Donald Trump’s Narrow Path

I really don't see an Electoral College path, but that's me.

He's going to need to sweep up all the states Mitt Romney won in 2012, and then take back a few that Obama won, like Iowa and Colorado, not to mention Florida and Ohio.

At WSJ, "Donald Trump’s Path to Victory Is Narrow":

PHILADELPHIA — After months of campaigning, the presidential race has come down to this: Democrat Hillary Clinton has several apparent paths to the White House, while Republican Donald Trump must all-but sweep the battlegrounds where the race has centered, and will likely need at least one Democratic-leaning state, too.

For Mrs. Clinton, victory would require her winning one or two of the most contested states, if she can hold on to those that have long favored Democratic nominees. Mr. Trump has said he has a shot at those Democratic-leaning states, which include Michigan, Pennsylvania, Wisconsin, Minnesota and New Mexico. Yet polls in each show Mrs. Clinton ahead.

Nationally, a Wall Street Journal/NBC News poll released Sunday found Mrs. Clinton leading Mr. Trump by 4 points among likely voters as the two nominees head into their final day of campaigning before Tuesday’s election.

For Mr. Trump to win, he must finish ahead of Mrs. Clinton in the battleground states of Florida, Ohio and, in most calculations, North Carolina, analysts from both parties said. His path to victory, far narrower than Mrs. Clinton’s, also likely requires a win in at least one state that has long been in the Democratic column.

“He has to run the table,” said Russ Schriefer, a strategist for Republican Mitt Romney’s 2012 campaign.

Mr. Trump’s chances are dim unless he can wrest away a state such as Michigan or Pennsylvania, where he campaigned Sunday, places that haven’t voted Republican in presidential races since 1988. Looking to shore up Mrs. Clinton’s base, her campaign added stops in both states Monday and began TV ads in Michigan, where polls have shown the race tightening.

Mr. Trump on Sunday followed a campaign schedule that outlined a possible path to victory—cutting through Midwestern and mid-Atlantic states, regions rich in the working-class, white voters who help form his base of support. He campaigned in Iowa, Minnesota, Michigan and Pennsylvania, each of which has a largely white voter pool that could boost his chances.

He also appeared in Virginia, a state where the Clinton campaign is so confident that Mrs. Clinton last campaigned there in July.

Democrats begin with an advantage in the hunt for the 270 Electoral College votes required to win. In every election since 2000, they have won states that account for 242 electoral votes; Republicans have won states that total 179 in the same period. The GOP, however, gets to a starting tally of 190 by adding Indiana, which backed Barack Obama in 2008 but has since shifted reliably Republican.

“The map naturally has a blue tilt to it simply because there’s a history of these states voting Democratic,” said Neil Newhouse, a Republican strategist and pollster. “Simply because of that, she starts on our 40-yard line.”

Mr. Trump is testing the proposition that a Republican can win with an economic message in the industrial Midwest, where states remain largely white.

“We’re going into what they used to call Democrat strongholds where we’re now either tied or ahead,” Mr. Trump said at a rally Saturday. “We’re doing well in places that they don’t believe.”

Beyond his Midwest strategy, Mr. Trump could also win by carrying a large set of battleground states where polls show him within striking distance or ahead: Florida, Ohio, North Carolina, Iowa, Nevada and New Hampshire. That combination of victories would produce a 269-269 Electoral College tie...

Well, that's all we need, an Electoral College tie. The election would go to the House, where Trump would likely win. Talk about Democrats blowing through the roof. It'll be worse than 2000.

But keep reading.

In the Sunset of the Baby Boomers' Generation, Election Reawakens an Old Divide

I'm a boomer, born on the tail end of the generation, in the early 1960s.

At the New York Times:

8 years after Obama lamented "psychodrama of the baby boom generation" & 12 years after litigating Bush, Kerry, Nam!https://t.co/U4ZrD0vpWO

— Jonathan Martin (@jmartNYT) November 7, 2016

They came of age in the 1960s and ’70s, in the traumatic aftermath of the assassinations of John F. Kennedy and the Rev. Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. They fought and protested a war together, argued over Nixon and Kissinger together, laughed at Archie Bunker together. As children, they practiced air-raid drills; as adults, they cheered the fall of the Berlin Wall.

In the 1990s, they saw one of their own become president, watching him gain glory as one of the most gifted politicians of his time, but also infamy as one of its most self-indulgent — a poster child for the Me Generation.

They are of course the baby boomers, the collective offspring of the most fertile period in American history. At 75 million strong, they have been the most dominant force in American life for three decades, and one of its most maligned. Enlightened but self-centered, introspective but reckless, they are known among the cohorts that followed them — and even to some boomers themselves — as the generation that failed to live up to its lofty ideals, but still held fast to its sense of superiority.

If Bill Clinton was their white-haired id, Hillary Clinton is their superego in a pantsuit. A second Clinton presidency could represent a last hurrah for the baby boomers. But it could also offer a shot at a kind of generational redemption.

“There is a kind of do-over quality to it,” said Landon Y. Jones, the author of the 1980 book “Great Expectations: America and the Baby Boom Generation.” “This is their last chance to get it right.”

A shared history binds the boomers — as do, broadly speaking, some shared traits. Their parents suffered through the Depression and World War II before rearing them in the most prosperous society the world had ever seen. Inevitably, perhaps, they were guided by two polestars: responsibility and entitlement.

Those dueling impulses powered the rise of both Clintons: one impulse galvanizing supporters who deeply admired their commitment to public service, the other galling critics who saw them as playing by their own rules...

Well, if the Clintons are going to be representative of the boomers, I think it's time to pass the baton.

Frankly, even Obama's a better representative, at least in terms of family values. He does seem like he's kept and raised a nice family, which is not true for the Clintons.

The Cyberwarfare Election

I was already thinking about this, as I was considering how I was going to analyze the 2016 election in my upcoming classes.

It's not just cyberwarfare as a political issue, but also a factor impinging directly on the campaigns, such as all the WikiLeaks revelations and accusations of Russian political influence.

In any case, the New York Times, "Under the Din of the Presidential Race Lies a Once and Future Threat: Cyberwarfare":

MANCHESTER, N.H. — The 2016 presidential race will be remembered for many ugly moments, but the most lasting historical marker may be one that neither voters nor American intelligence agencies saw coming: It is the first time that a foreign power has unleashed cyberweapons to disrupt, or perhaps influence, a United States election.

And there is a foreboding sense that, in elections to come, there is no turning back.

The steady drumbeat of allegations of Russian troublemaking — leaks from stolen emails and probes of election-system defenses — has continued through the campaign’s last days. These intrusions, current and former administration officials agree, will embolden other American adversaries, which have been given a vivid demonstration that, when used with some subtlety, their growing digital arsenals can be particularly damaging in the frenzy of a democratic election.

“Most of the biggest stories of this election cycle have had a cybercomponent to them — or the use of information warfare techniques that the Russians, in particular, honed over decades,” said David Rothkopf, the chief executive and editor of Foreign Policy, who has written two histories of the National Security Council. “From stolen emails, to WikiLeaks, to the hacking of the N.S.A.’s tools, and even the debate about how much of this the Russians are responsible for, it’s dominated in a way that we haven’t seen in any prior election.”

The magnitude of this shift has gone largely unrecognized in the cacophony of a campaign dominated by charges of groping and pay-for-play access. Yet the lessons have ranged from the intensely personal to the geostrategic...

Keep reading.

Why America Can't Make Up Its Mind Three Days Before the Election

From Salena Zito, at the New York Post:

I drove 2000 miles on the back roads-from Appalachia to the Rockies.
Meet the other America https://t.co/tgqSybd3uJ pic.twitter.com/WA75u99dZc

— SalenaZito (@SalenaZito) November 7, 2016

Clinton, Trump in Dead Heat for Florida and Ohio, at CBS News Battleground Tracker (VIDEO)

It's Anthony Salvanto, who've I've come to like a lot, for Face the Nation:

Watch, "CBS News Battleground Tracker: Trump, Clinton in Dead Heat in Ohio, Florida."

On election night, it's a bad sign for the Democrats if Hillary's not ahead in states as the polls close. If they're too close to call, that's going to be a good sign for the Republicans.

I'll probably get home around 5:30pm or so, depending on whether there's a line at my polling place, and there's never been one this last few years. Hence, when I turn on the television, it's possible the networks could be projecting a Hillary Clinton electoral college victory. The nets pretty much called it for Obama by 6:00pm on the West Coast in 2012, and I was surprised, since everyone was talking about how it was going to be a long night.

Well, it's possible we'll have a long night this year, and I hope so.

More later.

'The ABC/WaPo Poll's Track Record Since 1992 is Insane...'

Says Kristen Soltis Anderson, on Twitter.

The ABC/WaPo poll's track record since 1992 is insane. Freakishly accurate. FWIW. https://t.co/SztpfPuKik

— Kristen S Anderson (@KSoltisAnderson) November 4, 2016

She's the author of The Selfie Vote: Where Millennials Are Leading America (And How Republicans Can Keep Up), which I desperately need to read.

Will 'Fed-Up' Millennials Vote for Third Party Candidates?

I don't vote third party. Insignificant protest votes are a waste.

Frankly, I'll bet "fed-up" Millennials, if they don't like the choices, will simply decide to sit this one out. It's not like their cohort's voter turnout rate is overpowering, or anything.

In any case, from the front-page at today's USA Today:

Here's where fed-up Millennials are thinking about putting their votes. https://t.co/jefc6Zwb7W

— USA TODAY (@USATODAY) October 11, 2016

'Millennials are the worst. I should know — I am one...'

Heh.

This is a great essay.

From Johnny Oleksinsk, at the New York Post:

"The social awkwardness of 20-somethings is a problem caused by two enemies: Kanye-sized egos and smartphones" https://t.co/fSgYYW6g5K

— New York Post (@nypost) July 12, 2016

Too often, during a conversation, a young person’s eyes glaze over as they decide what scintillating tidbit about their brilliant selves to reveal next, be it the three days they didn’t leave their apartment, or how a study abroad experience in Portugal nine years ago shaped who they are today. News flash: Nobody cares.

(Sorry, I just got a text from someone I’d rather be spending time with. Feel free to keep reading while I carry on a separate conversation with them.)