The 2020 Decision That Could Cost Trump the Election

A census undercount preserved the "Blue Wall" for Democrats.

One glance at Democratic campaign stops over the last week and it’s clear: this remains a “Blue Wall” election. In the last seven days, Kamala Harris or Tim Walz have visited Philadelphia, Lansing, Grand Rapids, Waterford, Detroit, Saginaw, Madison, Racine, Chester County, Waukesha County, and Philadelphia again. 

The Harris campaign plainly still views the Midwest as her best path to the White House. Conveniently, the “Blue Wall” plus the other safe Democratic states deliver exactly 270 electoral votes. Fortuitous math indeed—and a stark reminder that Republican shortsightedness during the 2020 Census might cost Trump his second term. 

In May 2019, Texas Democrats César Blanco and Juan Hinojosa proposed $100 million in the state budget for U.S. Census outreach. The Republican-controlled legislature, however, adjourned without approving the extra cash. Fast-forward a year and Texas had one of the lowest response rates in the country, prompting a last-ditch effort from the legislature to bump up the count. Too little, too late: Texas slotted in as one of six states with a statistically significant population undercount (-1.9 percent). 

This undercount not only cost the Lone Star State an estimated $25 billion in federal funds, but also an additional U.S. House seat—and the electoral vote that comes with it. A similar story played out in Florida. Despite projections it would gain two House seats, Florida undercounted by an even larger 3.5 percent and earned just one additional seat. 

Trump did not help. His administration’s push to include a census citizenship question—ultimately tossed by the Supreme Court—stoked fears among immigrants, particularly Hispanic undocumented immigrants who are included in the resident population count according to the U.S. Constitution, that answering the census would invite legal consequences. This protracted public fight likely contributed to the undercounts in Florida and Texas, both of which are heavily Hispanic states. 

Now let’s imagine a world where Texas and Florida accurately count their populations. Each gains an additional seat and electoral vote. Heading into Election Day 2024, Texas would have 41 electoral votes and Florida would have 31. 

In the zero-sum game of reapportionment, two other states would now need to lose a seat. Some of the first states on the chopping block? Minnesota, New York, and Rhode Island—all of which Kamala Harris will win. Thanks to significant overcounts—including 3.4 percent in New York and 5.1 percent in Rhode Island—these blue states held onto more House seats (and electoral votes) than expected. 

The swap of two electoral votes would dramatically change the presidential election. Harris winning Michigan, Wisconsin, and Pennsylvania would now produce just 268 electoral votes. She would need to tack on one of the Sunbelt states to hit 270—certainly a steeper hill to climb. Trump’s path, meanwhile, would expand considerably.

Rather than a pure tossup, Trump would likely be the favorite in this scenario. 

---

This will be the last decade that the much-mythologized “Blue Wall” strategy can deliver a Democratic victory. Early 2030 apportionment forecasts project Minnesota, New York, and Rhode Island to lose the seats they just barely held in 2020—along with losses in Michigan, Pennsylvania, Illinois, and California. This scrambled electoral map will force Democrats to rethink their presidential strategy (they better hope, for example, they're seriously contesting Texas by then). 

But for now, the “Blue Wall” stands just high enough to potentially prevent a Trump victory. And if Harris touches 270 thanks to narrow wins in the Midwest, Republicans have no one to blame but themselves.