In a short paper published in 1921, French mathematician and politician Émile Borel introduced the basic principles of what would later become the game of electoral politics. Borel’s version involved players arranging numbers in a specific order and winning if their chosen numbers were higher than their opponent’s. This simple structure had wider applications beyond politics, as Borel noted that war, economics, and finance also involved similar strategic thinking.
The field of game theory further developed this concept, with one notable example being the Colonel Blotto game. In 1950, a paper from the Rand Corporation described this continuous game where players distribute troops across battlefields to win wars. Real-world scenarios like research and development, patent races, auctions, hiring strategies, and elections have all been analyzed using Blotto games.
Finding solutions to these games is challenging as they require complex mixed strategies that involve randomizing plans to outsmart opponents. Presidential campaigns can be seen as elaborate versions of rock-paper-scissors with strategic elements.
Political scientists have recognized the similarities between electoral campaigns and Blotto games since at least 2006 when they highlighted how Al Gore’s narrow loss to George W. Bush in 2000 may have been due to mistakes in his strategy. Economists have also delved into Blotto mathematics to gain insights into more complex variations of the game that better reflect real-world environments.
While playing this FT Election Game may offer some strategic insights into the political landscape, the true outcome will be determined on November 5th when Americans head to the polls.
(Note: This story is free for sharing with non-subscribers.)
