Why the 2020 election is a mandate for solutions and moderation

Politicians hoping to emerge from the 2020 election with a robust mandate for change received a different instruction from voters this month: Restore equilibrium.

Democrats had hoped for a double-digit Joe Biden win, significant gains in Congress and plentiful down-ballot wins that would give them clearance to usher in reforms. Republicans pinned their hopes on a group of silent Donald Trump voters who could propel their candidate to a second term, and perhaps even reverse midterm Congressional seat losses.

Instead, responding to record campaign expenditures and a drumbeat of media, Americans voted in record numbers to send the message that while we are divided about who can best serve us in Washington, we are in agreement that we want balanced solutions and political consensus from Congress and the states.

Biden voters were most interested (75%) in a better government response to COVID-19 and health care overall (73%). Trump voters saw their man as best on the economy (71%) and "returning to normal" (63%).   

While Biden won the popular vote, Republican congressional and down-ballot candidates surprised nearly all the pollsters. Survey data confirms, meanwhile, that a plurality of Americans is conservative in its views on everything from policing to business regulation.

If this election mandates anything, it’s a rejection of extremes in both parties. The desire for solutions and consensus is strongest with a group of voters dubbed the “vital center.”

These voters are vital because they’ve been a deciding factor in swing districts and key races such as the 2016 general election and 2018 mid-term. And they’re the center because, while pundits frequently observe that Americans are polarized, these Americans, who comprise 47% of the voting public, are closer to the middle than the extremes of the spectrum.

What’s more, they seem to be changing their long-term party affiliation, making them difficult to predict with traditional polling methods. They are the voters who went for George W. Bush in 2000 and 2004, switched to Barack Obama in 2008 and 2012, and surprised analysts with Trump in 2016.

Candidates valued over party loyalty

Party allegiance is far less important to the vital center than are tangible outcomes. They changed reliably red districts that Bush carried in 2000 and 2004 to blue for Obama in 2008 and for the most part in 2012. Some expected these districts to stay blue for Hillary Clinton, but these voters rejected what she offered and swung back to Trump in 2016. Early analysis of these districts indicates that they are swinging once again.

At the start of 2020, the vital center looked like it would break for President Trump. While not completely satisfied on all issues, they were happiest about the state of the economy and many of them felt as if they were in a better financial situation than they were four years prior.

There was some concern that this group was driven by populist tendencies, and a concern that it could signal a drift toward socialism. But the vital center is skeptical of socialism and big government, and 62% agree that government should guarantee equality of opportunity, not outcomes.

With a strong economy, 39% thought health care was the most important issue for the nation to address.  And 34% thought we should address economic issues, 23% racial issues, 22% the high cost of living and 22% were concentrated on the environment.

Pandemic shifted attitudes, values

The pandemic shifted behaviors, attitudes and values, causing the vital center to swing in just a few months. Vital center voters, even more so than the general public, have lost significant levels of trust in key institutions like government and media, with a comparable deleterious effect on their values. Challenges to economic health and household routines, coupled with failings in our health care and education systems, were their biggest concerns as they went to the polls.

We also know that the pandemic has lowered the vital center’s trust in government across the board, with 14% trusting the federal government (compared to 28% of the total population) and 23% trusting state government (compared to 36%). This corresponds to worsening senses of social order (39%), peace of mind (34%), and freedom (34%). They feel more unease than their fellow Americans, who tend to score nearly 20 points more positively on these attributes.

More than anything, the vital center craves solutions. While they may have voted for change in the White House, the state-based races appear to have had the least amount of party flipping since the 1940s.

Their rejection of Trump is not an embrace of the Democratic Party's platform. But neither is it an embrace of the Republican Party’s platform, which was a blank piece of paper with Trump’s picture pasted to it.

Instead, voters are pragmatic on key issue positions such as health care with only 1 in 5 voters saying that universal government health care is the way to go and 42% saying that the recent changes to the tax code were smart and should be extended.

Now is the time for our elected representatives to work on collaborative solutions rather than smashing their political enemies. The midterm elections, after all, will be here before they know it. And the vital center is watching.

Carrie Conko is vice president of communications at State Policy Network, and Erin Norman is senior solutions consultant for public policy at Heart+Mind Strategies.