good news for supporters of donald trump: an abc news/washington post poll shows hillary clinton with what appears to be a surmountable lead. <u+201c>overall, clinton leads trump by 47-43 percent among likely voters, a slight edge given the survey<u+2019>s four-percentage-point error margin,<u+201d> the post reports. libertarian gary johnson has 5% and green jill stein 2%. now for the bad news: an nbc news/wall street journal poll finds mrs. clinton up by 11 points, 48% to 37%, with 7% for johnson and 2% for stein. both surveys were conducted oct.<u+00a0>10-13, <u+201c>after the second presidential debate but before last week<u+2019>s sexual-misconduct allegations against mr. trump,<u+201d> as the journal puts it. trump has denied those allegations but he could not deny, only minimize, the 2005 video recording of him engaging in brutish sexual banter, which was released oct.<u+00a0>7. follow james on twitter we<u+2019>ll return to the question of trump<u+2019>s prospects, but one thing that caught our attention about both polls was a finding in which they were similar, although the questions were slightly different. asked which party they preferred to control congress, nbc/wsj poll participants favored democrats by only two points, 46% to 44%. the abc/post poll asked which party<u+2019>s candidate respondents favored <u+201c>in your congressional district<u+201d>; democrats had a 47% to 44% edge. typically a slight democratic edge on what is called the generic congressional ballot is insufficient to produce large gains in house races. after the trump tape release, some (including this column ) speculated the republican house could be in jeopardy. david wasserman of the cook political report argues it probably isn<u+2019>t: the senate, where democrats need only a four-seat gain to take a majority (or five if trump wins), is trickier<u+2014>and was always going to be, given that republicans are defending 24 seats and democrats only 10. but realclearpolitics<u+2019> james arkin reports that <u+201c>so far there<u+2019>s little evidence that republicans are being dragged down by their controversial nominee.<u+201d> sens. kelly ayotte of new hampshire and rob portman of ohio both dropped their support for trump; she continues to lead narrowly and he by double digits. sen. ron johnson of wisconsin still backs trump and is down three points in the rcp average <u+2014>a considerable improvement over recent months. pennsylvania<u+2019>s sen. pat toomey, who has neither endorsed nor repudiated trump, is down by 0.2%. nevada, an open-seat race for a democratic seat, <u+201c>is slightly murkier<u+201d>: democrats, led by president obama, have shifted focus in the interest of maximizing gop down-ballot losses. during the democratic convention in july, he and his fellow partisans portrayed trump as a deviant, in contrast with regular republicans. <u+201c>look, we democrats have always had plenty of differences with the republican party, and there<u+2019>s nothing wrong with that,<u+201d> the president said: but in a speech in cleveland friday, obama sang a notably different tune: the previous day, at a columbus fundraising dinner for senate candidate ted strickland, obama expressly targeted portman: actually, portman renounced trump on saturday the 8th, less than 24 hours after the sex-talk recording became public, so he wouldn<u+2019>t have had time to consult the polls. (some of portman<u+2019>s colleagues, but not he, equivocated on their renunciations after postdebate polls showed trump had not collapsed to the degree they perhaps anticipated.) but that<u+2019>s a quibble. of all republicans save for the nevertrumps, portman is among those it is least plausible to associate with trump in such a manner. still, you can understand why obama would think it politically expedient to extend a hand to republicans in july and make a fist of it in october. it<u+2019>s a divide-and-conquer strategy: reach across the aisle, cajole as many people over as possible, then repolarize the electorate in hope of motivating democratic voters to support down-ballot candidates. it could work, though there<u+2019>s also the risk that it will diffuse trump voters<u+2019> anger with regular republicans. what about the presidential race? is there any possibility trump could turn it around? mrs. clinton<u+2019>s supporters are so confident that some are suggesting she should stand trump up wednesday and skip the final debate. <u+201c>drug testing?!?<u+201d> tweeted former obama aide david axelrod . <u+201c>you have to wonder if @hillaryclinton will/should reconsider next debate, given the depths to which this has sunk.<u+201d> (axelrod was referring to a trump quip from a saturday speech.) boston globe columnist michael cohen also floated the idea <u+201c>to scrap next week<u+2019>s third and final presidential debate,<u+201d> though he admitted <u+201c>i offer this proposal with a rather large grain of salt.<u+201d> we suggested back in march that either mrs. clinton or trump, sitting on a large lead, might elect not to debate<u+2014>she <u+201c>on the ground .<u+00a0>.<u+00a0>. that such a vulgarian is unworthy of the nation<u+2019>s attention,<u+201d> which is more or less what axelrod and cohen now suggest. but it won<u+2019>t happen. she<u+2019>s ahead, but not so far ahead that she can be sure the risk of debating outweighs the risk of dropping out. some contrarian observers are still arguing trump could win. matthew goodwin , a british political scientist, reminds politico readers of the brexit precedent: on the other hand, brexit was an abstract proposition, not a human being with trump<u+2019>s manifest flaws. though on the third hand, were we lucky enough to have one, it wasn<u+2019>t running against a human being with mrs. clinton<u+2019>s manifest flaws. cnbc<u+2019>s jake novak argues that trump<u+2019>s poll decline following the sex-talk tape might be illusory: it<u+2019>s an elaboration of the <u+201c>shy trump supporters<u+201d> theory: novak<u+2019>s hypothesis is that recent events have made them even shier. some, however, may be shy enough to withhold their votes on election day. all that said, there<u+2019>s something to be said for resisting the temptation to call the result before the voting is over. enough of that, and people may start to think the election is rigged. two bushies in one! (hat tip: @jimmyprinceton .) fox butterfield, is that you? worst appeals to authority <u+201c>dukakis: race would be more competitive if trump wasn<u+2019>t running<u+201d><u+2014>headline, cnn.com, oct.<u+00a0>14 we blame george w. bush <u+201c>you know, i notice [hillary clinton<u+2019>s] opponent<u+2014>he seems to be in the middle of the game, making excuses all the time for why he might be losing. and it<u+2019>s always interesting to me to see folks who talk tough but then don<u+2019>t act tough. because if you<u+2019>re tough you don<u+2019>t make excuses.<u+201d><u+2014>president obama, oct.<u+00a0>14 what would we do without experts? <u+201c>experts suggest 9 weed strains to get you through a stormy weekend<u+201d><u+2014>headline, oregonian, oct.<u+00a0>14 hypothesis and proof<u+2014>i hypothesis and proof<u+2014>ii generalissimo francisco franco is still dead <u+201c>the great barrier reef is not actually dead, but is still in serious trouble<u+201d><u+2014>headline, whnt-tv website (huntsville, ala.), oct.<u+00a0>16 hey, kids! what time is it? <u+201c>watched saturday night live hit job on me.time to retire the boring and unfunny show. alec baldwin portrayal stinks. media rigging election!<u+201d><u+2014>tweet, @realdonaldtrump, oct.<u+00a0>16 question and answer<u+2014>i question and answer<u+2014>ii question and answer<u+2014>iii look out below! <u+201c>samsung is risking an <u+2018>environmental disaster<u+2019> by dumping its galaxy note 7 handsets, experts warn<u+201d><u+2014>headline, dailymail.com, aug.<u+00a0>14 it<u+2019>s always in the last place you look <u+201c>morning spin: hillary clinton missing from suburban democrat<u+2019>s tv ad<u+201d><u+2014>headline, chicago tribune website, oct.<u+00a0>17 everything seemingly is spinning out of control <u+201c>researchers have debunked one of our most basic assumptions about how the world works<u+201d><u+2014>headline, washington post website, oct.<u+00a0>14 bottom stories of the day <u+201c>norway will not give halti mount summit to finland<u+201d><u+2014>headline, bbc website, oct.<u+00a0>14 fact chess donald trump speaks, and politifact pounces: do you see where this is going? politifact goes on to note that the u.s. does have 90 mass grand chesters. (whatever.) but apparently they missed the word <u+201c>like.<u+201d> an ordinary idiot can take a metaphor literally, but it takes a special kind of idiot to take a simile literally. follow @jamestaranto on twitter. join fans of best of the web today on facebook. subscribe to the best of the web email with one click. (carol muller helps compile best of the web. thanks to irene deblasio, dave ceely, tony lima, michele schiesser, ed grinberg, macrena sailor, r. dawson, shimon mogilyansky, dan palmer, kevin burns, t.k. smyth, john schoenecker, michael smith, jay weiser, darin bartram, wes van fleet, george brix and alex suciu. if you have a tip, write us at opinionjournal@wsj.com , and please include the url.)
divide and conquer - wsj
james taranto