THERE is much debate about the 2020 US elections. However, there are neither cogent arguments nor consistent scientific analysis that explain what is going on. This article seeks to cut through the noise and bring rationality and reason to the discourse. GUEST COLUMNIST: AUTHOR. G. O. MUTAMBARA A new electoral system In their national efforts to mitigate the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on the November 2020 electoral process, the United States, through its various States, introduced a new electoral system with the following provisions:  Postal ballot voting for anyone who wants to use it;  Early in-person voting for anyone who wants to do so;  Election day, in-person voting. This contrasts with the old system:  Election day, in-person voting (as the primary electoral method);  Postal ballot voting for a few who apply and justify; Early in-person voting; only for a few exceptional cases. Although the new electoral system was put in place to mitigate COVID-19, it presents different and better voting opportunities to citizens than the old system. It is not equivalent to the old system. Why do we say this? The new system makes it easier and less onerous for a citizen to cast a vote. The new system leads to a higher turnout for every candidate who embraces it. For purposes of illustration, if a candidate has 100 supporters, under the old system, we can assume 60 will vote, whereas under the new system the number will increase say to 80. There are various reasons why supporters do not cast their votes. Under the new system, those reasons are reduced, hence the increased turnout. Another impact of the new electoral system was to remove voting logistical constraints experienced in some constituencies such as few polling stations, prohibitive documentation requirements, and other voter suppression shenanigans. The new system radically enabled the voter. Trump’s strategic error Donald Trump did not embrace the new system, while Joe Biden did. Trump's wrong assumption was that all his supporters would show up on election day, November 3, 2020. He did not understand that the new system has the potential to affect the turnout for every candidate. Biden and the Democrats whole-heartedly embraced the new system and mobilised their supporters to take advantage of postal votes and early in-person voting. In some cases, Trump did the opposite by casting aspersion about the new system, thus discouraging his supporters from utilising postal voting and early in-person voting. This was disastrous. Trump practised voter suppression against himself. If he did not like the new system, he had two options:  Launch legal challenges at the state level to stop the new system in all the states, way before the election date. Of course, this was not going to succeed because the states have the power to run elections in the United States. The Federal Government has no role.  Having failed to stop the new system, Trump should have embraced it and encouraged his supporters to utilise it maximally. He did not exercise either of these two opti