Electoral Blowout Doesn’t Look Likely

[DonViejo]

Stuart Rothenberg: “Over the past 10 presidential contests, there have been three narrow Electoral College wins (1976, 2000 and 2004) and three true blow-outs (1980, 1984 and 1988). The remaining four contests (1992, 1996, 2008 and 2012) produced something in between — a comfortable victory for the winner but not quite a landslide. The winners in those four elections received between 332 and 379 electoral votes, while the losing candidate drew between 159 and 206 electoral votes. (In four of the 10, there was a faithless elector.)”

“At this point, Clinton is more likely to approach the size of Obama’s wins, whether his 365-to-173 electoral vote win over John McCain in 2008 or his more narrow 332-to-206 victory over Mitt Romney four years later. A 1980-style blow-out does not seem to be in the cards given the country’s current political divide or the two major-party nominees.”

###

https://politicalwire.com/2016/08/30/electoral-blowout-doesnt-look-likely/

[democrattotheend]

1. How was 2008 not a blowout?

Maybe a 7-point margin is a bit shy of a landslide in the popular vote, but how is 365 electoral votes not an electoral blowout?

[tonyt53]

2. I'd go with a 310-228 or something similar. Won't be a blowout. Wish for it, but won't happen.

[NurseJackie]

3. I'm not sure what to make of this. Should I be concerned?

I was pleased with the size of both of Obama's wins, but now if Hillary duplicates the size of Obama's previous wins, are we supposed to be disappointed? Or what?

[Adrahil]

8. no. :) It's unless there is something BIG....

... it seems unlikely the dynamics of the race will change very much at this point.

[NurseJackie]

17. :-)

[SCliberal91294]

4. I think it could be

as much over slightly higher than 2008. Or it could be in between 2008 and 2012

[randome]

5. 3 compared to 3 compared to 4. Not an adequate sample size at all.

[hr][font color="blue"][center]There is nothing you can't do if you put your mind to it.
Nothing.[/center][/font][hr]

[Happyhippychick]

6. So if Hillary doesn't get 49/50 states then it isn't a blowout?

The media really needs to keep this story going, doesn't it?

[stopbush]

9. Bingo!

[ChairmanAgnostic]

18. I don't think that some folks here fully comprehend just how

Sly, vile, manipulative, and convincing Teh Donald is to a surprisingly large minority of folks in the US and A.

Need I remind you of how easily he took down the entire GOP? And transformed it from a bizarre collection of neocons, Teabaggers, and conservatives who now look moderate in comparison, into a racist, nationalistic, "bomb first, ignore any and all questions second," sexist, collection of heavily armed, uneducated dweebs who think that their Two Amendment right to strut around armed is twice as powerful as the One Amendment? After all Two is Greater than One. (This is partly because they cannot count greater than two, and partly because they think through their penises and use substitutes to make themselves feel more manly)

The last, and biggest problem is that a majority of Americans do not like or trust Hillary. A slightly larger majority do not like or trust Trump. That was, is, and will be the problem that we face in this election. To ignore the danger posed by the fact that most people want none of the above, is to put our chances for success at great risk.

Bernie fans, of whom there still are a great number, suffer from angst that she will ignore them once in office. Moderates, apolitical, not into a daily discussion of politics or politicians, get very little information about the race, except what they may glimpse on Boredcast news or cable. And even then, they'd rather watch football, basketball, or even baseball. When you have a trumpian monster hogging that segment of the media that talks politics and elections, they get used to him, and may vote for him only because they view him (with little or no data) as the lesser of two weevils. Conservatives may hate and distrust Trump as well, but there are enough questions, concocted, real, imagined, or just plain false, about Hillary, that they cannot move to vote for her. I personally experience and know this. My entire family are GOPers, and they cannot vote for either on. My own dad is writing my name in, or Atilla the Hun's. He will decide later. My mom thinks TRump is cute and convincing, even though he is a distasteful SOB.

Complacency is our enemy, and so far, Huma, Weiner's wiener, and the Foundation (not to mention emails) have been the biggest attention getters from Hillary. Her refusal to do press conferences will be held against her. That horrific AP tweet, which everyone agrees was horribly flawed is still up and is having an impact.

The race is getting closer, and will close up even more. That is what happens when the shock value of Trumpian idiocies become routine and expected, instead of insulting, rude, and shocking.

My point is this. WE CAN LOSE THIS ELECTION. I sincerely hope not, but we can.

[stopbush]

19. Trump won with Rs because he was preaching hate to the choir.

The problem arises when you attempt to move your "religious" message out of the Amen corner and into the world of the atheists. He's failing miserably on that front.

[ChairmanAgnostic]

21. I cannot disagree. BUT

and it is a Kardshian sized but, he is not failing completely with many other segments and facets of the population. Just as Hillary is not connecting well with some groups, not all GOP groups outside of his gaggle of nut jobs are so afraid of his bad ideas that they would not, in the end, vote for him.

[stopbush]

24. I think the dislike of Hillary is overblown

as a factor in who people will vote for. It's certainly far from the most-important factor.

Everybody recalls having a school teacher who was not their favorite, or who they even disliked, but who they respected for their skills as a teacher.

Being liked isn't the be all and end all.

[ChairmanAgnostic]

30. Uh huh.

Get out in the real world much, do you?

Did not think so.

There is a large. Intense. Smart. Mistrusting. Group of people along the entire political spectrum that dislikes her. You have to take that into account. To ignore it is political malpractice.

She has to address that group of millions . . . Or she risks losing to an asshat like trump.

[stopbush]

31. Uh, no.

[JoePhilly]

10. +1

[JaneyVee]

7. 2012 was a blowout too.

[JoePhilly]

11. If we know the winner by 11pm, its a blow out.

[Liberal_Stalwart71]

15. I'll never forget Axelrod telling us to stop worrying; that we'd be in bed no later than 11:00...

I never worried because I knew that Romney had to win every single last one of the swing states. He couldn't lose one. Well, one of those states was Pennsylvania. Every year, the media tries to make Democrats think that Republicans will take PA but they never do. I don't even understand why they keep putting PA in the toss-up category when the state has not voted for a Republican in over 30 years since Reagan.

Anyway, once Romney lost PA, I had another drink, gave my hubby a kiss, and went to bed.

[FSogol]

26. We'll know the winner 20 minutes after the polls in PA and FL close.

If Trumpy doesn't win those two states, he is finished.

[JoePhilly]

27. Agree!

I may stay up late just to see which traditional red states The Conald loses!

[jamese777]

12. In today's political climate

with Republicans in control of both Houses of Congress, a Republican-appointee majority on the Supreme Court until Scalia passed away, 31 states with Republican Governors, and 29 states with Republicans in control of both Houses of state legislatures, ANY Democratic victory is good enough for me and 60% or above in the Electoral College is what I call a "landslide."

[Liberal_Stalwart71]

14. You got it, but it's still sad that (a) Democrats allowed that to happen by not coming out in big

enough numbers in 2010. I will never forgive us for that; and (b) that we even have to make this argument. We shouldn't have to. Because we didn't show up *enough* in 2010, we allowed the Republican-controlled states to redistrict. So in 2012 and 2014 when we DID show up, it didn't matter because redistricting made our participation obsolete. So Democrats could receive a million more votes than Republicans and yet, the ReThugs STILL control the House and ultimately the Senate.

That fucking sucks. I hope we never make that mistake again and not show up EVERY TWO YEARS!! Not every four, every TWO!!!

[Liberal_Stalwart71]

13. People are so full of shit with their higher expectations for blacks and women...

So, we are made to believe that:

365-to-173 electoral vote win over John McCain in 2008 is NOT overwhelming or a blowout???

and...

Obama's "more narrow" 332-to-206 victory over Mitt Romney four years later is not a mandate???

Bush barely won in 2000 and didn't do all that much better against John Kerry in 2004, but the political elites never diminished or downplayed his victories. They were referring to the 2004 win as a mandate and never flinched doing so.

A black man beats one of the most beloved politicians in modern history--handily--and it wasn't a big deal.

A woman will probably do even better, even if only slightly better, and it's characterized as "not as big" or impressive.

Again, people are so full of shit with their racism and sexism, it's fucking pitiful.

[Starry Messenger]

32. +1

[Egnever]

16. Hahah stupid ass pundit

Doesn't have a clue..

This is going to be a blowout of epic proportions despite Clinton's negatives.

[Exilednight]

20. As my college football coach use to say, it doesn't matter if you win by

1 point, or a 100 points, it goes into the same column and your bowl ring doesnt look any different.

[dhol82]

28. I like that

Reminds me of the old saying, 'what do you call the guy who graduated last in their med school class? Doctor!'

[La Lioness Priyanka]

22. yes, thats how gerrymandering and incredible polarization of parties work

there will be no blowouts unless something fundamentally changes

[Doctor Jack]

23. EVERYONE PANIC!!!!

[Unit 001]

25. I'm simply amazed and baffled

by the number of stupid, gullible working people in this nation who vote republican.

[Purveyor]

29. This presidential election will be decided on personalities, not issues mainly because

issues are rarely discussed.