This is what The Economist thinks, which sounds like a repeat of 2016. Even if Biden were to win, 342 electoral votes is ridiculous.
https://projects.economist.com/us-2020-forecast/president
Did the Economist have a similar look at the 2016 Election?
I remember everyone in the national and international media assuring us that Trump was going to lose... BIG.
The NY Time's election tracker had a meter that started out showing Hillary with something like a 90% chance of being President... As the evening went on that meter started creeping towards Trump. I was STUNNED when it showed basically a 50/50 split, and by the time I went to bed it was showing Trump with a better than 80% chance of winning the Presidency.
And I wish I could find the video, but early in election night MSNBC's (I think) coverage had some simpering little pantywaist going over the projections. He started out with a comfortable win with Hillary and then started projecting his own hopes, dreams, and wishes onto the map... things like "with only a little change in turnout this way Hillary wins," and crap like that, and by the time he was done he had autoeroticized himself into something like 440 electoral votes for Hillary. I didn't see it on election night, I caught the Utoob the next day, and it was just hysterical.
Basically his entire premise was that Hillary can't lose, Trump can't win, we are the intelligencia and we have decreed it!
I wish I could have been a fly on the wall to see his reaction as the returns started coming in and states that he handily awarded to Hillary flipped to Trump.
