The Volokh Conspiracy
Mostly law professors | Sometimes contrarian | Often libertarian | Always independent
Michael Barone, an experienced and astute student of American politics, has a very interesting analysis of the election; a few highlights, though you should read the whole article:
1. The asymmetry of the Double Negatives…. According to the exit poll (current figures, which may be slightly revised), 18 percent of voters were "double negatives," that is, had negative feelings toward both [Hillary] Clinton and [Donald] Trump. Of these 18 percent, 49 percent voted for Trump and only 29 percent voted for Clinton ….
2. The losing strategy: replicate Obama's 2012 coalition….
3. Clinton campaign targeting: staggering incompetence. In an excellent Washington Post article, Jim Tankersley points out that in the closing weeks of the campaign, the Clinton campaign put more ads on the air in the Omaha market (aiming, presumably, at the 1 electoral vote of Nebraska [Congressional district] 2, since Iowa's 6 votes were clearly already lost) than in Michigan and Wisconsin combined (26 electoral votes)…. In effect, Clinton was aiming for her 340th electoral vote and ignored the need to campaign for her 270th, which is the one that counts….
5. The narrowness of the Obama Democratic coalition. The fact that Democratic voters are so clustered, concentrated heavily in central cities, sympathetic suburbs and university towns, has helped its presidential candidates in past elections (this one, not so much) but hurt them in congressional and legislative elections conducted in equal population districts….