The Case for 2016 Being a Boring Election

Political journalists and political scientists have a tense relationship. Journalists cover politics as a riveting narrative, in which major events can always alter the outcome of the election. Political scientists tend to believe that a few big structural factors are all that really matter. The most exciting account of the 2012 election was “Double Down,” a book by two political reporters that treated every twist and turn of the election as a potentially game-changing event. The most accurate account of the race was “The Gamble,” a book by two political scientists which drained the race of drama by reminding readers that the underlying structure of the election had always favored Obama.

See the rest of the story at newyorker.com

Related:
Cover Story: Barry Blitt’s “Anything But That”
Anna Deavere Smith Contains Multitudes
Four Trump Rallies and a Fight for Florida