This too might be comic relief: Who's going to win the November election?
We don't have the slightest idea. Given the lunacy of this campaign, no one else really knows either.
That said, we had to chuckle at something we saw on the front page of yesterday's New York Times. We've heard this bite a million times, but Burns and Haberman came close, at the start of their front-page report, to awarding the state of Pennsylvania to Candidate Hillary Clinton:
BURNS AND HABERMAN (7/31/16): Donald J. Trump, confronting a daunting electoral map and a significant financial disadvantage, is preparing to fall back from an expansive national campaign and concentrate the bulk of his time and money on just three or four states that his campaign believes he must sweep in order to win the presidency.You've already heard it a million times. The Dems haven't lost the Keystone State since Michael Dukakis narrowly lost it in 1988!
Even as Mr. Trump has ticked up in national polls in recent weeks, senior Republicans say his path to the 270 Electoral College votes needed for election has remained narrow—and may have grown even more precarious. It now looks exceedingly difficult for him to assemble even the barest Electoral College majority without beating Hillary Clinton in a trifecta of the biggest swing states: Florida, Ohio and Pennsylvania.
President Obama won all three states in 2008 and 2012, and no Republican has won Pennsylvania in nearly three decades.
That's true, of course. We thought you might like the see the landslide totals the victorious Dems have racked up:
Winning vote totals in PennsylvaniaPerot cut into Clinton's totals. But with runaway outcomes like those in the past, who could imagine that Candidate Crazy could possibly win this state?
1992: Clinton, 45.1%
1996: Clinton, 49.2%
2000: Gore, 50.6%
2004: Kerry, 50.9%
2008: Obama, 54.5%
2012: Obama, 52.0%
Burns and Haberman typed more than 1800 words. In our view, it would have made sense to stick the word "narrowly" in there.