Right now, the polls in Nevada show a narrow Trump lead. However, the head honcho in Nevada prognostication says that ain't so. Jon Ralston says that Trump will lose there, and what if he is right? As I have been saying for the last few days, we just don't know the state of the race right now.
So, here's a very ugly scenario. Trump wins New Hampshire, but Clinton squeaks out an electoral college victory with Nevada instead of New Hampshire in her column. If that happens when there is a discrepancy between the polls and the final tally, we get something very ugly.
Last summer, I wrote a series called "Zero-sum politics" about how Trump's view of politics as a zero-sum game might lead to problems after a loss, but it would rest, in part, on whether or not Republicans accept the correctness of the polls. If Trump is behind in the polls, Republicans accept the polls, and Trump loses, then everything is fine. However, if Trump is at least thought to be winning, and then loses, trouble ensues on the basis of rigged-election claims. If Nevada polls show a Trump lead and Clinton gets the Nevada victory, which tips the electoral college, be afraid. Things get ugly on the basis of rigged-election claims.
Enjoy your weekend!