11-14-2016, 02:13 AM
(This post was last modified: 11-14-2016, 02:13 AM by Warren Dew.)
One could argue that Trump simply had a better run campaign. He was campaigning in all the really close states at the end, while Clinton was neglecting half of them and spending a lot of time campaigning in states that were not close.
Or one could argue that is was a realigning election with respect to the upper midwest. One could say it was the "northern strategy".
Or one could argue that is was a realigning election with respect to the upper midwest. One could say it was the "northern strategy".