How do swing states impact elections?

The unique structure of the American electoral system situates some states in more influential positions than others.  During closely contested elections, “swing states” are states with a reasonable likelihood of being won by either major political party, and whose votes are more likely to decide the outcome of a presidential race.  Swing states are critical to a candidate’s campaign strategy, and they tend to attract a much higher level of campaign activity and media attention than their reliably red or blue "stronghold state" counterparts. The phenomenon of swing states, a defining characteristic in the American political landscape, often dominates the news cycle during election seasons. But what exactly makes a state a swing state, and does the time and money candidates pour into these swing states pay off in terms of increasing voter turnout?

Individual states differ in their approach to allocating Electoral College votes.  Historically, most states have chosen to embrace the "winner take all" model, which provides all of a state's electoral votes to the winner of the popular vote in that state, increasing the electoral influence of states with the largest population and most electoral votes.

The role of individual states in deciding elections became clear in 1860, where slavery was the main electoral issue, and Midwestern states such as Ohio tipped the balance in favor of Abraham Lincoln in a nation entrenched in the deep-rooted division between the North and the South.  The term “swing state” was originally coined in 1936 by the New York Times to describe Franklin D. Roosevelt’s efforts to garner support from Western voters whose electoral preferences were “doubtful”.  This term gained popularity in the 70’s and 80’s, and eventually became central to discussions around the 2000 presidential election, where the extremely close race in the state of Florida “swung” in favor of George W. Bush and decided the outcome of the election.  With the trend of increasing polarization between the two major parties and with the growth of increasingly diverse communities where a wide range of political beliefs are juxtaposed, candidates today tend to target their signature policies to the preferences of voters in these swing states, since they need only win over a narrow majority of a state’s voters to win all of that state’s electoral votes.

In this way, the "winner take all" model dilutes the broad range of appeal a candidate must make to voters across the political spectrum in all 50 states, as “stronghold states” that vote for the same party year after year are often overlooked when candidates focus most of their energy on wooing undecided voters in states that could swing either way.  Some pundits disagree on which states can be classified as swing states, but a major factor in designating a state as a battleground is the margin of victory between candidates in that state's election.  According to Ballotpedia, The states with the closest margins of victory in the 2020 presidential election that are either newly competitive or perennial swing states include Arizona, Florida, Georgia, Iowa, Michigan, Minnesota, Nevada, New Hampshire, North Carolina, Ohio, Pennsylvania, Texas, and Wisconsin.

These states tend to be viewed as "up for grabs" by presidential campaigns, who then invest money in these states through advertising, campaign events, and other efforts.  Between August and November 2020, 212 official campaign-sponsored events were held for the presidential election, with 47 of those occurring in Pennsylvania, 31 in Florida, 25 in North Carolina, and 21 in Michigan.  By contrast, states that have recently voted strongly Democratic, such as California and New York, and states that have recently voted strongly Republican such as Alabama and Mississippi, received significantly less visits by either presidential candidate from the two major parties.  In terms of television advertising spending, which many campaigns saw as a key tool to connect with voters at home during the COVID-19 pandemic, the most money was spent in Florida ($257.5 million dollars), followed by Pennsylvania (195.7), Michigan (120.1), and North Carolina (110.8).  However, increased ad spending and time spent by candidates and their campaign teams in these states do not necessarily translate to an increase in voter turnout in swing states.  The average voter turnout nationwide is 66.7%, and while voters in states like Wisconsin (75.8% of the eligible population), Michigan (73.9%) and Florida (71.7%) showed up to the polls at higher rates than the average state in 2020, some "stronghold" states with consistent one-party support such as Washington (75.7%), Oregon (75.5%), and New Jersey (75.3%) had high overall voter turnouts as well, suggesting that increased spending in swing states is not the only factor at play in determining whether or not an eligible American will vote.

Although there is no universal indicator to suggest one state is more likely to become a swing state than another, many observations have been utilized by media outlets to justify how competitive a state's electoral votes are likely to be in the future.  Shifts in the demographics of a voting population often affect how a state will vote, as is seen in the growing base of younger Democratic voters of Latinx backgrounds in Arizona as well as the aging of the white voting population in Ohio which has contributed to the state leaning increasingly conservative and Republican in recent years.  

The movement of jobs into or out of a state, as has been the case in recent years in the Rust Belt, may impact a state’s vote as well: this phenomenon was observed in 2016,  where blue-collar voters in the energy and manufacturing industries flipped the "Blue Wall" of Pennsylvania, Wisconsin, and Michigan in favor of Donald Trump over Hillary Clinton.  State-specific issues are often targeted by a certain political party in order to attempt to flip a state, such as in Florida, where both parties attempted to capitalize on the state’s increasing concern about immigration laws.  Additionally, an increase in the voting population in general of a state can have a major impact on the likelihood of flipping the state: many news outlets credit Stacy Abrams and the Fair Fight organization for registering 800,000 new voters in America's newest "swing state" of Georgia, which voted for Joe Biden and two Democratic senators in 2020 after a history of supporting Republican candidates.

The mere existence of these "swing states" and the disproportionate attention they receive often frustrates Americans in stronghold states who believe their votes do not hold as much power, as this singularity in the American electoral system will continue to exert influence over national elections now and in the foreseeable future.  However, the wide range of political actions individuals can take to influence national elections and the increasing technological connectivity of our country provides hope for prospective voters looking to make sure their voices are heard, regardless of the state they live in.