The U.S. Election, and Why it is Totally Bonkers

The United States holds presidential elections that probably last the longest in the world. The 2016 race began when Senator Ted Cruz first announced he was running at the end of March 2015. The election will end in November, meaning people have been campaigning for this presidency for one year and seven months. Which means that there have probably been millions of different op-eds on this election, and yet here I am taking my own shot at it.

I'll start by saying this election simply has no precedent. It is completely insane.

One the Democratic side, the two remaining candidates are Hillary Clinton and Bernie Sanders. Both are unprecedented. Though women have run for president before, none has been as successful as Hillary, who has (and I am using the British betting markets for this) the odds of 4/11 of becoming the next POTUS. A woman has never been the nominee of a major party in the U.S, much less the president. What is even more shocking is that she has higher unavailability numbers than any person to run for POTUS, save for her even more unpopular opponent.

And Bernie Sanders is quite simply the most successful socialist in American history. Several socialists have run for office before, but none have cracked 10% in a presidential election or come so close to becoming a major party's nominee. It is actual proof that the word "socialist" is not the death-knell for electoral success that it once was.

The Republican side may be even more absurd. The presumptive nominee, Donald Trump, is a populist, but this isn't completely unprecedented. Jimmy Carter, Ronald Reagan and Barry Goldwater can all be considered populists. What is new is that Trump is the first nominee for a major party with no government experience, in anything. He was never a governor, a senator, a representative, a mayor, NOTHING. And that is exactly why people like him. And he also has the worst favorability of any candidate ever, including his opponent.

None of this is going to stop me from trying to predict the outcome, as I love predicting elections. I even predicted the last Canadian one correctly (although I didn't think the Liberals would win by such a large margin). So I will do my best here, and will keep my analysis to purely numbers and not positions.

1. Hillary Clinton will be the Democratic nominee. Sorry Sanderistas, but to overtake Clinton he needs not only to win all of the remaining states, but by margins up to 85% to 15%. Because delegates are given out proportionally, beating Clinton isn't enough anymore. You would need to win by margins comparable to Sanders Vermont victory, in his home state.

2. Sanders will get little concessions out of Clinton at the convention. She isn't likely to budge much farther than she has already, especially when she wants to attract moderate voters. What she may do is become more vocal about positions she already supports. For example, promising to nominate a Justice that would overturn Citizens United. She has said numerous times that she is against money in politics, so making such a promise isn't shifting, but it is a clear way to attract Sanders supporters.

3. Sanders will support Clinton. He's not going to enjoy it, but he will. Although there are sharp disagreements between him and the Secretary, he knows it is far better for his movement if Clinton is in the White House over Trump. They can continue to badger Clinton if she is POTUS, while Trump can easily ignore them. Though Trump and Sanders share similar opinions on free-trade they disagree on pretty much everything else.

4. Clinton won't get indited. The most similar high-profile email-scandal was General Petraeus, He was sharing confidential emails with his extra-marital lover, which is probably a worse crime than using a private server when you should have used the government one. The General was put on probation for two years and paid a $100,000 fine. Clinton can't be put on probation and can easily cough up that money, and such a result is still more unlikely because her breach was smaller.

4. Clinton will beat Trump. This requires a longer explanation. Many are concerned that Trump is pulling ahead of Clinton, with one poll beating her 45 to 42. But compare that number to 2012, when Obama beat Romney 51 to 47. In 2012, only 2% of voters chose a third-party. In the current poll, about 13% of people are choosing neither candidate.

A lot of voters make up their minds right up to the election. In 2012, it is believed that Romney's statement on how 44% of Americans don't pay taxes was the thing pushing moderates over the edge. So if we consider that 13% of Americans haven't picked which candidate they loathe more, let's think why.

The Democratic primaries still aren't over, and many Sanderistas think they may still have a chance. They really don't, but if any of them picks up a phone and is asked if they would rather have Trump or Clinton, many are currently happy saying neither. But when Sanders endorses her, and after months of Trump vs. Clinton coverage, most of the Sanders supporters will shift to her, and the polls will change to be closer to that Romney/Obama result.

And remember, in a tight poll the Democrats have the advantage. They undoubtedly hold the advantage with younger voters, who are less likely to have a landline and respond to a poll. This is a big reason I was wrong in my Canadian prediction, as I took the polls too seriously (which predicted a close Liberal minority government). Instead the Liberals over performed, as many of their voters had never answered a poll before. I never have, but my Grandparents have many times.

Although the overall result may be as close or closer than the 51% to 47% of 2012, the Democrats also have the advantage in the electoral college. In 2012 Obama crushed Romney by 332 to 206, despite a difference of 4% overall. There are simply more safe "blue" states than "red" ones. In order for the Republicans to win they need to win more states than the Democrats. Romney only got one swing state, North Carolina, which wasn't nearly enough.

Trump would have to win at least Ohio, Florida, and a couple others to win the election. The last time a Republican has done this was 2004, where Bush had the incumbent advantage. Since then we have a popular incumbent and the demographics have changed, both in favor to Clinton. It is believed with Latino support Clinton can still easily win Florida, and that alone gives her the victory.

The numbers since now can change, but I think if they do they will move in favor of Clinton. She is still competing against Sanders and will inevitably get his support. There are still Trump-Clinton debates to be had, which are probably his worst format and her best.

He still has a chance, as in any U.S. election there are only two options. A economic downturn or large terrorist attack can swing moderate opinion in favor of the Donald. But short of election-changing events, it appears that 2016 will elect the first woman as leader of the free-world.