Electoral landslide such as 2008, 1996, or 1984. Something along the lines of 350-180 or so electoral votes. The popular vote will probably be within 5-7% points.
Wow...so basically you have a close win, a landslide, and almost nothing in between with "landslide" being a
gigantic margin to possibly fall within.
So you think 1984 (98% electoral, 98% of states, 18.8% popular vote) is equivilent to 1996 (70% electoral, 63% of states, 5.5% popular)? You think those two elections should be mentioned in the same breadth in terms of descriptions of margin of victory?
Let's look at another you listed...2008....with one you didn't list, 1988.
2008 you had 68% electoral, 57% of states, and 7.2% in popular. That compares to 1988 where you had 79% of electoral, 78% of states, and a 7.7% lead in popular vote. That's 10% more electoral votes, 20% more states, and about even on the popular...yet those two things should be viewed as similar in margins?
Actually...by your reasoning...we've had a "landslide" victory in 9 of the past 13 (dating back to 1960) Presidential elections. Of the 4 that don't qualify, one didn't get to the 350 mark because a 3rd party managed to get 48 electoral votes from states likely to have swung towards him. So basically "landslide" by your definition is pretty much your average Presidential victory.
If you wish that to be your definition, so be it. However...to me...it waters down the word and frankly makes your use of it one that is ignored and derided. It's akin to saying a guy who scored 25 points in a NBA game had a "MONSTER" game scoring because you view anything between 25 and 75 points as a "monster" game.
Landslide should be reserved for instances like 1964, 1972, 1980, and 1984 with '88 on the boardline. 80%+ electoral, 80% plus of the state, and double digit lead in the popular vote.
Things like 1992, 1996, and 2008 were good, strong solid wins but were by no means landslides. I think it does a siginificant disserviec to the term to suggest that 1996 and 1964 or 2008 and 1984 are anywhere close to in the same ballpark.
I think this election is likely to be close, but I wouldn't be shocked to see a win similar to 2008. I'd be flabbergasted to see anything close to the actual landslides I listed above.