An excellent read on the state of each campaign's ground game. Tl;dr Hillary has far more offices, in more strategic locations, with a better web presence, which are devoted to electing her and only her instead of downballot candidates, and this advantage should be worth a 1% boost in counties with such offices.

http://fivethirtyeight.com/features/trum...6-forecast

Quote:The Marion County GOP headquarters in Ocala, Florida, is haunted. More specifically, the former movie theater that housed the headquarters was haunted, until it was torn down this summer to make way for a parking lot. And yet, for Republicans looking to volunteer in Ocala, the county GOP’s website still lists its address as the recently razed home of “Morris” the ghost.

Directing would-be volunteers to demolished buildings (and their now-homeless ghosts) is just one risk of outsourcing field operations to state and local parties. Both the Hillary Clinton and Donald Trump campaigns are coordinating field efforts with their party, but Trump is leaning on the Republican National Committee almost entirely. Until a couple of weeks ago, the Ocala office was one of only a few offices in all of Florida working to elect Trump.

That lonely, haunted Ocala non-headquarters exemplifies Trump’s ground game strategy — ephemeral and ineffectual.

Trump’s decision to partner with the RNC, though framed as being more efficient, robs him of the opportunity to organize in areas where the state or local party is not already strong. Many county parties don’t have an office, and even when they do, their leadership may prioritize electing other statewide or local GOP candidates. In Wisconsin, for example, many of the state party’s Victory offices predate the 2016 campaign and seem more focused on U.S. Sen. Ron Johnson’s re-election.

Campaigns simply don’t have the money or the staff to set up offices everywhere, so they put them in areas where they expect voter mobilization (such as door knocking, phone banking and distributing yard signs) might be most impactful. Offices that primarily advocate for down-ballot candidates, or are located inefficiently, won’t have the same payoff as logically placed, coordinated campaign offices focused on the party’s nominee.

OH MUH NATE!

I mean does it matter who has more field offices when those offices are empty?

We have plenty of video of the Hillary OH offices that are closed, empty, or that attracted exactly zero people for the get out the vote efforts. But yea, office space. yay.

Well of course she does.

She has all the big donors, Wall Street, the rich white 1%, and the entire establishment on her side.