Weather on election day and football victories could resolve the election

The current presidential election campaign between Kamala Harris and Donald Trump is developing right into a a particularly close competition. Numerous last-minute aspects could bring votes to at least one candidate or the opposite. Current economic news, international conflicts, personal slip-ups or revelations – all of those could be enough to influence the election.

In addition, there are aspects which have absolutely nothing to do with the candidates themselves or the national and international conditions, but can still influence a detailed election. These aspects could possibly be called random aspects.

The most vital of those unknowns is the weather on election day. As I say in my recent book, “The random factor“The weather is notoriously difficult to predict due to its randomness. Yet it might probably have a decisive influence on who wins or loses a detailed election.

Fair weather friends

Studies have shown that bad weather resembling rain or snow tends to reduce voter turnoutFor less motivated voters, the bad weather could also be reason enough to not vote on election day.

In general, studies show that this tends to Republican candidate. One reason for that is analyses have shown that there’s a barely higher percentage of less engaged voters amongst Democrats than amongst Republicans.

As a result, when the weather is bad, barely fewer Democratic voters show as much as vote for his or her candidate and a rather larger percentage of voters vote for the Republican candidate.

In modern times, there have been two elections through which the Weather had a direct influence of the result. The first was the extremely close election of 1960 between John F. Kennedy and Richard Nixon, with 118,000 votes separating the 2. According to researchers, had the weather on election day been much rainier and snowier, Nixon would have won the states of Delaware, Illinois, Minnesota, Missouri, New Jersey, New Mexico and Pennsylvania and thus the presidency with a snug margin.

The other presidential campaign affected by the weather was the 2000 race between George W. Bush and Al GoreThe election resulted in Florida, where Bush won by 537 votes. Much was fabricated from the controversies surrounding the butterfly ballot, the hanging ballots, Suspension of vote counting and so forth. Had the weather been drier that day in several Florida counties, Gore would likely have won the state and turn into the forty third President of the United States.

Heavy rain may occur

Could the weather on November 5, 2024 affect the election end result? The answer is definitely yes.

The battle between Harris and Trump could well come right down to the states, Wisconsin, Michigan and Pennsylvania. All three states are experiencing extremely changeable weather conditions in early November. It is feasible that Harris wins the election as a consequence of favorable weather in a number of of those states, or that Trump wins as a consequence of bad weather in certain key counties.

The indisputable fact that bad weather has traditionally helped Republican candidates could possibly be certainly one of the the reason why the Republican Party and Trump were way more proof against allowing early or mail-in voting. This type of voting eliminates the weather effect, thereby neutralizing a Republican advantage that may arise on Election Day.

“Subtle power of irrelevant events”

Although weather is probably the most well-known random factor that may influence an election, there may be one other interesting element that would affect the end result. Researchers have found that voters are barely more prone to vote for the team when the house sports team is doing well, especially if the school football team wins within the 10 days before the election. Incumbent in a presidential race.

Scientists Andrew Healy, Neil Malhotra and Cecilia Hyunjung Mo write: “We find clear evidence that the Successes and failures of the local college football team before election day The electoral prospects of the incumbent party could be significantly influenced, suggesting that voters reward or punish incumbents for changes of their welfare that don’t have anything to do with government performance.”

The researchers describe what they call “the subtle power of irrelevant events in shaping important decisions in the real world.” They explain that the rationale for this effect is that when one's team performs well, one can even experience a psychological boost. And voters who’re satisfied with themselves and their immediate situation usually tend to vote for the incumbent than the challenger.

Although Harris shouldn’t be an incumbent, she is the Acting Vice President and will due to this fact profit from such an effect.

The moral of this story is that the Trump campaign should pray for bad weather, together with hoping that Big Ten football teams in Wisconsin, Michigan and Pennsylvania suffer devastating defeats. Saturday, November 2while the Harris team should hope for clear skies and triumphant victories within the Big Ten on Election Day.