Quoting Lev Lafayette (lev@levlafayette.com):
Quite correct; the difference between the "Washington" and "Westminster" systems is a distinction between the powers of the president/prime minister and the legislature. Voting methods can vary widely regardless of this distribution.
With thanks and no objection, I'll also point out other differences such as the vote of confidence, which has no part in the Washington system other than the painful and difficult process of impeachment (accusation) and trial followed by removal from office. The Westminster model has always struck me as quite a bit more flexible. (Lately, I've been watching the Danish television series Borgen, about a fictional Danish prime minister, her government, and its politics. It's very good.)
Interestingly, Clinton might even win by a bigger margin than Obama. If the predictions are right and she loses Iowa but gains North Carolina, that's a net improvement.
It's been such an extremely unconventional, basically totally unprecedented campaign season that I am confident of very little any more, and just watch in fascination.
It might be that a very large number of Americans simply aren't fond of Trump.
Indeed, even more and broader swathes of the public dislike Trump than dislike Hillary Clinton.
It is also interesting that the Libertarian candidate (and ex-GOP governor) is picking up notable, albeit single digit, support.
This is likely to be their best showing ever -- but still resulting in exactly zero electoral votes.