Analyzing the 2020 Texas Election (Part Deux)

In the presidential contest in 2020, Texas was considered a swing state. According to 270 to win (https://www.270towin.com/2020-polls-biden-trump/), the average of six polls conducted through November 2, 2020 showed Trump with a slim 1.3 percent advantage:

Many analyses placed blame on poor polling, Trump supporters misleading pollsters, and other reasons that deemed Texas’ division between Democrats and Republicans closer than it actually was. The final results show Trump winning Texas with 52.2 percent of the vote to Biden’s 46.4 percent. The 5.8 percent difference showed that Texas was indeed competitive. What differences in the campaign would have resulted in a Biden win in Texas?

The most common analysis maintains that Texas nothing would have helped because Texas remains a “Red State” with a majority of voters preferring the policies and programs supported by the Republican Party of Texas and its candidates. Others have noted that Texas is divided among the Democratic urban core of Texas, the rural Republican strongholds, and the battleground area of suburban Texas. This is the argument of Blue Metros, Red States, which was recently published by Brookings Institution.

In Texas, the division among the three components of Texas was close enough that an expansion of votes could have resulted in a Democratic win of Texas’ 38 Electoral College votes. In the previous post, I noted that 30 percent of registered voters in Texas did not vote. That constitutes 5.7 million voters. If more of these nonvoters had been mobilized in certain counties, the results could have been different.

In the ten largest counties in number of registered voters, 3.2 million registered voters did not vote. That constitutions 56 percent of the registered voters who did not vote. In some of those counties, voter turnout was more than 70 percent of registered voters (Travis, Fort Bend, Collin, and Denton). However, Harris, Dallas, Bexar, and Hidalgo Counties were below the average turnout of 66.5 percent turnout. If those counties had achieved the average turnout and those nonvoters had been identified as potential Biden voters, Biden would have added 175,000 votes. Of course, Biden still would have been more than 400,000 votes short of the number necessary to defeat Trump. Gaining those additional votes in the urban core, but additional votes in the suburbs could also have been garnered.

	Trump/Pence		Biden/Harris
County	Early Votes	Total Votes	Early Votes	Total Votes	Total Votes	Total Voters	Turnout
HARRIS	607,040	699,771	810,106	911,913	1,633,557	2,480,522	65.86%
DALLAS	262,198	306,572	527,822	597,407	917,245	1,398,469	65.59%
TARRANT	351,885	403,271	357,565	403,698	820,157	1,212,524	67.64%
BEXAR	266,145	303,871	397,338	440,823	756,039	1,189,373	63.57%
TRAVIS	140,321	159,907	403,939	432,062	602,889	854,577	70.55%
COLLIN	229,730	250,194	213,187	227,868	485,323	648,670	74.82%
DENTON	202,732	221,829	174,573	188,023	416,610	565,089	73.72%
EL PASO	64,886	81,235	143,224	168,801	254,029	488,470	52.01%
FORT BEND	143,623	157,595	180,197	195,191	356,908	482,368	73.99%
HIDALGO	75,077	89,925	110,840	127,391	219,433	391,309	56.08%
	2,343,637	2,674,170	3,318,791	3,693,177	6,462,190	9,711,371	66.54%
EV % TV	87.64%		89.86%

 

In the 11^th through 20^th largest counties, Trump won 56.5 percent of the vote. Among these ten counties are several suburban counties in which Democrats could have won a larger share of the vote and reduced Trump’s margin of victory. There are 770,000 registered voters in these counties that did not vote. As an example, Hays and Williamson Counties, suburbs that are southwest and north of Austin, could have provided additional voters, although the number is less than 150,000 votes.

	Trump/Pence		Biden/Harris
County	Early Votes	Total Votes	Early Votes	Total Votes	Total Votes	Total Voters	Turnout
WILLIAMSON	123,803	138,649	132,612	142,457	287,092	376,672	76.22%
MONTGOMERY	167,808	193,224	65,877	74,255	271,175	370,060	73.28%
GALVESTON	84,668	93,306	53,326	58,247	153,843	228,482	67.33%
BRAZORIA	80,822	89,939	56,749	61,780	154,037	224,256	68.69%
CAMERON	40,303	48,834	54,592	63,732	113,635	218,910	51.91%
BELL	53,404	67,113	47,880	56,032	125,559	215,974	58.14%
NUECES	55,697	64,467	53,921	60,749	126,984	211,652	60.00%
LUBBOCK	69,740	78,560	35,103	39,757	120,204	183,320	65.57%
HAYS	42,289	47,427	54,200	59,213	108,822	152,840	71.20%
MCLENNAN	47,719	59,432	31,185	36,550	97,617	149,461	65.31%
	766,253	880,951	585,445	652,772	1,558,968	2,331,627	66.86%
EV % TV	86.98%		89.69%

 

Another source of additional votes would have been voters in heavily Hispanic counties in South Texas. Twenty counties in Texas have a population that is more than 75 percent Hispanic. Two of those counties, Bexar and Hidalgo are among the ten largest counties; therefore, I exclude them from consideration. Among the remaining eighteen counties, the average percentage of the vote for Biden was 56 percent of the vote to Trump’s 40 percent of the vote. Four years earlier, in 2016, Hillary Clinton received 69.4 percent of the vote to Trump’s 30.6 percent. Thus, Biden’s advantage was 13 percent lower than Clinton’s advantage. The appeal to Hispanic voters by Democrats was ineffective, and Texas Republicans emphasized issues that appeal to Hispanics as well as depicting Democrats as too liberal for Texas.

If Texas is to turn Blue in some future election, Democrats will need to expand their appeal to Hispanics, foster neighborhood organizations of activists that are active throughout the election year, and expand their reach into he suburbs that surround their urban cores. Is a Democratic incursion into statewide offices in 2022 possible, or is Texas destined to remain a red state in which rural voters continue to provide Republican candidates with the votes necessary to overcome the Democrats’ stronghold on the urban core and expansion into the suburbs?