Demographics change as well and some states become less representative than others. N. Carolina is now a swing state. Virginia apparently said “eff it” and went from red to blue without barely a glace at purple. Missouri went from swing state to Republican. There’s nothing magical about Ohio that prevents the same from happening there.
Trump’s coalition is “less people in nearly every demographic than Romney or McCain got”
Well, of course she does. It’s ridiculous to suggest she wouldn’t.
Keep in mind, though, there’s two different kinds of rigging:
Hacked servers, fraudulent voting, corruption in elections offices. That’s the sort that there’d be new evidence of, and that’s not what anyone is saying Trump should stay quiet about if there’s evidence of it.
Media bias. That’s the sort of rigging Trump keeps talking about, and that’s bullshit.
He is doing better among working class whites, which is why he’s competing better than Romney or McCain in Ohio, Iowa, Maine CD2, and New Hampshire. As a matter of fact, Nate wrote last week that if you are looking for signs of a Trump comeback, watch New Hampshire.
Trump is doing worse though among college educated whites without postgraduate degrees, which is normally a group Republicans win by a few points. Romney won college graduates with an undergraduate degree by 4 in 2012:
Trump’s coalition is less educated and poorer than Romney’s.
Whenever Trump is telling a story about himself interacting with anyone, in Trump’s telling, the other person always calls him “Mr. Trump”. I was struck by that during the primaries, when he was boasting about Senators calling him up for donations or something, and in his version of the conversation, they began nearly every sentence with “Mr. Trump”.
Which state would that be? I’m not seeing one. 538 has the same blue states as 2012 with the addition of North Carolina in polls-plus, and NC plus Arizona in polls-only and nowcast.
Trump is leading in Indiana, which Obama won in 2008 but lost in 2012. That’s the only state Trump is leading in that Obama won in either election. Indiana is traditionally red, so I think Obama’s win in 2008 was more of a fluke than any sign of a big shift in that state.
Back in may Trump and Clinton had one poll tied but most polls in the last 2 months showed Clinton ahead by about 8 points on average.
This month’s last 5 polls at “270 to win” so far has Clinton ahead by just a bit more than 8.
Looks more like a flat line to me; and I think that is how Trump’s chances look like because, not mentioned by the 270 agregator here, the University of New Hampshire just came with a poll were Clinton is ahead by 15 points.
Iowa, Ohio, and Maine CD2 all look pretty good for Trump. Clinton probably needs another point or two in the general election polling to take all three from him.
What they have said is that Mr. Trump’s accusations of the election being rigged have no foundation, and as such, they continue to have confidence in our system.
I think that’s a little unfair, I think it’s safe to say that almost all Women are by now “out to get him”.
It’s the perfect self sustaining closed belief system. If anyone doesn’t agree with me they’re obviously paid shills or corrupt. The fact that no major newspaper has endorsed Trump is obviously because they’re biased or corrupt. Not because his ideas and platform are either offensive, contradictory or actually illegal and against the constitution and he shows no understanding at all of the actual issues and of international politics and current affairs. Nope, that couldn’t possibly be it!
You said they were “more likely than not” to go to Trump on 538. That’s not true. 538 is showing Ohio and Iowa blue in all models. Ohio has a better than 60% chance in going to Clinton. He may have more of a chance in those states than in any others won by Obama in 2012, but at present they’re “more likely than not” to go to Clinton. And since they were fairly close in 2012, I don’t see any big signs of a shift there.
Actually no, he said 538 has Trump more likely than not to win a state Obama took in 2012, which is correct. At the moment, 538 gives that a 60% chance. While Iowa and Ohio might each be light blue, the model obviously doesn’t see them necessarily going the same way.
He should have clarified that’s what he meant, then. His remark was in the context of Trump having a “different coalition” than Romney. While that is no doubt true, the fact that Trump might win a state Obama won is not evidence of that. Romney won two states that McCain lost in 2008; that was not an indication that their coalitions were any different.
because, not mentioned by the 270 agregator here, the University of New Hampshire just came with a poll were Clinton is ahead by 15 points.