2016: The Perfect Storm?

May 20, 2016 By: Primo Encarnación Category: Uncategorized

As we noted earlier, close elections like the two for Dubya earlier this century are unusual, and since 1912, all but 4 victorious Presidents have had Electoral College wins north of 300 electoral votes (EV). Of those 22 wins, about 2/3 of them – fourteen – have been what we defined as “blowouts” of over 400 EV. And three have been “huge” at over 500 EV for the winner.

It will take a lot of work for Hillary to reach the 400-vote benchmark, and due to the current Republican strongholds in the Deep South and in the Northern Plains, general election wipe-outs where the loser wins only one or two states seem highly unlikely. But the small populations (and, thus, small EV prizes) of those states make it possible that Trump could win several states, and still take home fewer than 39 electoral votes.

What would that look like?

First, win all the toss-ups from our previous map. That would give Hillary 470 EV. The key to all that, of course, is minority turnout in places like Texas, Georgia and the Chicago burbs of Indiana. She’d have to win AR as a home state, and carry states like KS and LA based on the failed GOP governance there.

Then, to get the 30 remaining votes she needs, she’s going to have to build off the momentum she gained in GA, MO, IN and AR to draw in Kentucky and Tennesee, for an additional 19 EV. In declining order of switch-ability, the states remaining to Trump that she’d then have to gain another 11 votes from are: NE (4 more EV, we already gave her 1), WV (5), AK (3), OK (7), SD (3), WY (3), MS(6), AL (9), SC (9), ND (3), MT (3), ID (4).

Can all this happen?

Not unless Trump helps by being so patently, obviously, completely an unqualified candidate that GOP voters stay home in droves in every damn state. This is not a difficult case to make, obviously, but it is a very difficult case to sell.

It has gotten a lot harder in the last week as GOP folks, for the most part, seem to be falling in line behind Trump, and the Never Trump movement has run out of steam. Trump’s support in the primaries has been shown to be the same old hard-right mouth breathers that have formed the snacilbupeR base since Nixon, only now they are turning out for primaries rather than just in November. This bespeaks a small but energized base who can cause a lot of trouble in tiny states like we’ve listed here.

What does the historical precedent look like?

The three times this has happened (1936, 1972 and 1984) it’s been done by sitting Presidents running for re-election who won their first term by at least 300 EV (two by 400+ blowouts) and were building on that basis. Their opponents have been selected by contentious primaries, and the electorate was facing hard times, but times they felt were getting better under the current President. Each sitting President had been elected as a repudiation of the other Party based on those hard times.

How is this year different?

Besides none of those historical conditions obtaining, the electorate is a lot more polarized, and a lot more diverse.   This means that rising minority participation is helping to raise Democratic numbers, but hard-right enclaves make it more difficult to pull some states out the red column and into the blue. Furthermore, Hillary Clinton, while building on the popularity of the Obama Administration – essentially framing herself as a third Obama term – carries high negative perceptions herself. Combined with coming off a contentious primary of her own, it seems highly unlikely that massive turnout will propel her to a high-end victory over 500 EV.

What elements could contribute to the Perfect Storm?

  • Let Trump be Trump – and also let him be so bad that it overcomes the cognitive dissonance that has held the GOP coalition together since Reagan.
  • Perception: The media “horserace” narrative must be overcome – this is not an even fight between two differently-qualified individuals. It is a fight between qualified and not; between engaged and not; between Presidential and not. There’s not enough honest media to present that, so it will have to be overcome by hard work and lots of ads. And by folks like us.
  • Depressed GOP turnout – especially among women, who will be subjected to months of Trump’s misogyny. The risk with that is that, after awhile, it just blends into background noise. But we might also see lower turnout also among Trump’s base, low-information white males, who may find the effort to vote in a losing cause too egregious to bear.
  • Strong Dem turnout and some crossover GOP votes – especially among women and minorities.
  • Vice Presidential nominees – although they rarely have an effect on the race, especially with the “home state” nonsense, sometimes they DO have an effect. The right VP pick could ensure greater women and minorities turnout for Hillary. The wrong VP pick could utterly destroy Trump. Consider – I can’t believe it’s even a thing, but there it is – a Trump/Palin ticket.   Just, stop reading for a minute, put your hands in your lap, and consider it. Back now? Did the score “538-0” enter your mind?
  • Election strategy – Trump is the king of earned media and very little else in the professional political toolkit. His understanding of the election is based on the air war, and so far he hasn’t shown a lot of organizational skill. He just now hired a pollster, but I believe that will be less for micro-targeting and more for lying about internal poll numbers showing him doing better than he is. In other words, for more earned media. Hillary should be able to out-organize him everywhere.
  • Will – you can’t just sit back and wait for all 50 states to come to you. Team Hillary and the Democratic Party must full embrace Dean’s 50-state strategy and CHALLENGE EVERYWHERE. In this election, especially, the best defense is a good offense. Challenging in KY and WV shores up Ohio and Michigan. Challenging in South Dakota shores up Wisconsin. Challenging in the South shores up the mid-Atlantic and flips Georgia.

Come on, Primo, is all this gonna happen?

It really would have to be The Perfect Storm. That’s highly unlikely, although I think 400 is eminently do-able. The beauty of that is that the same strategy you would use to reach 500 guarantees you 400, and also helps all your down-ticket races.

But the whole key to everything, the reason I have believed from the start that Hillary would not only be the nominee, but also President of the United States, is because of the women’s vote. As we’ve noted in the past, the percentage of women in the November electorate has been rising slowly, but steadily, up to around 54%. Obama got 55% of that, which equates to a 5.4 percent head start in final totals. If Hillary, thanks to Trump’s big mouth, can pull in 60% of the women’s vote, that’s an 11% boost.  There are 8 women who are potential freshmen Democratic Senators.   What an exciting prospect!

So many things would have to go right for Hillary and wrong for Trump for the Democrats to pull off their first 500 EV Perfect Storm since FDR. I just don’t think we’re going to get there.  But for the first time in 84 years, it’s a conversation we can finally have.

And there’s always Hillary’s re-election in 2020!

Be social and share!

0 Comments to “2016: The Perfect Storm?”


  1. Polite Kool Marxist says:

    Primo, did you raid my SuperPac and drink all the scotch?

    “And there’s always Hillary’s re-election in 2020!”

    Albeit, optimism is grand. But we’re talking about a weak candidate who was rejected in 2008, may or may not succeed in 2016, and by the actuarial charts may or may not be dead in 2020.

    Back to 2016. The year in which Drumpf couldn’t possibly be nominated. OOPS. Yeah. Not quite ready to climb out on a limb with “Hillary cannot be defeated.”

    1
  2. A wooden candidate, with astronomical, partly earned negatives, facing a dynasty repudiating electorate, will garner 400 electoral votes? I got your under covered.

    2
  3. God loves handicappers!

    3
  4. Rastybob says:

    It all comes down to the ground game. Dig out every last vote and get them to the polls. Then make sure every vote is counted. We all know Who votes is not as important as who counts the votes. Do what Obama did, Make sure you police the polls and the count. The GOP here in AZ. did a dry run on not enough polling places. All it did was wake some folks up.
    Black and brown lives will mater. When enough black and brown votes turn out. You have to fight for your right to vote.
    And then use that right.

    4
  5. I must be the odd man out here, I like Ms. Clinton and always have. if she and Bill were running against each other, I’d vote for her. she’s smart, good sense of humor and quick on her feet. you have no idea how much I am looking forward to the first presidential campaign debate with Mr. Trump. stock up on popcorn and drinks now, hilarity will ensue!

    here’s the thing though, she could win every available electoral vote, and the popular vote by 20,000,000, and the republicans will still say she doesn’t have a mandate. they’re just stupid that way.

    5
  6. It’s easy to say the Donald will self destruct, but I’m just not sure how it can happen if it hasn’t happened yet. What’s different now than in those elections is that t electorate has become more stratified and set in their ways. There are so many folks that would literally vote for Satan if he/she was their party’s nominee.

    6
  7. I have noticed something that disturbs me. Eight years ago there was jubilation over the prospect of our first black President. I’m seeing nothing for the chance of our first woman President. I realize personality is likely part of it–Obama is way cooler–but surely there should be a little joy at the prospect.

    What gives? Are women still not viewed as leaders?

    7
  8. Marcia in CO says:

    No, cpinva, you are not the only “odd man out” … I’ll be voting for Hillary, too! For me, it was a difficult toss-up when she was running with Barack … but I ended up voting for Barack – twice – because it WAS his time … OUR time for this particular president.
    Now, it is Hillary’s time … OUR time … this Country’s time … for a woman president! How many other countries have women as their leaders and they seem to be doing OK … plus they all seem to have a better handle on healthcare and so many other things that we are falling short on!!
    The more I see or hear Bernie and his Bots, the more I’m convinced that she is the one to sit in the Oval Office.

    8
  9. Gringo Viejo says:

    A nice scenario, and one that I would think highly likely (538-0) if voters were rational. Yet living in Louisiana (not a native! not a native!), eight years of “failed GOP governance” (an understatement if I ever heard one) has not led the electorate to drop the Republican Party. Across the South I see a lot of well-entrenched Republican majorities that will gladly vote for Trump (or Wallace if he was still alive). Here in Louisiana all a Democratic governor has gotten us is gridlock at the state level (admittedly an improvement over Jindal-dominated politics) and bills regulating the age and weight of strippers.

    9
  10. maryelle says:

    Secretary Clinton was the leading democratic candidate for most of the 2008 primaries. She was not rejected, but chose, for the good of the party to support Barack Obama after Ted Kennedy threw his support to him. She is no reject by any means, but an accomplished woman who has successfully participated in government at the highest levels. To hear Democrats disparaging her is an affront to all of us who recognize the good she has already done for this country: nuclear missile reduction treaty with Russia, strict sanctions on Iran bringing them to the table on nuclear arms, children’s health initiative, global Women’s Issues, full healthcare benefits for reservists and national guardsmen and countless benefits for Americans. She may well be the best qualified presidential candidate in either party since FDR.

    10
  11. Marcia in CO says:

    I strongly agree with you, Maryelle … nicely put!! Hillary has proven time and again that she is ready and able to do the job!!
    Thank You!!

    11
  12. Polite Kool Marxist says:

    Wasn’t it just a few days ago that I called Donnie Drumpf the “Emperor with No Clothes”? Seems the cartoonists have adopted that opinion. #NakedDonnie should cause his campaign some downward turmoil.

    https://1.bp.blogspot.com/-5B1aNjgX4_4/Vz-4cGhvl2I/AAAAAAABcPY/3ByIR2iEUMIjyXOVo8SXc1rm7qzW-DO7ACLcB/s640/5%2Bsteve%2Bsack.jpg

    While Hilz is a heavy lift, Donnie should be a yuuuge drop. #NakedDonnie

    12
  13. Polite Kool Marxist says:

    Primo, speaking of prescient, it was you who spoke of Roy Cohn and Donnie’s early relationship.

    http://www.counterpunch.org/2016/05/20/trumps-rasputin-what-the-donald-learned-from-roy-cohn/

    I can list 100 reasons or more why 16 snacilbupeR couldn’t beat this putz. But c’mon Dems and bury this pisher.

    13