November 7, 2016

[°Leprechaun]

https://electoral-vote.com/evp2016/Pres/Maps/Nov07.html

If you believed this map you probably would think that it was a slam dunk for Clinton.
I think that the map could look similar in 2020.

Comments?

[ElectionsGuy]

Yes, it won't look like that (people will be well aware WI+MI+PA are competitive) but it could very well be Dem 320 Rep 218 or something like that by election day just by polling leads. After 2016, we need to be on guard.

[Sir Mohamed]

On election night, I thought this would be the map minus NC, giving HRC a 307 EVs victory.

September 19 is weird: https://electoral-vote.com/evp2016/Pres/Maps/Sep19.html

[MarkD]

https://electoral-vote.com/evp2016/Pres/Maps/Nov07.html

If you believed this map you probably would think that it was a slam dunk for Clinton.
I think that the map could look similar in 2020.

Comments?

I'd prefer a prediction in which the 2020 Dem gets about 100 more EVs than that map. I think Trump keeps getting more and more unpopular and loses maybe half of the states that he carried in 2016.

On election night, I thought this would be the map minus NC, giving HRC a 307 EVs victory.

September 19 is weird: https://electoral-vote.com/evp2016/Pres/Maps/Sep19.html    

That's pretty weird, alright. NM being solid GOP while Alabama is only likely GOP?? CO leaning more GOP than NC??

[Politician]

https://electoral-vote.com/evp2016/Pres/Maps/Nov07.html

If you believed this map you probably would think that it was a slam dunk for Clinton.
I think that the map could look similar in 2020.

Comments?

I'd prefer a prediction in which the 2020 Dem gets about 100 more EVs than that map. I think Trump keeps getting more and more unpopular and loses maybe half of the states that he carried in 2016.

On election night, I thought this would be the map minus NC, giving HRC a 307 EVs victory.

September 19 is weird: https://electoral-vote.com/evp2016/Pres/Maps/Sep19.html    

That's pretty weird, alright. NM being solid GOP while Alabama is only likely GOP?? CO leaning more GOP than NC??

Also Rhode Island and New Jersey being only Barely/Likely Dem.

[morgankingsley]

I honestly forgot Trump was leading in Nevada

[Gracile]

In retrospect, it's interesting how Wisconsin was commonly viewed as the "safest" of the MI/PA/WI trio before the election. Much of the polling in Wisconsin showed Clinton comfortably ahead of Trump, with only a few polls showing a tight race (this was also backed up by polling of the Senate race as well, where Feingold consistently lead Johnson and only a few polls that were seen as outliers at the time put Johnson ahead). Additionally, the other two states were contested more heavily - PA was seen as a fringe swing state throughout the cycle and MI was seen as very close in the closing weeks of the campaign.

This is, of course, far from the current conventional wisdom that Wisconsin will be the toughest of those states to flip back. However, it also shows that sometimes narratives created through polling and spending often end up being completely wrong (though granted, there were signs that these states were going to flip that went overlooked). It will be interesting to see how 2020 plays out with that in mind.

[morgankingsley]

In retrospect, it's interesting how Wisconsin was commonly viewed as the "safest" of the MI/PA/WI trio before the election.

I can kind of understand because Wisconsin has been 'safe D' since 1988 as opposed to 92 for PA and MI

[President Punxsutawney Phil]

In retrospect, it's interesting how Wisconsin was commonly viewed as the "safest" of the MI/PA/WI trio before the election.

I can kind of understand because Wisconsin has been 'safe D' since 1988 as opposed to 92 for PA and MI

[Beefalow and the Consumer]

Given what we knew at the time, the following result seemed just as likely as a Trump victory:

[Beefalow and the Consumer]

In retrospect, it's interesting how Wisconsin was commonly viewed as the "safest" of the MI/PA/WI trio before the election.

I can kind of understand because Wisconsin has been 'safe D' since 1988 as opposed to 92 for PA and MI

A cursory glance at the polls gave absolutely no reason to think Trump had much chance in Wisconsin.

A deeper view, with 20-20 hindsight, reveals the following:
1. Hillary hadn't broken 50% in months.
2. The numbers of undecideds were yuge
3. There wasn't enough time for the polls to properly reflect Comey's bombshell, but they were moving towards Trump.

If Comey never came forward that he was reopening Clinton's emails, she wins the state easily. She would also currently be the subject of an impeachment inquiry ( )

[Plankton5165]

I'm surprised Delaware went to Clinton on poll closing time.

It didn't even go to Clinton on poll closing time in 1992.

[Beefalow and the Consumer]

I'm surprised Delaware went to Clinton on poll closing time.

It didn't even go to Clinton on poll closing time in 1992.

The white population dropped from roughly 80% to 68% in that time period, and I'm guessing urban precincts, turnout, and exit polls made it an insta-call.

[morgankingsley]

I sometimes forget that fivethirtyeight was the only one that gave Trump anything more than a pure zero chance of winning

[BigVic]

I had Hillary winning 278-260 with WI giving her the win.