Nothing Left to Do but Vote
By JONATHAN MARTIN AND NATE COHN
Election Day is here at last. The United States is set to decide between Hillary Clinton and Donald J Trump.
The long, unusual and often ugly 2016 presidential campaign has been about America’s changing demographics and the shifting coalitions of the two major parties as much as it has been about the two main candidates.
Here is what to look for from the voters, who now get their say.
Sun Belt vs. Rust Belt.
The changing nature of the presidential map — and the coalitions of the two parties — can be deduced from where Mrs. Clinton went on Monday, the day before the election. She was assured enough of her prospects for winning Florida, a state that George W. Bush won twice, not to return to the biggest battleground of them all, but she held her second event in four days in Michigan, a state no Republican has won since 1988.
Mrs. Clinton’s aides expressed confidence that the results will go their way, in large part because of their optimism about Colorado, Florida, Nevada and Virginia, but they are less bullish about their prospects in Michigan and states like Iowa and Ohio. That is a striking turnabout given how rooted Democrats once were in the industrial Midwest and how much they used to struggle in the South and parts of the West.
Mr. Trump’s way forward.
Mr. Trump has one real path to the presidency: run up the score among white voters without a college degree enough to compensate for his losses among well-educated and nonwhite voters.
National surveys suggest Mr. Trump is poised to fare far better than Mitt Romney did four years ago among those white voters, even if the same surveys show Mrs. Clinton in the lead. Mr. Trump leads that group by an average of 30 points in recent national surveys, compared to Mr. Romney’s 23-point edge in 2012.
A huge Democratic loss among white working-class voters would not just endanger Mrs. Clinton's chances of winning the presidency, it might also accelerate a broader shift in American politics from the industrial-era fights between labor and business to a post-industrial split between the beneficiaries of globalization and diversity and those who feel they have been left behind.
A new wave.
The number of Hispanics who voted early in Florida this year is about as many as voted in total four years ago. The same story holds in heavily Hispanic areas across the country, whether the Latino neighborhoods of Las Vegas or the Texas counties along the Rio Grande.
Mrs. Clinton’s exact margin among Hispanic voters could prove just as important. She will probably win Latino voters by an even wider margin than President Obama did in 2012.
The Latino vote has the best shot of deciding the election in Florida, where Hispanic voters represent a well-above-average share of the population. Mr. Trump does not have a credible path to the presidency without the state’s 29 Electoral College votes.
By JONATHAN MARTIN AND NATE COHN
Election Day is here at last. The United States is set to decide between Hillary Clinton and Donald J Trump.
The long, unusual and often ugly 2016 presidential campaign has been about America’s changing demographics and the shifting coalitions of the two major parties as much as it has been about the two main candidates.
Here is what to look for from the voters, who now get their say.
Sun Belt vs. Rust Belt.
The changing nature of the presidential map — and the coalitions of the two parties — can be deduced from where Mrs. Clinton went on Monday, the day before the election. She was assured enough of her prospects for winning Florida, a state that George W. Bush won twice, not to return to the biggest battleground of them all, but she held her second event in four days in Michigan, a state no Republican has won since 1988.
Mrs. Clinton’s aides expressed confidence that the results will go their way, in large part because of their optimism about Colorado, Florida, Nevada and Virginia, but they are less bullish about their prospects in Michigan and states like Iowa and Ohio. That is a striking turnabout given how rooted Democrats once were in the industrial Midwest and how much they used to struggle in the South and parts of the West.
Mr. Trump’s way forward.
Mr. Trump has one real path to the presidency: run up the score among white voters without a college degree enough to compensate for his losses among well-educated and nonwhite voters.
National surveys suggest Mr. Trump is poised to fare far better than Mitt Romney did four years ago among those white voters, even if the same surveys show Mrs. Clinton in the lead. Mr. Trump leads that group by an average of 30 points in recent national surveys, compared to Mr. Romney’s 23-point edge in 2012.
A huge Democratic loss among white working-class voters would not just endanger Mrs. Clinton's chances of winning the presidency, it might also accelerate a broader shift in American politics from the industrial-era fights between labor and business to a post-industrial split between the beneficiaries of globalization and diversity and those who feel they have been left behind.
A new wave.
The number of Hispanics who voted early in Florida this year is about as many as voted in total four years ago. The same story holds in heavily Hispanic areas across the country, whether the Latino neighborhoods of Las Vegas or the Texas counties along the Rio Grande.
Mrs. Clinton’s exact margin among Hispanic voters could prove just as important. She will probably win Latino voters by an even wider margin than President Obama did in 2012.
The Latino vote has the best shot of deciding the election in Florida, where Hispanic voters represent a well-above-average share of the population. Mr. Trump does not have a credible path to the presidency without the state’s 29 Electoral College votes.
New York Times
