[oceanstone]

You didn't mention the largest voting block, voters who don't strongly identify with either party.

[viridian]

Unfortunately that voting block doesn't line up with reality, as least from the stats I know for the presidential elections. A given voter that voted for party X's candidate four years ago, if they vote again, will vote for party X's candidate about 92% of the time. This means that in the pool of 'likely voters', the two parties are realistically fighting over 8% of hearts and minds.

[ajmurmann]

There is another caveat: 8% in ~12 states.

Greatest democracy in the world!

[netheril96]

Swing states, where the votes matter the most, have been won by less margins.

[lurr]

Then why didn't clinton win easily?

[specialist]

HRC got nearly 3m more votes. That ain't nothing.

[lurr]

But less turnout than Obama. Disastrously less.

[Joeri]

Obama preached change, clinton to stay the course. People are so desperate for change they even voted for trump.

[dragonwriter]

Voters who claim not to strongly identify with either party vote as consistently with one party as voters who do strongly identify with a party, at least, from research I saw several years back.

[specialist]

The largest voting block are the people who don't.