News

Clinton vs. Trump: How Clinton’s Path Looked After Florida

Republican nominee Donald Trump (L) and Democratic nominee Hillary Clinton arrive for the first presidential debate at Hofstra University in Hempstead, New York on September 26, 2016. / AFP / Jewel SAMAD (Photo credit should read JEWEL SAMAD/AFP/Getty Images)

Republican nominee Donald Trump and Democratic nominee Hillary Clinton.

Florida was, once again, causing heartburn in voters all over the country as the race seesawed wildly back and forth all night (although as the night progressed, Wisconsin and Michigan replaced Florida as the states giving everyone stress attacks).

One minute, Donald Trump was up in Florida, and then Hillary Clinton, and then Trump again. People on Twitter were declaring their love for Florida one minute and their hatred of Florida the next. In the end, Clinton lost Florida, and the race turned out to be a canary in the mine for the rest of the election.

The New York Times said Trump won Florida 49.1% to 47.7%. Clinton’s support among Hispanics was outmatched by Trump’s support with working-class whites, the Times said. Barack Obama won Florida by .09%, and early voting had shown Democrats were off the 2012 pace.

After Clinton lost Florida, for a few hours at least, people wondered whether Clinton still had a pathway to the White House.

The answer is yes. Florida by itself didn’t sabotage her chances. It was Wisconsin that played spoiler, along with Michigan and Pennsylvania. She could have weathered a Florida loss. But not a Florida + Wisconsin loss.

There were higher stakes for Trump in the Florida contest initially. If Clinton had won Florida, it could have been electoral sudden death for Trump (although less so with the blue state gains).

The stakes for Clinton in Florida were also significant but not fatal alone; she still had pathways to victory without Florida. He had no margin for error. That is, unless he could flip a traditionally blue state like Michigan, Wisconsin, or Pennsylvania. He ended up doing so, which was something the oracles of punditry did not predict.

Here’s how Clinton could have won without Florida.

Let’s start with a key way she can’t. The maps were created with the 270toWin site. If Trump had simply run the table in the remaining battlegrounds, he would have won without securing a blue state in the Midwest:


image

The problem for him initially seemed to be that he couldn’t afford to lose any of the above states without a surprise pickup.  Check out reporter Jon Ralston’s blog on Nevada early voting patterns, and you will see the challenge for Trump. Remember: Barack Obama won Nevada by a healthy margin in 2012. In the end, Trump lost Nevada. If he had not flipped traditionally blue states, he could not have survived a Nevada loss in the electoral college.

Here is what would have happened if you give her Nevada, and she had won Wisconsin, Michigan and Pennsylvania as everyone expected:

image

She would have been president. We could do this reduction process endlessly. She takes North Carolina, along with that trio of blue states, he loses. She takes New Hampshire, and those blue states, he loses:

image

However, Trump created a new game altogether by flipping three states that had not gone Republican since the 1980s. That made Florida a game changer in the end after all; had Clinton won Florida, she could have weathered other losses.

Read more about the Wisconsin race here:

Why Donald Trump Won Wisconsin

Wisconsin was a gamechanger. The state went for Donald Trump when it hadn't gone Republican since 1984. Why did Trump win Wisconsin?

Click here to read more

Read all the election results in Spanish at AhoraMismo.com:

Leave a comment

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

2 comments

  1. AMERICAN DEMOCRACY
    .
    A-M-E-R-I-C-A-N D-E-M-O-C-R-A-C-Y I-S D-E-A-D!… and this just completed U.S. Election, is a testament to that reality!
    .
    There are a few details that most wanna-be and would-be supporters of “D-E-M-O-C-R-A-C-Y” should be made aware of! And!… the question to be asked, is:… DID MOST AMERICANS ACTUALLY DESIRE A HILLARY… OR A DONALD… ON E-I-T-H-E-R S-I-D-E OF THE POLITICAL SPECTRUM?
    .
    If I may!… I would like us to reflect on what’s really happened here!… and, on what really counts! Was this “democratic vote” more “P-S-E-U-D-O-D-E-M-O-C-R-A-T-I-C”, than not?… and!… did the “T-R-U-E M-A-J-O-R-I-T-Y” of the people of America find their “wills” reflected in this “democratic election”?… or!… were their “wills”, in fact– and in many cases!– N-O-W-H-E-R-E T-O B-E F-O-U-N-D?
    .
    How is it “DEMOCRATIC”– e.g.!– when the Brexit Referendum “win” of Thursday, June 23rd, 2016, was “won” W-I-T-H-O-U-T the E-S-S-E-N-T-I-A-L M-I-N-I-M-U-M of 50+% of the T-O-T-A-L N-U-M-B-E-R of ELIGIBLE BRITISH VOTERS’ VOTES?… AND!… NOT JUST, by way of a majority of those who’ve decided to cast a vote! In other words, how can L-E-S-S than the E-S-S-E-N-T-I-A-L M-I-N-I-M-U-M of 50+% of the T-O-T-A-L N-U-M-B-E-R of eligible British voters’ votes, constitute a “D-E-M-O-C-R-A-T-I-C P-L-U-R-A-L-I-T-Y”? It is– de facto!– I-M-P-O-S-S-I-B-L-E (i.e., without God!)! And thus, the Brexit vote is a further example of a “P-S-E-U-D-O-D-E-M-O-C-R-A-T-I-C P-S-E-U-D-O-P-L-U-R-A-L-I-T-Y” “winning the day”!
    .
    To compare the Brexit Referendum to an election of a candidate within a Electoral District… if fifty thousand eligible voters decide not to vote in a District that is composed/ comprised of one hundred thousand eligible voters… and five candidates are running!… the math would suggest, that no candidate could possibly obtain a “D-E-M-O-C-R-A-T-I-C P-L-U-R-A-L-I-T-Y” from the remaining fifty thousand eligible voters who have cast a vote! Unless!… and of course!… A H-I-J-A-C-K-E-D, AND E-L-I-T-I-S-T P-O-L-I-T-I-C-A-L P-R-O-C-E-S-S SIMPLY MARGINALIZES THOSE WHO HAVE NOT SHOWN UP TO VOTE; AND THEN, DICTATES THAT THEIR “NO SHOW”/ ABSENCE, CANNOT– AND SHOULD NOT!– BE HELD “B-I-N-D-I-N-G” IN SOME FASHION, OR FORM (AND SOME “NO SHOWS” ARE AS SUCH, DUE TO DISABILITY, AND/ OR INFIRMITY!… NOT TO MENTION, THOSE WHO HAVE BEEN SYSTEMICALLY AND SYSTEMATICALLY DISCRIMINATED AGAINST, DUE TO THEIR Y-O-U-T-H!)! FOR!… OUT OF SIGHT, IS OUT OF MIND!
    .
    Simply put!… and to return to the Brexit Referendum!… the said total of 17,410,742. “winning” “pro Brexit” British voters, plus the said total of 16,141,242. “losing” “pro Bremain” eligible British voters, who– together!– showed up at the “Referendum ballot boxes (i.e., 33,551,984 eligible British voters!)”, are in contrast to the ACTUAL TOTAL of 46,499,537 eligible British voters (see Google result, Electoral Commission | Provisional electorate figures published!… AND, LET ALONE, THE EVEN HIGHER ACTUAL TOTAL NUMBER OF ELIGIBLE VOTERS’ VOTES TO BE HAD, IF MANY OF THE DISABLED/ INFIRMED BRITISH CITIZENS WERE “ACCOMMODATED”!… AND!… IF MANY BRITISH YOUTH WEREN’T THE TARGETS OF “P-O-L-I-T-I-C-A-L A-N-D S-O-C-I-A-L P-A-T-E-R-N-A-L-I-S-T-I-C A-G-E-I-S-M”!)!… and reveals a deficit of 12,947,553. of the ACTUAL TOTAL NUMBER of eligible British voters, and a deficit of 5,839,027. eligible British voters, for even a “B-A-R-E M-I-N-I-M-U-M M-A-J-O-R-I-T-Y W-I-N (i.e., 46,499,537. ÷ 2 = 23,249,768.5… + .5 = [23,249,769.] – 17,410,742. = 5,839,027.!)”! AND THEREFORE, THE COMBINED “WINNERS” AND “LOSERS” TALLY OF ELIGIBLE VOTERS, S-H-O-U-L-D N-O-T B-E M-A-D-E S-Y-N-O-N-Y-M-O-U-S W-I-T-H T-H-E A-C-T-U-A-L T-O-T-A-L- N-U-M-B-E-R O-F E-L-I-G-I-B-L-E B-R-I-T-I-S-H V-O-T-E-R-S/ V-O-T-E-S!… AND!… THE “WINNING TALLY”, S-H-O-U-L-D N-O-T B-E M-A-D-E S-Y-N-O-N-Y-M-O-U-S W-I-T-H T-H-E “M-A-J-O-R-I-T-Y W-I-L-L” O-F T-H-E E-L-I-G-I-B-L-E V-O-T-E-R-S O-F B-R-I-T-A-I-N! AND!… THEREFORE!… THE “WINNING TALLY” OF ELIGIBLE BRITISH VOTERS– AT LEAST!– SHOULD BE MET WITH A C-O-N-S-T-I-T-U-T-I-O-N-A-L C-H-A-L-L-E-N-G-E (TO START!) FOR THE FLAGRANT BREACH OF THE “L-E-G-I-T-I-M-A-T-E P-R-I-N-C-I-P-L-E-S” O-F D-E-M-O-C-R-A-C-Y (I.E., AND E.G., IN THE F-A-I-L-U-R-E OF THE BREXIT REFERENDUM RESULT TOTAL, TO ACHIEVE EVEN A BARE MINIMUM MAJORITY TALLY, FOR A ‘M-A-J-O-R-I-T-Y W-I-N’!)”!
    .
    And so!… the Brexit “win”… like the “wins” seen so often in our PSEUDODEMOCRATIC PSEUDOELECTIONS!… I-S A S-H-A-M!! And!… it escapes me, why citizens from respective “D-E-M-O-C-R-A-C-I-E-S” from around the world, haven’t challenged these scurrilous, and shameful “F-A-U-X P-U-B-L-I-C R-E-F-E-R-E-N-D-A”!… AND PSEUDOELECTIONS!… AND!… haven’t brought civil proceedings against any and all institutions, which have allowed these G-L-O-B-A-L F-A-R-C-E-S to continue! And thus… re the Brexit Referendum result!… it’s my contention, that the Brexit Referendum is D-E-F-E-A-T-A-B-L-E, due to it’s inherent S-Y-S-T-E-M-I-C V-I-O-L-A-T-I-O-N of the “L-E-G-I-T-I-M-A-T-E P-R-I-N-C-I-P-L-E-S” OF DEMOCRACY!
    .
    This horrendous situation involving our PSEUDODEMOCRATIC PSEUDOELECTIONS, has resulted in “winning candidates” winning with as little as 1/5th of the total number of eligible voters’ votes!… AND!… THEN DARING, TO CALL SUCH RESPECTIVE “WINS”, D-E-M-O-C-R-A-T-I-C! A-N-D W-O-R-S-E!… and in the case of the Brexit Referendum result (AND “PSEUDOWIN”!)!… such a “W-I-N” could– POTENTIALLY!– compromise the security of an E-N-T-I-R-E N-A-T-I-O-N! And so!… it’s no wonder why so many citizens within our respective “democracies (so-called!)” hate the elections process!… and hate, Public Referenda!
    .
    And!… to add Elections insult to Elections injury, there are “Parties” within countries… and again, composed of “winning candidates” who have “won” with L-E-S-S than the E-S-S-E-N-T-I-A-L M-I-N-I-M-U-M needed for a D-E-M-O-C-R-A-T-I-C P-L-U-R-A-L-I-T-Y!… whose leadership (e.g., in Canada!), cannot be chosen, D-E-M-O-C-R-A-T-I-C-A-L-L-Y, by the PEOPLE!… and O-N-L-Y, by the Party! And further, rather than have the brightest!… the best!… “winning candidates” from all across a country– and, from across a legislature’s floor!– forming Executive Cabinets (and in Canada!… for example!… composed of Ministers of Federal Departments, or Provincial Ministries!)!… A-N-D T-H-R-O-U-G-H A N-O-N P-A-R-T-Y_B-A-S-E-D L-E-G-I-S-L-A-T-U-R-E O-R P-A-R-L-I-A-M-E-N-T (and something, incidentally, that municipalities have been doing for generations!… A-N-D W-O-R-L-D-W-I-D-E)!… our current “PARTY-BASED DEMOCRACIES” have chosen, instead– A-N-D V-I-R-T-U-A-L-L-Y!– GANGS, CLIQUES, AND “P-S-E-U-D-O-S-O-C-I-A-L I-N-T-E-R-E-S-T-S”, TO ACT AS “GO-BETWEENS” FOR PARTY-BASED “OLIGARCHIC BACKROOM BOYZ”!
    .
    But!… if all of this wasn’t bad enough, there’s no “NONE OF THE ABOVE” option on millions of voters’ ballots (AND “B-I-N-D-I-N-G”!… AS A PREREQUISITE!)!… nor, an “AUTOMATIC TRANSLATION” of the “NO SHOWS (i.e., eligible voters who have NOT cast a vote!)” to “B-I-N-D-I-N-G” “NONE OF THE ABOVE BALLOTS (inasmuch, as such ‘NO SHOWS’, can’t be translated as being ‘F-O-R’, any candidate!)”! (BUT!… PLEASE NOTE!… IF OUR “NO SHOWS” AS SUCH, ARE DUE TO OUR P-O-L-I-T-I-C-A-L A-N-D S-O-C-I-A-L I-N-A-B-I-L-I-T-Y– O-R, U-N-W-I-L-L-I-N-G-N-E-S-S!– TO ADDRESS THE VOTER NEEDS OF OUR DISABLED/ INFIRMED!… AND, OUR YOUTH!… THEN SUCH “INABLED”, OR “UNWILLING”, SHOULD BE “H-E-L-P-E-D” RE THEIR “INABILTY”!… OR H-E-L-D T-O A-C-C-O-U-N-T FOR THEIR “UNWILLINGNESS”!) And, had the “NONE OF THE ABOVE” and the “TRANSLATED NO SHOW” provisions been addressed, many “NO SHOWS” would have shown up to vote (for fear of receiving a MANADATED “BINDING” “AUTOMATIC TRANSLATION”!)! And!… if combined “NO SHOW TRANSLATIONS”, together with directly cast “NONE OF THE ABOVE BALLOTS”, were implemented (wherein– TOGETHER!– these OUTNUMBER the votes cast for any respective “running candidate”!), this combined tally could have meant the introduction of “lottery lists” of candidates within respective Districts (preselected!… and the members in which, would not be eligible to run as “running candidates”!)!… from which, our “winners” could have then been chosen! And thereby!… EFFECTING F-U-L-L R-E-P-R-E-S-E-N-T-A-T-I-O-N FOR EVERY SINGLE ELIGIBLE VOTER, AND VOTE!
    .
    And!… to juxtapose the just aforesaid template onto Referenda!… and onto the Brexit Referendum, in particular!… if the directly cast “NONE OF THE ABOVE BALLOTS”, combined with the “TRANSLATED NO SHOWS”, OUTWEIGHED the votes cast for either the Brexit or Bremain scenarios, then NEITHER Brexit, nor Bremain, would be left on the table! And the MPs of the British Parliament, would then be forced to renew their respective individual approaches, and collective approach, re their “arrangement” with the EU!… and, their respective dialogues, and collective dialogue, with the citizens of Britain!
    .
    And given… and in contrast to the abovenoted!… in the light of the process that was implementated for the Brexit Referendum (yet to be revealed!)!… WELL!… you have the makings of a P-O-O-R E-X-C-U-S-E F-O-R A D-E-M-O-C-R-A-T-I-C R-E-F-E-R-E-N-D-U-M!… A-N-D A P-O-O-R “R-A-T-I-O-N-A-L B-A-S-I-S” F-O-R T-H-E R-E-D-I-R-E-C-T-I-O-N O-F T-H-E F-U-T-U-R-E C-O-U-R-S-E F-O-R A-N E-N-T-I-R-E C-O-U-N-T-R-Y!!
    .
    To sum up, what we have, presently, are PSEUDODEMOCRATIC PLURALITIES IN THE GUISE OF “D-E-M-O-C-R-A-T-I-C-A-L-L-Y E-L-E-C-T-E-D” REPRESENTATIVES! An intolerable situation!… and deserving of both Constitutional challenges, and Tort action! And!… A-N-Y O-T-H-E-R ACCEPTED PLURALITY OTHER THAN A “D-E-M-O-C-R-A-T-I-C P-L-U-R-A-L-I-T-Y” ACCEPTED BY A PROSPECTIVE CANDIDATE, AND/ OR BY A PROSPECTIVE VOTER (AND BASED UPON THE “LEGITIMATE PRINCIPLES” OF DEMOCRACY, AS AFOREMENTIONED!… AND OTHER, THAN ONE INSTITUTED BY GOD!)!– IS A CANDIDATE, OR VOTER, WHO IS EITHER BLIND TO THE “LEGITIMATE PRINCIPLES” OF DEMOCRACY, OR WHO IS A TRAITOR TO THE “LEGITIMATE PRINCIPLES” OF DEMOCRACY! AND!… WHO IS EITHER BLIND, OR A TRAITOR, TO THE COMMON GOOD OF THE PEOPLE!
    .
    THEREFORE, THE “J-U-S-T ESTABLISHMENT” OF “T-R-U-E DEMOCRATIC PLURALITIES” WITHIN OUR RESPECTIVE REFERENDA, AND ELECTIONS PROCESSES, IS F-U-N-D-A-M-E-N-T-A-L TO THE VERY REALIZATION OF “D-E-M-O-C-R-A-C-Y”!… AND!… WITHOUT WHICH, WE ARE SUBJECT TO MERE OLIGARCHIC WHIM!
    .
    Please!… no emails!