Everyone has an interest in pretending this election is close. The media, certainly. The candidates, obviously.

And in a divided country where even the start of a professional football game is enmeshed in controversy, it’s natural to think this election will come down to the wire.

It won’t. It hasn’t. It’s done. Hillary Clinton is going to beat Donald Trump, handily in the Electoral College, probably by a mid-single-digit percentage in the popular vote.

To defend that point, let’s look at where the race is, where the polls are, and what could plausibly be on the horizon.

Trump hosted a Republican convention that was notable only for advancing the theme that Clinton should be indicted and that Trump was a law-and-order candidate. He did get a bounce out of that, but then fell disastrously after Clinton not only had a better convention but Trump picked a fight with the parents of a deceased war veteran.

Trump did manage to crawl back into the race, helped by a more competent campaign manager and by mustering a few weeks of relative discipline.

He then managed to undo any of those gains at the biggest moment, with an unprepared and chaotic showing at the widely watched first debate, where he managed to fall into every trap Clinton laid to defend the undefendable while barely landing a blow of his own. He then used the postdebate limelight to focus on the propriety of a former Miss Universe. And now the spotlight, thanks to a New York Times revelation, has turned to the question of what in his past allowed him to take a nearly billion-dollar loss to eliminate future taxes.

See:How Trump may have posted a billion-dollar tax loss without losing any actual money

The polls reflect Trump’s performance. There was a poll released Tuesday in Arizona — Sheriff Joe country, the heartland of complaints about Mexican immigration — with Clinton in the lead. In Pennsylvania, where Trump’s anti-trade message has resonance, the former secretary of state’s lead has ballooned to as many as 10 points.

The most plausible non-Pennsylvania path for Trump would require wins in Florida, Ohio, North Carolina, Arizona, Colorado and Nevada. According to the RealClearPolitics average of polls, Trump is winning in just two of those.

Again, whom are we kidding here?

So the question has to turn to this: What’s left that can turn the election? And any realistic answer comes down to “not much.” Let’s run through a few scenarios:

The debates: It’s certainly possible Trump would do better at the two remaining debates. His running mate, Mike Pence, provided a template for a better showing at the vice-presidential head-to-head. But it’s not like Clinton will turn into a stammering fool, and it’s hard to imagine Trump will make an as-yet-untested argument that eviscerates her and causes new deliberation among voters. Furthermore, the most important debate was the first one. Ratings will only go down from here, particularly with the coming debate occurring on a Sunday night. Finally, Trump will run into the same problem Pence encountered: Trump’s own catalog of outlandish and offensive remarks. They’re not easily disowned or explained.

The economy: Even a few bad (or good) indicators won’t change anyone’s perspective at this point. Consumer confidence has steadily climbed from 2011 lows. Job growth has been solid. Wage growth is muted but there. Gas prices are cheap. Whatever the economy is, it is — there’s no surprise coming on that front.

A mass-casualty terrorist attack: It’s not a pleasant thing to speculate about, but it’s certainly within the realm of possibility. In fact, there was one such event, after the Bastille Day attack in Nice. Trump pressed his message that he would be “extreme” in vetting and restrict immigration, whereas Clinton said she would try to increase intelligence resources. Advantage: Trump. That said, it’s a message Trump has repeated for months. The emotions of such an event could help Trump, though his own style — and tendency to pat himself on the back for “predicting” such a tragedy — could undercut that. Would it be enough to swing the popular vote by several points? Unlikely.

Urban riots: Racial tension and the riots in cities including Charlotte and Dallas certainly buttress Trump’s law-and-order appeal. But, again, that is already baked into the polls.

Clinton’s health: The pictures of her being escorted into a van, looking nearly lifeless, during the Sept. 11 memorial were not good, to say the least. But she’s bounced back from the apparent bout of pneumonia to sound energetic and active. Of the two candidates at the debate, Clinton had the most vibrancy, particularly in the latter half. Even a cold would raise fresh concerns about her health, but, short of her looking like a zombie, this doesn’t seem likely to be the path to a Trump victory.

An October surprise: The head of the Federal Bureau of Investigation said Clinton was “extremely careless” in her handling of very sensitive, highly classified information. Trump’s response was to attack the FBI for not recommending an indictment. If he couldn’t handle a gift like that, what new revelation, what new email, could come from WikiLeaks or some other outfit that would not only show Clinton unfit for office but show Trump to be more fit?

In fact, the entire recent thrust of the Trump campaign, which is focusing more on Clinton’s character than any broader economic message, is nonsensical. Sure, he can raise doubts about whether the Clinton Foundation’s raising of funds reflected a degree of corruption. But what’s basically impossible is for Trump to argue convincingly that he himself is less corrupt than Clinton, not with the questions over his taxes and his use of a charity for personal means, alongside concerns about links to Russia, payments to state attorneys general and the like.

Russia hacking voting machines and changing the results: You got me there.

There’s an understandable reluctance to declare the election over. The polls famously missed the United Kingdom’s Brexit vote, and many of the same trends, toward nationalism, against immigration, against free trade, against elite rule — are reflected in the tone of this presidential election. Listening to U.K. Prime Minister Theresa May speech this week — “if you believe you’re a citizen of the world, you’re a citizen of nowhere” — there is a plausible, conservative blueprint that a U.S. politician can use to exploit concerns over the economy and society.

Trump, with his lack of discipline, desire and self awareness, isn’t going to be that politician.

It’s over. All that’s left is calculating the margin of victory.

This story was first published on Oct. 6, 2016.