First thing election special: two visions of America, one day to choose
One Day More #OneDayMore
Good morning. More than 93 million Americans have already cast their ballot in the 2020 presidential election, which is more than two-thirds of the total turnout in 2016. In Texas and Hawaii, early voting numbers have already surpassed the total vote four years ago. Yet with just 24 hours to go until election day, and even with the polls still stubbornly in Joe Biden’s favour, the results – and their timing – remain unpredictable.
Criss-crossing the swing states for our Anywhere but Washington series, Oliver Laughland has met voters with two very different – and apparently irreconcilable – visions for the future of America. It is a measure of the volatility of this election that at least one reporter has requested a bullet-proof vest to cover its aftermath, writes the Guardian US editor, John Mulholland:
It’s not just paramilitaries and threats of violence which are causing us to prepare differently for this election. Ordinarily we would expect an election result – at the latest – in the early hours of Wednesday morning. That could still happen, assuming a very decisive victory for either party. But, as almost everyone now knows, this election result may not be known for days, or even weeks, such is the number of people voting by mail.
Donald Trump began a sprint through the swing states on Sunday, with 10 rallies planned in seven states over the last two days of the campaign. Axios reported that the president plans to declare victory on election night “if it looks like he is ‘ahead’”, to counter a potential “blue shift” in votes counted after Tuesday. Trump denied the report, but warned: “As soon as the election is over, we’re going in with our lawyers.”
While the president has so far failed to articulate a coherent manifesto, his critics have a pretty good idea what Americans could expect from a second Trump term, writes David Smith: “Widening chasms between rich and poor, justice and racism, truth and lies.” For the latest edition of the Today in Focus podcast, Chris McGreal asked several voters who swung behind Trump in 2016 why they’re sticking with him in 2020.
The temptation to take refuge in a figure of arrogant strength is now greater than ever.
An Iowa poll rattles Democrats, but Harris stumps in Texas 
Video: 2020 polling is more precise, but Election Day could still bring surprises (The Washington Post)
2020 polling is more precise, but Election Day could still bring surprises
SHARE
SHARE
TWEET
SHARE
Click to expand
UP NEXT
For many Biden supporters, the specter of 2016 looms large – which is why a new poll of Iowa released on Saturday sent some into a panic. The Selzer & Co survey showed Trump with a seven-point lead: the same margin he enjoyed over Hillary Clinton, in the same poll, days before he beat her by 9.4% in the Hawkeye state and clinched the presidency.
That poll remains an outlier, however – and in a state Trump was already expected to retain. Biden spent the weekend in more vulnerable swing states, while his running mate, Kamala Harris, was on the stump in Texas, suggesting Democrats still think they could flip the nation’s second-biggest electoral college prize. Daniel Strauss and Lauren Gambino look back on a campaign that came close to collapse during the primaries, but is now within reach of the White House.
In other election news… Stat of the day
The Texas supreme court has rejected a Republican request to toss out almost 127,000 ballots cast at drive-through voting places in Harris County, Texas – a vast Democratic stronghold that comprises much of the city of Houston. A federal judge is expected to rule on the same issue on Monday, and could come to a different decision, voting rights activists have warned.
Conservative activists claim counting the ballots from the drive-through locations, which were set up to allow safe voting amid the coronavirus pandemic, would “call into question the integrity and legality of a federal election.”
View from the right
Many of Jonah Goldberg’s fellow conservative commentators have already written pieces explaining why they won’t vote for Trump. Instead of adding another to the pile, writes Goldberg for the Dispatch, he is offering a prediction – Trump will lose – and an explanation:
Thanks to his inability to let go of the 2016 mindset combined with his belief that the single best thing about his presidency was him—not his policies, not his accomplishments, just him—he didn’t think he needed to promise anything concrete for his second term other than more him.
Don’t miss this
Amid one of the most consequential presidential elections in memory, it is easy to overlook the local races that are also on the ballot this year. But as David Daley explains, the make-up of legislatures in Texas, Wisconsin, North Carolina and several other states will determine how their electoral maps are redrawn – and potentially gerrymandered – after the 2020 census. And that will shape the electoral college for at least the next decade.
Last Thing: an intellectual history of the Trump era 
Book reviewer Carlos Lozada has made a study of some 150 often trashy tomes written about the Trump presidency, and from it produced his own intellectual history of the past four years. His book, What Were We Thinking, is “an utter marvel,” says Peter Conrad: “Sober though frequently very funny, fairer minded than the subject deserves, in the end profoundly troubling even as it looks ahead to America’s recovery from the Trump malaise.”
Sign up
First Thing is delivered to thousands of inboxes every weekday. If you’re not already signed up, subscribe now.