A week out from their first debate, Democratic presidential nominee Hillary Clinton is considered the winner in her initial encounter with Republican opponent Donald Trump. As reported by Politico, Clinton’s poll-confirmed victory — such as those by Fox News and The Washington Post and ABC News — has helped increase her lead over Trump in a slew of state and national polls.

But Politico also noted that while Clinton appeared to trounce Trump in the debate, her election advantage remains “a low-to-mid-single-digit” nationally and in most battleground states.

The Real Clear Politics (RCP) average of polls shows a similar story, with Clinton’s lead being just 2.5 points. Huffington Post’s trend tracker, meanwhile, shows Clinton with a 5.2-point lead, even as a Los Angeles Times poll shows Trump with a five-point lead.

While the RCP and Huffington Post methods have their strengths and drawbacks, the race as a whole has been much tighter than predicted by many political insiders.

An example of the reaction by many of those same insiders is a Monday piece by Politico’s Glenn Thrush. He is critical and mocking of Trump — describing the race as one where “the unloved candidate trumps the hated one, the polls say.” He also described Trump as “the most outrageous and detested presidential nominee in recent memory” who “still gets his 38 to 43 percent in virtually every national poll.”

But while Trump may not be liked by most of America, wrote Thrush, Clinton doesn’t fare much better:

Meantime, a vast swath of the United States still can’t stomach Clinton. In the course of one mid-September day in deep-blue Maryland, I had a doctor pull his stethoscope off my chest to declare, “I’m a life-long Democrat and I don’t know what the h*** I’m going to do” and an African-American cabbie, who idolizes Barack Obama, muse about sitting this one out.

Nate Silver’s analysis currently gives Clinton a 70 percent chance of victory right now, and while things could change, the post-debate polls make it clear that each candidate would have to do a great deal to swing the race one way or the other. Here are a couple of things that could quickly change the dynamics of the race:

Trustworthiness

Neither candidate is trusted, with Trump facing attacks on his business practices throughout his career. Clinton, meanwhile, has been hammered with scandals surrounding her family’s charitable foundation and her activities as Secretary of State, to say nothing of the baggage she carries from past Clinton scandals.

A major scandal about either candidate could swing things as the race closes. Monday’s announcement, for example, that Trump’s Foundation has been issued an order to stop fundraising because it didn’t file proper paperwork probably doesn’t rise to the occasion, and who knows what Wikileaks founder Julian Assange will be revealing about Clinton in a video announcement now set for Tuesday.

While the top groups investigating Trump’s background have liberal bents — such as The New York Times with its non-story on Trump’s taxes on Saturday, or the New York state Attorney General who issued the fundraising order against Trump — a federal investigation into the Clinton Foundation is being done by Preet Bharara. Bharara is a Democrat who worked for Senator Charles Schumer (D-NY) in Washington but has shown no qualms about targeting high-ranking state Democrats and Republicans alike.

If he was to find something of significance in his Clinton Foundation investigation, it would be hard for Clinton to claim Bharara is a partisan hack, something Trump’s campaign is claiming about the Times’ editors and the New York Attorney General.

Health

Clinton’s health has been questioned even by some Democrats, especially in light of secrecy surrounding a recent bout of what the campaign said was pneumonia and dehydration.

Clinton performed very well during the debate, appearing energetic and on point, while a sniffling Trump looked nonplussed during much of their 90 minutes onstage.

Debates

Two solid debate performances by Trump probably won’t change the equation on their own, but the echo chambers of the media could sway voters who after last week’s debate performance and subsequent attacks on a former Miss Universe winner (including a 3:00 a.m. Twitter outburst) may be hesitant to trust Trump’s decision-making capabilities.

A physical collapse by Clinton during any debate could be devastating.

The Ever-Lurking October Surprise

A Muslim terrorist attack could help Trump, as could another Dallas-style revenge attack against police. Conversely, Clinton could politically benefit from an unjust police shooting, or a racist “lone wolf” attack like the one in 2014 in Charleston.

If the economy improves, the headlines could benefit Clinton. Conversely, given the slow growth of the U.S. economy in recent years, a perceived or actual downturn could harm Clinton.

Even the weather could play a role, as Mitt Romney found out in 2012 with Hurricane Sandy. At this hour, Hurricane Matthew is set to strike Haiti, which could draw attention to the Clintons’ post-earthquake antics in that impoverished nation. Also, during Louisiana’s recent floods, Donald Trump gained much needed credibility with his visit, while Clinton stayed home. If Hurricane Matthew affects the U.S., Clinton won’t make the same mistake again. And her steadiness and experience might contrast well with the political novice.

Tracking the storm should serve as a good reminder that while statistics and historical precedent can point to the way things are likely to go, no one knows what’s going to happen until landfall — or election day.