The fact that Trump has not conceded to Biden is not surprising, given the fact before the election he had repeatedly dodged questions over whether he would accept the election results. The guy was still sensitive over the fact he lost the plurality in the 2016 election to Hillary Clinton, ludicrously arguing that she benefited from "illegal alien" votes. Now constitutionally the aggregate popular vote is irrelevant, of course, but as I write, Biden received almost 80M votes (51.1%) to Trump's 73.8M (47.2%), nearly 4 points; Biden had expanded Clinton's plurality by about 2 points.. So really I think Trump barely raised his percentage less than a point over 2016. The big difference this time around: Biden is the one who pulled off the narrow state wins in MI, PA and GA.
Now on paper, Biden had the closest thing to a lock on taking on an incumbent President; the US economy tanked during the COVID-19 crisis and likely will close at a contraction for the full year. Hoover (1932), Carter (1980), and Bush (1992) all lost reelection under economic challenges. Ford's narrow loss (1976) doesn't quite fit the script, but he wasn't elected in 1972 (he replaced Agnew, who resigned, and then assumed the Presidency when Nixon resigned). And in almost every poll down the home stretch Biden hit the 50+ point mark. And we're not even discussing Trump's abominable historically low approval ratings, not to mention his sky-high unfavorables and his low-rated leadership during the COVID-19 crisis.
Trump's desperate post-election actions have been abominable, including a bewildering series of crackpot conspiracy theories and almost no factually-based arguments. He tries to suggest there's something improper with the vote-by-mail totals, and the fact is that he objected to vote by mail from the get-go. Everyone know that Democratic voters were heavily vested in vote by mail, and the GOP concentrates on in-person voter turnout, so there really wasn't any mystery when Trump's election day advantage melted away in Michigan, Pennsylvania, and Georgia. And, in fact, some of his targets, like ballots received after Election Day (but postmarked by Election Day), really weren't material to the election outcome. He's actually gone to the extreme of inviting GOP state legislatures, like in Michigan, to void Biden's state victory and replace the electors with Trump slates. This would likely, at minimum, be unconstitutional under the state constitutions, not to mention ignite massive protests and almost certain electoral backlash against GOP state and local politicians. To their credit, those Republicans have distanced themselves from Trump's antics, merely paying lip service to letting Trump having his day in court.
What is unusual is that Biden had no obvious coattails. The House, under the 116th Congress, held a 232-197 advantage (5 vacant, 1 LP). We currently see 222-204, with LA-5 in a runoff between 2 Republicans, and Republicans leading in almost all undecided races, although 2-3 are very tight. The House, assuming no additional Dem wins, stands at a net +5 seat majority, one of the slimmest, if not the slimmest in history. I don't think the Democrats flipped a single House incumbent's seat. Although not a lock, the conventional first-term midterms would almost certainly see the GOP regain control of the House in 2022. Vulnerable House Democrats might well balk at a progressive agenda.
The Senate Republicans have clinched at least a tie with 50 seats, with both Georgia seats in a runoff. So the worst case for the GOP is that the Dems win both seats, whereby VP-Elect Kamala Harris breaks a tie. It's certainly possible but unlikely; the Dems have generally lost almost all statewide runoff elections and Biden just barely held off Trump. The post-election polls I've seen show both races in a dead heat.
So what do we make of Pelosi's laughably absurd claim that Biden has a "strong mandate"? The fact is, almost all polls suggested that the Dems would flip the Senate and increase their House majority. So where were Biden's coattails enabling a progressive agenda? Not to mention certain polls (such as the Monmouth) showed Biden voters were more anti-Trump than pro-Biden and Trump voters were more anti-Biden than pro-Trump. Biden's vacillating policy views had more to do with accommodating his base than winning over independent voters. Trump and Biden have similar interventionist, protectionist high-spending and anti-immigration views; both favor expansion of the imperial "pen and a phone" Presidency. There are some obvious nuances, e.g., fossil fuels, government healthcare, and Biden's more orthodox diplomacy.
Will Trumpism die with Trump's eviction from the White House? One can only hope, although I saw a rumor that Trump's daughter-in-law is eyeing the upcoming North Carolina open Senate seat and Twitter rumors abound that Don Jr. may be looking at the 2024 race (assuming Donald doesn't try for his own comeback). I think some Republicans still fear being in Trump's cross-hairs so long as he is in the White House, but the reality of Trump leaving the White House is beginning to take hold. Heaven help us: I don't think Trump's toxic brew of nativist ideology and protectionism is going to revert to previous GOP free market policies anytime soon. I do think the Republicans will rediscover their objections to leftist policies and profligate spending.
