics as usual in PR.
Ranked choice voting would really be a good option for PR, because both the PNP and thr PPD have been terrible and corrupt for decades.