Support NeoGAF

[User 463088]

Why are the results from New Hampshire important at all? Isn't that state pretty much solid blue?

Will the networks really wait for the West Coast to declare a winner? I don't recall it taking that long in previous years.

There's no way Hillary gets to 270 until California, Oregon and Washington close.

Our "safe" states that are slightly swingy (CO and VA) get us to 269, assuming ME-2 is safe (268 otherwise). So, she'll still need one of OH, NE-1, NC, FL, NH, IA or NV to get to 270.

We're currently at a 44k vote firewall in NV. If we get that to 50-60k, that'll pretty much lock the state. Trump hasn't had a lead in NH since....well, ever, really. No live phone poll has ever given him the lead (nor IVR polls). So, NH should be fairly safe, but we still need SOMETHING to get us to 270.

 

[Emarv]

Why are the results from New Hampshire important at all? Isn't that state pretty much solid blue?

Will the networks really wait for the West Coast to declare a winner? I don't recall it taking that long in previous years.

I mean, you could say the same for Pennsylvania. The point is that once they're confirmed, the media can't really deny her victory. PA and NH basically allow Wolf or Corey to say, "it could still happen. These are where Trump made his play in!" We know they're already gone, but as soon as they start to break her way on election night, we can stop the pretending or fake drama.

 

[border]

For those worried about the hidden Trump vote, here's an interesting article.

https://www.brookings.edu/blog/fixgov/2016/10/31/hidden-white-working-class-voters/

tl;dr

Basically, even if we increase non-college white turnout by 22 points from 2012, Hillary still manages a win 293-245. (She even loses PA and WI in this scenario, but still wins the election.)

Florida is looking to be tighter and tighter. I am kinda skeptical of this, since it shows Clinton winning FL no matter what the turnout is among non-college white voters.

 

[mackaveli]

Samantha Bee new videos

Hilarious

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7LFkN7QGp2c

and Here's the interview with Obama

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=b0yONlMjxjs

 

[watershed]

I guess because he didn't give two shits about the slaves. His main reason for sending General Sherman to rip the South apart was to preserve the Union. He didn't care if it freed slaves. He wanted to send slaves to Central America. He didn't think blacks should have the same rights as whites. The guy was not what history made him out to be.

Eh, partly right but also not. He didn't initially care to take up slavery as a political issue and he did not make slavery his cause for the Civil War. But even before the war he thought slavery would die out on it's own and during the course of the war he took up slavery as a motivation for the war and as a political cause. He eventually supported full emancipation for all slaves in the Union, not just in the Confederacy and did in fact support former slaves having rights similar to whites starting with the right to own property and vote.

He did want to send freed slaves and African Americans in general to Central America but dropped that plan after it became clear that just about no one, including African Americans themselves, wanted it.

But I honestly don't want to debate Lincoln's history.

 

[Pancake Mix]

He asked how it was the Party of Lincoln. The GOP and its fellow travelers still regularly endorse corporatism, cronyism, political corruption, war crimes and deporting any undesirables (ideally darkies for the latter two because progress).


His Reconstruction plan didn't include black suffrage, and he only came to support it for those who served or met some kind of educational benchmark. (Which ironically is how some states blocked the vote.)

He would not have been re-elected if he advocated anything civil rights related, nor were such things common sentiments at the time.

It's really a pointless argument. People pretend it's not but actually it is. He died over 150 years ago. We've gotten better than that.

 

[User 463088]

Florida is looking to be tighter and tighter. I am kinda skeptical of this, since it shows Clinton winning FL no matter what the turnout is among non-college white voters.

I mean, ya, sure. But, at the same time, there's no universe in which scenario 3 is going to happen. There is no way non-college educated whites are going to jump their participation by 22%. We'd see that in voter registration and even in early voting. Turnout among this group has maxed out at about 61%. I just cannot see a way they get up to nearly 80% with no GOTV, no massive voter mobilization and registration efforts, and no evidence in early or absentee voting.

 

[A Human Becoming]

Why are the results from New Hampshire important at all? Isn't that state pretty much solid blue?

Will the networks really wait for the West Coast to declare a winner? I don't recall it taking that long in previous years.

As someone who lives in NH, I can assure you that's not the case. I really think NH has only become reliably Democrat because of Mass transplants who move here for the low taxes but commute back.

 

[User 463088]

As someone who lives in NH, I can assure you that's not the case. I really think NH has only become reliably Democrat because of Mass transplants who move here for the low taxes but commute back.

Since 1992, you've only gone R one time, and that was in 2000. You guys picked a hell of a year to do it. I'm sure some Mass residents have helped, and y'all are still swingy, but not to the extent some people think.

 

[A Human Becoming]

Since 1992, you've only gone R one time, and that was in 2000. You guys picked a hell of a year to do it. I'm sure some Mass residents have helped, and y'all are still swingy, but not to the extent some people think.

I agree with you on that. At a local level though there's still a strong conservative base: the Free State Movement exemplifies the libertarian attitude.

 

[Box of Kittens]

Why are the results from New Hampshire important at all? Isn't that state pretty much solid blue?

Will the networks really wait for the West Coast to declare a winner? I don't recall it taking that long in previous years.

The networks won't project a winner until they can project them winning in states worth 270 electoral votes, and they won't project any state until the polls close. If it's looking obvious they'll wink wink nudge nudge but no "official" projection. This didn't use to be the case. In 1980 for example they declared Reagan the winner almost at the beginning of the evening, but people started to complain about the practice.

 

[RastaMentality]

Samantha Bee new videos

Hilarious

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7LFkN7QGp2c

and Here's the interview with Obama

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=b0yONlMjxjs

that obama interview is GOLD. the entire millennial segment and SUPREME COURT JUSTICE CORY LEWANDOWSKI spooky story was funny as shit. god i love sam.

 

[Holmes]

New Hampshire to me seems like a Democratic state at its core, but also very susceptible to national swings (see its Republican swing in 2010 and 2014, and Democratic swing in 2008 and 2012 wrt the rest of the country).

 

[ItWasMeantToBe19]

Philly's public transport workers went on strike.

I mean, this is a risky fucking political move, guys.

Hopefully the strike ends immediately, pay them whatever they want.

 

[benjipwns]

He would not have been re-elected if he advocated anything civil rights related, nor were such things common sentiments at the time.

It's really a pointless argument. People pretend it's not but actually it is. He died over 150 years ago. We've gotten better than that.

Who knew it was such a big deal to actually answer a question somebody asked.

 

[border]

I mean, ya, sure. But, at the same time, there's no universe in which scenario 3 is going to happen. There is no way non-college educated whites are going to jump their participation by 22%. We'd see that in voter registration and even in early voting. Turnout among this group has maxed out at about 61%. I just cannot see a way they get up to nearly 80% with no GOTV, no massive voter mobilization and registration efforts, and no evidence in early or absentee voting.

Like I've said, I'm in Florida and would totally want to see it stay Blue. But in the last few weeks there have been polls that show Trump winning Florida, or Clinton with a vary narrow lead of 1-2 points. If non-college white participation increased by 10-20%, I find it hard to believe that it wouldn't tilt us towards Red significantly.

 

[Box of Kittens]

New Hampshire to me seems like a Democratic state at its core, but also very susceptible to national swings (see its Republican swing in 2010 and 2014, and Democratic swing in 2008 and 2012 wrt the rest of the country).

According to 538 it's the second most elastic state in the country behind Rhode Island.

Back in 1992 it was considered a big deal when Clinton won New Hampshire. If you watch the coverage from that night pretty much all the networks note how prior to that it had a strong history of voting Republican outside of Democratic landslide years.

 

[border]

The networks won't project a winner until they can project them winning in states worth 270 electoral votes, and they won't project any state until the polls close. If it's looking obvious they'll wink wink nudge nudge but no "official" projection. This didn't use to be the case. In 1980 for example they declared Reagan the winner almost at the beginning of the evening, but people started to complain about the practice.

So it's really just a matter of some ethical standard about not influencing people who can still vote? Otherwise I really don't see the point in pretending that CA, WA, and OR might somehow go to a Republican candidate. Just call it when the results are clear for the Eastern swing states.

 

[Box of Kittens]

So it's really just a matter of some ethical standard about not influencing people who can still vote? Otherwise I really don't see the point in pretending that CA, WA, and OR might somehow go to a Republican candidate. Just call it when the results are clear for the Eastern swing states.

That's basically how it worked in 2008. Once Obama was over 200 or so it was effectively over since CA, WA, OR, and HI would get him more than 70, but they still waited until the polls closed in those states to make a projection. Now they made it awfully clear how the night was going if you could read between the lines even a little bit, but no announcement. As I said once upon a time they would have called the election before the polls closed if they knew, but not any more.

 

[B-Dubs]

So it's really just a matter of some ethical standard about not influencing people who can still vote? Otherwise I really don't see the point in pretending that CA, WA, and OR might somehow go to a Republican candidate. Just call it when the results are clear for the Eastern swing states.

That's pretty much exactly it.

 

[StormBrute]

Philly's public transport workers went on strike.

I mean, this is a risky fucking political move, guys.

Hopefully the strike ends immediately, pay them whatever they want.

At the very least, they said they intend to enjoin the strike for election day so people can vote. So there's that.

 

[benjipwns]

Back in 1992 it was considered a big deal when Clinton won New Hampshire. If you watch the coverage from that night pretty much all the networks note how prior to that it had a strong history of voting Republican outside of Democratic landslide years.

It had voted Republican in every election from 1948 until 1992 except 1964.

The more shocking Clinton win up there was Vermont, which had never not voted Republican (since the Party came into existence) before 1992. (It even voted Whig every single time.)

New Hampshire was the bigger deal because it had only voted for the losing candidate once (Ford in 1976) which would, by that logic, mean Clinton was going to win.

 

[Basileus777]

According to 538 it's the second most elastic state in the country behind Rhode Island.

Back in 1992 it was considered a big deal when Clinton won New Hampshire. If you watch the coverage from that night pretty much all the networks note how prior to that it had a strong history of voting Republican outside of Democratic landslide years.

Is there 1992 election coverage on youtube?

 

[User 463088]

Like I've said, I'm in Florida and would totally want to see it stay Blue. But in the last few weeks there have been polls that show Trump winning Florida, or Clinton with a vary narrow lead of 1-2 points. If non-college white participation increased by 10-20%, I find it hard to believe that it wouldn't tilt us towards Red significantly.

I was raised in Florida. Polk County, to be specific. The only poll of FL that was meh to me was the Sienna poll. By Nate's own admission, they did some things to that poll out of necessity that may impact their results. (They didn't show Hillary winning the early vote there, for instance.) Florida is going to come down to where the NPA voters break. If they do as we think they will, then I think we'll be fine. But, ya, a huge swing towards wwc would hurt us. I just don't think either 10-20% is probable.

So it's really just a matter of some ethical standard about not influencing people who can still vote? Otherwise I really don't see the point in pretending that CA, WA, and OR might somehow go to a Republican candidate. Just call it when the results are clear for the Eastern swing states.

It's just accepted practice. I mean, technically, everyone in California already knows how their state is going to go, but there are still down ballot races and stuff that we don't want to fuck up turnout on.

Today's schedule is fucking INSANE for Hillary's team:

November 1, 2016 Dade City, Florida Early Vote Rally Hillary Clinton
November 1, 2016 Sanford, Florida Early Vote Rally Hillary Clinton
November 1, 2016 Fort Lauderdale, Florida Early Vote Rally Hillary Clinton
November 1, 2016 Appleton, Wisconsin Early Vote Rally Tim Kaine
November 1, 2016 Madison, Wisconsin Early Vote Rally Tim Kaine
November 1, 2016 Columbus, Ohio Get Out the Vote President Barack Obama
November 1, 2016 Charlotte, North Carolina Get Out the Vote Vice President Joe Biden
November 1, 2016 Plymouth, New Hampshire Get Out the Vote Senator Bernie Sanders
November 1, 2016 Hanover, New Hampshire Get Out the Vote Senator Bernie Sanders
November 1, 2016 Portland, Maine Stronger Together Rally Senator Bernie Sanders
November 1, 2016 Florida City, Florida Get Out the Vote Bill Clinton
November 1, 2016 Immokalee, Florida Get Out the Vote Bill Clinton
November 1, 2016 St Petersburg, Florida Get Out the Vote Bill Clinton
November 1, 2016 Aurora, Colorado Get Out the Vote Chelsea Clinton
November 1, 2016 Carroll, Iowa Early Vote Event Anne Holton
November 1, 2016 Des Moines, Iowa Early Vote Event Anne Holton
November 1, 2016 Boone, Iowa Early Vote Event Anne Holton
November 1, 2016 Raleigh, North Carolina Get Out The Vote Performance NE-YO
November 1, 2016 Syracuse, New York Fundraiser Senator Kirsten Gillibrand
November 1, 2016 Rochester, New York Fundraiser Senator Kirsten Gillibrand
November 1, 2016 Washington, DC Fundraiser Heather Boushey

Trump and Pence

Trump and Pence-Valley Forge PA
Trump-Eau Claire, WI
Pence-Youngwood, PA

 

[benjipwns]

With write-in access, Roque "Rocky" De La Fuente (America Delta Party/Reform Party), Laurence Kotilkoff (Independent), Tom Hoefling (America's Party) and Mike Maturen (American Solidarity Party) now are on enough ballots to potentially win the election.

They join Evan "Two Mommies" McMullin ("has no girlfriend"), Darrell Castle (Constitution), Dr. Jill Stein (Green), Jaguar Johnson (Libertarian) and Donald J. Trump (Republican) as candidates who could theoretically win the election.

 

[Loudninja]

I was raised in Florida. Polk County, to be specific. The only poll of FL that was meh to me was the Sienna poll. By Nate's own admission, they did some things to that poll out of necessity that may impact their results. (They didn't show Hillary winning the early vote there, for instance.) Florida is going to come down to where the NPA voters break. If they do as we think they will, then I think we'll be fine. But, ya, a huge swing towards wwc would hurt us. I just don't think either 10-20% is probable.

It's just accepted practice. I mean, technically, everyone in California already knows how their state is going to go, but there are still down ballot races and stuff that we don't want to fuck up turnout on.

Today's schedule is fucking INSANE for Hillary's team:



Trump and Pence

Woah crazy.

 

[Amir0x]

Ugh please get out of my fucking state Trump

 

[benjipwns]

Is there 1992 election coverage on youtube?

NBC: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=63Al95TrlO0
CNN: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wEDxq6SW04o
ABC: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=phzmrooNHoM
CBS: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=I7wNQJEHf9A
Indecision 92: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=x8Drb0_S8KI

BBC of the 1992 UK Election, vastly superior theme music: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ARifiLUKwxA

also sweet hi-tech computers and a host who sounds like he says "cunt" and "whores" in the first minute

 

[rjinaz]

I was raised in Florida. Polk County, to be specific. The only poll of FL that was meh to me was the Sienna poll. By Nate's own admission, they did some things to that poll out of necessity that may impact their results. (They didn't show Hillary winning the early vote there, for instance.) Florida is going to come down to where the NPA voters break. If they do as we think they will, then I think we'll be fine. But, ya, a huge swing towards wwc would hurt us. I just don't think either 10-20% is probable.

It's just accepted practice. I mean, technically, everyone in California already knows how their state is going to go, but there are still down ballot races and stuff that we don't want to fuck up turnout on.

Today's schedule is fucking INSANE for Hillary's team:



Trump and Pence

Wow what a difference of schedules. I'd almost feel bad for Trump, but they got team Russia and team FBI on their side. Shit evens out.

 

[hawk2025]

Sam Bee has somehow topped herself with tonight's first segment. Completely and 100% on point.

Still one of the best shows on television.

 

[Amir0x]

I was so sad that Jon Stewart wasnt going to be covering this election. Samantha Bee makes me forget my sadness.

 

[Basileus777]

NBC: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=63Al95TrlO0
CNN: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wEDxq6SW04o
ABC: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=phzmrooNHoM
CBS: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=I7wNQJEHf9A
Indecision 92: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=x8Drb0_S8KI

BBC of the 1992 UK Election, vastly superior theme music: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ARifiLUKwxA

also sweet hi-tech computers and a host who sounds like he says "cunt" and "whores" in the first minute

Thanks, I'm surprised there's so much of it.

 

[Kevinroc]

NBC: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=63Al95TrlO0
CNN: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wEDxq6SW04o
ABC: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=phzmrooNHoM
CBS: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=I7wNQJEHf9A
Indecision 92: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=x8Drb0_S8KI

BBC of the 1992 UK Election, vastly superior theme music: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ARifiLUKwxA

also sweet hi-tech computers and a host who sounds like he says "cunt" and "whores" in the first minute

1992... A lot of interesting things happened in that election. That was the year Bobby Rush was first elected to Congress. An interesting footnote about Rush? He is the only politician who ever beat Barack Obama in an election (in the 2000 Democratic primary for Illinois' 1st district).

 

[Ecotic]

1992 is one of my favorite election nights to watch on youtube. Republicans had won 3 in a row and it's only by luck that the economic downturn gave them the opening and that Bill was talented enough to take advantage of it. Democrats had stopped believing in themselves and were like "Oh shit, we won? Really?". You had the WWII generation finally pushed out like an old lion whose time had come. Plus technologically it's a fascinating year to watch frozen in time.

 

[benjipwns]

Thanks, I'm surprised there's so much of it.

There's a lot of it out there actually, C-SPAN plays some of it at times, here's a playlist of stuff back to 1960:
https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLg2KzMsaR9dVIHml_hullcl9OdBZqHCrv

I know 1956 is out there somewhere. I don't know if there's earlier ones still around. But that's more pushing the edge of TV than anything.

1994 midterm shocker is always a fun one because everyone is so baffled:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9gVfG3pnfy0
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vrK9-a49GXU

ABC Nightly News the day after:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=708N0nOaO1s
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=F7ROoEKpoFU

This guy has like 25+ parts of election night 1994, those first two videos I think steal from these:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eoCAw8GQ5JI

1980, watch that map light up in blue for REAGAN and enjoy the sound in only one ear back before sound happened in two ears:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OMuWVsPQbwM

Clip of them calling it at 8:15 PM with some hot graphics: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PsDe-8cOSYY

Here's 2000 on NBC, how little did they know what they were in for lol:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ucdj8qHqqdQ
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Sn06pE1Ryek

Chris Matthews mentions Bernie "Saunders" in the first two minutes. Then compares New Hampshire to West Berlin.

 

[Pancake Mix]

1992 is one of my favorite election nights to watch on youtube. Republicans had won 3 in a row and it's only by luck that the economic downturn gave them the opening and that Bill was talented enough to take advantage of it. Democrats had stopped believing in themselves and were like "Oh shit, we won? Really?". You had the WWII generation finally pushed out like an old lion whose time had come. Plus technologically it's a fascinating year to watch frozen in time.

The strongest turnout for a third-party candidate by far in recent memory might have helped siphon off some Republican voters also, as did his Southern appeal winning him Lousiana and his home state of Arkansas.

 

[border]

Today's schedule is fucking INSANE for Hillary's team:

Obama comes to my city in Florida next Thursday. I am surprised and disappointed that they waited this long to have him show up, but I hope he can get people energized in a race that is closer than it should be. I still don't understand how a state with a big Latino/Hispanic population is still swinging dangerously close towards Trump.

 

[Finalizer]

I know 1956 is out there somewhere. I don't know if there's earlier ones still around. But that's more pushing the edge of TV than anything.

'48 and '52 for the curious.

 

[benjipwns]

'48 and '52 for the curious.

sweet

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Sn06pE1Ryek

25:45 of this, word comes in that they might have to uncall Florida and it'll be almost impossible to call, 565 votes with 99.87% of the vote

at 48 minutes they zoom their cameras in on a computer screen with an IE window showing Florida's vote count as everybody laughs at Brokaw saying "we'll go to Florida's website"

roughly 1 hour and 20 minutes they talk to their "DECISION DESK" guy, like Megyn Kelly did in 2012 to shut up Rove, to try and figure how they miscalled Florida twice (earlier for Gore, then for Bush along with the Presidency)

 

[benjipwns]

Ten and a half hours of CNN in 2004. Wolf Blitzer starts with a SIX SECOND COUNTDOWN TO THE FIRST POLLS CLOSING: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AYb1f3r82lQ

 

[eBay Huckster]

We don't debate the constitutionality of a central bank or grants to build bridges anymore.

Wait, we don't?

 

[benjipwns]

Wait, we don't?

the colloquial "we", aka the slavers

 

[thepotatoman]

Samantha Bee brings up Trump's prior war against telepromters.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7LFkN7QGp2c

I am actually 30% sold on this theory, which way more than I should be for any presidential candidate.

My main reservation is Trump has definitely given speaches before that were clearly pre-writen, and I have a harder time believing Trump would spend the time to memorize it than believing he can't read the teleprompters.

 

[davepoobond]

I am actually 30% sold on this theory, which way more than I should be for any presidential candidate.

My main reservation is Trump has definitely given speaches before that were clearly pre-writen, and I have a harder time believing Trump would spend the time to memorize it than believing he can't read the teleprompters.

He never reads it from beginning to end. He always goes off on his tangents to entertain himself and others so he doesn't sound like he's reading a book report in 3rd grade

 

[ItWasMeantToBe19]

I am actually 30% sold on this theory, which way more than I should be for any presidential candidate.

My main reservation is Trump has definitely given speaches before that were clearly pre-writen, and I have a harder time believing Trump would spend the time to memorize it than believing he can't read the teleprompters.

Trump can obviously read because his first few months of teleprompter speeches were super rough and showed him clearly (and awkwardly) reading the speech off the teleprompter.

But to see how Trump has gone from wanting to make teleprompters illegal to relying on them more dramatically than any recent candidate is just impressive.

And Trump does hate reading and is bad at reading!

 

[DontBeThatGuy]

Trump simply has the attention span of a small child.

 

[GhaleonEB]

Trump simply has the attention span of a small child.

And the hands to match.

 

[aspiegamer]

PA + VA+ NC = it's over, period. Good to see that even the more pessimistic talkings appear settled on this. Clinton could inexplicably lose firewall states like WI, CO and NH and still win overall with that kind of mid-Atlantic bulwark. FL and OH? Meaningless, too. Wow that's rather liberating to say after those states single-handedly cost Dems the 2000 and 2004 elections, respectively.

Let's go oppo! It's going to take something absolutely mindblowing to get the media to actually focus on it if the moderately damning things of the past 24 hours haven't registered at all. Oppo isn't even about shaping the race anymore for me anymore, and I don't expect any revelations to change anything. I just want to see something other than the words "FBI" and "emails" as headlines 24/7 so I can turn my TV on again. Seriously anything to get off of this. Even if proven not particularly damaging, it's a frustrating media message to have in the public's face at one week to go.

 

[Rockin' Ranger]

Samantha Bee brings up Trump's prior war against telepromters.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7LFkN7QGp2c

And her "Feelin' Alt Right" segments.

https://youtu.be/XQ8swY06eRU
https://youtu.be/QGn-C0G6xcw

 

[Pixieking]

PA + VA+ NC = it's over, period. Good to see that even the more pessimistic talkings appear settled on this. Clinton could inexplicably lose firewall states like WI, CO and NH and still win overall with that kind of mid-Atlantic bulwark. FL and OH? Meaningless, too. Wow that's rather liberating to say after those states single-handedly cost Dems the 2000 and 2004 elections, respectively.

Let's go oppo! It's going to take something absolutely mindblowing to get the media to actually focus on it if the moderately damning things of the past 24 hours haven't registered at all. Oppo isn't even about shaping the race anymore for me anymore, and I don't expect any revelations to change anything. I just want to see something other than the words "FBI" and "emails" as headlines 24/7 so I can turn my TV on again. Seriously anything to get off of this. Even if proven not particularly damaging, it's a frustrating media message to have in the public's face at one week to go.

I think, because the horse-race narrative is essentially dead, the media will focus on Comey. What he did is shocking, and, unless he resigns, the media will continue to report on his hypocrisy and partisan actions. And I don't think this'll hurt Clinton - anything that pushes the story that Comey has been two-faced in regards to the emails will actually help her, since it comes across as a witch-hunt.

Add to that, if the news about Trump destroying emails and pushing supporters to commit voter-fraud didn't get any play, then there's no reason to think anything else would, unless it's a video.