I called the election as a D victory the day Mr. Trump held a Bible in front of a church. That was a politician who had no intention of even trying to pretend to go beyond his base. That was a clear sign that the man did not understand, like so many other Medium political writers including Ms. Martinchek, how modern democracy really works.
Elections are about managing soft support. Get your soft support to the polls. Try to convince the soft support of the other side that their candidate is really not worth the effort to vote, and---whatever you do---do not offend the people who normally do not vote.
Mr. Trump is solidifying the vote of those who are already voting for him. But they don't have any more votes to give to him. He is driving some of his soft support away. Yes they will tell the pollsters they still support him. But on November 3, a least 500,000 of them will find a reason not to cast a ballot--which is a big deal in a close election. And he is annoying at least 10m of the 108m who didn't vote last time.
The D's don't seem to be doing anything that shoots them in the foot--not like last time. And Ms. Martinchek has her way of bending their will, they shoot themselves in the foot.
A 70/30 split is possible on November 3. But probably a 60/40 is going to be the result.
Don't get me wrong. I believe that many of Ms. Martinchek's aims are worthy. It's just that they can't be accomplised with USA's two party system. Reforming the D's to her way is most likely going to give victory to the R's.
It's time to end these silly contests where history is being written on things like "a supposed email conspiracy uncovered a week before the election" or "how a Bible is held in front of a church."
Tiered Democratic Governance