Could an old-school approach to voting decide the midterms?

Election Day is here, and voters will reveal whether tightening polls in competitive statewide races will mean a “red wave” sweeps the country.

If that wave turns out not to be as strong as expected, Democrats can likely thank split-ticket voting, the practice of electing candidates from different political parties for different statewide, congressional, or presidential races.

Split-ticket voting was once far more common, in part because of a belief expressed by Elon Musk recently. In endorsing Republicans up and down the ballot Monday night, he argued that “shared power curbs the worst excesses of both parties.” In an era of intense polarization, and narrow congressional majorities, that sentiment hasn’t proven to be the case and has generally waned. However, this cycle, with polling showing high dissatisfaction with certain candidates in key races, such as Doug Mastriano in Pennsylvania, some voters appear willing to cross party lines.

In nine states, that would look like voters having a senator and a governor (or another office, like secretary of state or US representative) from different political parties.

“It reached its height in the mid to late ’80s, especially at the federal level, [with] people voting [differently] for president and Congress,” Barry C. Burden, a professor of political science at the University of Wisconsin-Madison, told Vox. But as political polarization, the decline of local news, and the nationalization of local politics have increased in the past two decades, split-ticket voting has been dying a slow death.