On polling for Election 2016
It is absolutely the case that individuals polls are often wrong.
But poll averages—while sometimes wrong—are more seldom wrong in terms of the general trend for candidates, win or lose. And the poll averages over time are almost never wrong.
Trump has been losing to Hillary in the average of polls over a long time; for about a year now. It is pretty safe to predict a loss for him for that reason. But of course such a prediction is never completely safe, and although I make such a prediction I definitely have acknowledged that fact and continue to acknowledge it.
Brexit polls are often cited as being a good analogy for those who would like to discount the current polls on Trump, and say that a Trump win is a very decent possibility. And it is understandable why people would make that analogy, because the pro-EU forces were ahead in the poll averages for a long time, and yet the anti-EU forces ended up winning in a squeaker, and it’s easy to believe that the anti-EU forces are roughly analogous in their makeup and orientation to the pro-Trump forces here (I happen to agree with that latter characterization).
However, if you look more closely at the Brexit polls, they had become much closer in the final few weeks before the referendum took place (for a while, the Brexit forces were even ahead). These later polls were such that the prediction went like this (I can’t seem to reproduce the chart, so if you want to take a look at it, follow the link and scroll down just a bit to “Brexit Poll Tracker”):
The chart below aggregates all public surveys and attempts to address their shortcomings, with greater emphasis given to pollsters who were more accurate in the past. Where they all agree: It’s too close to call, with the still-undecided voters likely to determine whether Britain will leave or remain.
That’s not what the aggregate is saying about Trump. Here’s a chart for the poll averages for Trump over time, and if you compare it to that Brexit data, the late trend looks very different:
There are two and a half weeks left, and unless something changes in those two weeks, I feel fairly confident making my prediction of a Trump loss, and not a close one.
[NOTE: You can take a look at more Brexit polling data here.
The Trump average trend is also bad in the state data, but I haven’t included that here because it would constitute a book.]
[ADDENDUM: See also point #3 here.
One more thing, neither scientific or mathematical. It is my gut feeling, and has been right along, that Trump will lose. My track record is good on this, because I was also one of the few people who did not predict a Romney win in 2012. Not only that, but those who know me personally can attest that I was virtually certain Romney would lose, and became extremely distraught about it in the weeks prior to the election. Various people tried to pep-talk me out of my conviction, but to no avail.
Perhaps the reason I felt that way was that I tend towards pessimism. But I was actually basing my belief on some personal anecdotal evidence in addition to my gut. The following is an excerpt from a post I wrote the day after the 2012 election:
I had been dreading yesterday for weeks, and I felt that dread especially keenly in the week leading up to the election.
The arguments on the right that the polls were rigged never made sense to me. When I researched polls I noted that, historically, poll averages have tended in most cases to correctly predict the outcome of elections. Exceptions are very rare. So the only hope I had about that was that, because the response rate to polls has gotten so low in recent years, polls had become more unrepresentative than they used to be.
But the polls stubbornly kept saying the same thing: Romney continued to fall a tiny bit short in many important states. And that’s the way the election panned out.
Last week I also discovered that, when I spoke to a bunch of liberal friends I knew who had adored Obama in 2008, they were all still very supportive of him and very strongly motivated to vote for him…Those on the right who felt that declining crowds and lack of yard signs meant that enough of Obama’s supporters had defected probably didn’t have the experience I had in talking to so many people who still had a very high regard for him. I saw almost no fall-off in support for him at all.
My anecdotal evidence this year is even worse for Trump than it was for Romney that year. I’ve written about it before so I won’t go on and on about it now, but suffice to say that the only people I know who are pro-Trump are already conservatives, and it’s a small group of conservatives at that. People I know who are moderates and/or Independents who don’t like Hillary at all and were prepared to vote for Rubio or Kasich don’t want anything whatsoever to do with Trump, whom they both detest and fear.]
Well, one can hope that Trump has no “coat tails.” Who knows how the “burn-it-all-downers” will respond to congressional and governor races if it appears clearly and starkly that Trump is going down in flames?
you still refuse to understand that in a dirty world there is no such things as pure white.
ie. none of these are accurate becuse ALL of them are skwed by the system.. the same way everhything was skewed in the osviet union. and it was only accident if it told the truth, or if the truth matched what it wanted.
The best saying that fits the above is:
Even the devil can quote scripture when it serves her
i would LOVE to hear how you think one could accurately measure things and then let me know which polling is doing that… none are… in fact they work harder at skewing to what they want then to accurately measure things. why? because even if they are 100% accurate, and perfect, in a sea of shit their accuracy cant be determined.
the saddest part about free people who have never lived under the auspices of the belief system that is gaming them, is that they desperately want to trust something when there is no longer anything to trust that way.
in fact, its contradictory to the extreme..
if trump is losing, then why run 6 pages of antitrump editorial today in the daily news… when has ANY winning candidate and their cadres ever spent so much on addressing their competitive losers?
in a world where there are 100 rulers, and only one is valid, how do you determine the one? and thats assuming that there is one that is valid in the 100…
GIGO… garbage in, garbage out
there is no way to get an accurate poll in a world where one side is blowing up things, attacking supporters, ripping up signage, running pages of bs, and so on.
what fool who supports trump would walk around ny with a trump hat? in fact, there has been people who have admitted telling the poles what they think the pollster wants to hear to avoid that violence, aprobation, nastyness, and so on.
Donald Trump supporter beaten with crowbar outside Friendly
PROTESTERS Crash Trump Fundraiser, BEAT AND ROB Trump supporter
Horror! LEFTIST MOB Beats, Kicks, Pummels TRUMP Supporter
WATCH: Trump Supporter Beaten at El Cajon Rally
Trump Supporter Beaten In Bloomfield, New Jersey With Crowbar
meanwhile, the truth ministries like snopes want to say it never happened.. despite photos.
here is the key. the purpose of riots and beating up people is NOT to change their minds to vote otherwise… it didnt work when the dems murdered blacks, it doesnt work today, so THAT is not its purpose
its purpose is to give them control of the polls because a poll can change the outcome of something
See dialoging to consensus and havlocks change agent guide… note i recommended that stuff 10 years ago, and your still ignroant of how the game is being played and your guesses are off… i have already shown that i was a founder of one movement, and its still going… see MGTOW. i said read about HOW it works and so on.
you know about as much about whats going on on stage as a person in the audience of a magician who is not a magician themselves!!!
the attacks and such is to make sure that when pollsters ask, the answers can never be right… its not worth risking life, freedom, liberty, and on and on, to show support when one can lie, walk away, and vote otherwise when the curtain closes.. or rather when your hunched shoulders block others from looking
its just a revenue stream to get eyes to see ads.
duh.
so this is inane in terms of anything meaninful
there is no way to get their from their
just as once someone pisses in the well theres no way to get a clean drink of water.
“Trump Won’t Say If He Will Accept Election Results,” wailed the New York Times. “Trump Won’t Vow to Honor Results,” ran the banner in the Washington Post.
But what do these chattering classes and establishment bulletin boards think the Donald is going to do if he falls short of 270 electoral votes?
Lead a Coxey’s Army on Washington and burn it down as British Gen. Robert Ross did in August 1814, while “Little Jemmy” Madison fled on horseback out the Brookville Road?
What explains the hysteria of the establishment?
In a word, fear.
The establishment is horrified at the Donald’s defiance because, deep within its soul, it fears that the people for whom Trump speaks no longer accept its political legitimacy or moral authority.
It may rule and run the country, and may rig the system through mass immigration and a mammoth welfare state so that Middle America is never again able to elect one of its own. But that establishment, disconnected from the people it rules, senses, rightly, that it is unloved and even detested.
Having fixed the future, the establishment finds half of the country looking upon it with the same sullen contempt that our Founding Fathers came to look upon the overlords Parliament sent to rule them.
Establishment panic is traceable to another fear: Its ideology, its political religion, is seen by growing millions as a golden calf, a 20th-century god that has failed.
Trump is “talking down our democracy,” said a shocked Clinton.
After having expunged Christianity from our public life and public square, our establishment installed “democracy” as the new deity, at whose altars we should all worship. And so our schools began to teach.
Half a millennia ago, missionaries and explorers set sail from Spain, England and France to bring Christianity to the New World.
Today, Clintons, Obamas and Bushes send soldiers and secularist tutors to “establish democracy” among the “lesser breeds without the Law.”
Unfortunately, the natives, once democratized, return to their roots and vote for Hezbollah, Hamas and the Muslim Brotherhood, using democratic processes and procedures to re-establish their true God.
And Allah is no democrat.
By suggesting he might not accept the results of a “rigged election” Trump is committing an unpardonable sin. But this new cult, this devotion to a new holy trinity of diversity, democracy and equality, is of recent vintage and has shallow roots.
For none of the three — diversity, equality, democracy — is to be found in the Constitution, the Bill of Rights, the Federalist Papers or the Pledge of Allegiance. In the pledge, we are a republic.
When Ben Franklin, emerging from the Philadelphia convention, was asked by a woman what kind of government they had created, he answered, “A republic, if you can keep it.”
Among many in the silent majority, Clintonian democracy is not an improvement upon the old republic; it is the corruption of it.
Consider: Six months ago, Virginia Gov. Terry McAuliffe, the Clinton bundler, announced that by executive action he would convert 200,000 convicted felons into eligible voters by November.
If that is democracy, many will say, to hell with it.
Patrick J. Buchanan
Artfldgr:
I can’t even imagine where you get the idea that I refuse to accept that “in a dirty world there is no such things as pure white.”
Nothing I’ve said can be interpreted that way.
Unless you were addressing someone else when you wrote “you.”
It’s always good to indicate whom you’re addressing. Note that I pretty much always do that when I respond to someone, to help avoid confusion as best I can.
Patrick J. Buchanan, digging deep.
“My anecdotal evidence this year is even worse for Trump” – Neo
Posted this on another article, but seems to fit here better…
“Had a conversation today with an acquaintance who was an early trump supporter. I mentioned before that the few that I know were becoming noticeably uncomfortable.
Today, he said he’s thrown in the towel — he now readily acknowledges many of the issues with trump, and thinks it was a big mistake not selecting one of the other 16 who could prosecute the case against clinton and speak clearly on what he would do.
To him trump only talks in headlines, but has nothing after that.
Btw, he does not have a hyperbolized view of what clinton will do — we share a similar view on what clinton will mean.
This is a lost opportunity.” – BM
http://neoneocon.com/2016/10/20/is-trumps-refusal-to-say-hed-accept-the-results-of-the-election-the-only-thing-that-happened-on-earth-today/#comment-1804319
“I can’t even imagine where you get the idea that I refuse to accept that “in a dirty world there is no such things as pure white.”
Nothing I’ve said can be interpreted that way.” – Neo
There are a number of folks here who fervently believe in one large conspiracy, which makes it the “obvious” explanation that all polls are skewed.
The likely explanation based on real world observation is never enough because the end result doesn’t fit their hyperbolical world view.
It is not a far step from there to having no limit in the opposition to clinton.
There is always a “good” explanation for trump’s failures, in their minds, at least.
.
Sad that trump plays all this up, including “rigged” elections.
It’s about as “rigged” as throwing a horeshoe 100 yards past the stake – it’s not even close enough to make a worthy debate of it, and instead looks more like whining and excuse making.
@Neo – BTW… took 1.5 hours to get this prior comment to post. Your site a victim of some of the recent DOS attacks?
Downticket, downticket, downticket.
Get out there and vote from the rooftops.
Big Maq:
Yes. My blog’s been down for a while.
See this.
Big Maq: Seem thing happened to me. I was wondering the same thing.
I’ve got to say the Obama adminisdtration has been extraordinarily sloppy on the cyber-security. We’ve been hacked and hacked and don’t seem to be keeping up with our adversaries as we should.
Huxley:
It does seem like our servers get hacked a lot. However, Hillary’s unsecured servers probably already let them find out most of what they wanted to know, and the hacking they’re doing now is letting the citizens of this country find out more of what the government has been doing than this government would ever tell us.
I think it was the alt-r, as there is a little too much anti-trump rhetoric here. /jk
Neo-neocon, I agree with your assessment and can vouch that you’ve held steady throughout this campaign, but I wonder if you will concede one miscalculation on your part? Like you, I’ve believed Trump would lose all along, but you argued my theory that he would attract Dems that Romney had not, specifically union members and blacks. This will be more than offset by his low numbers among women, especially white women, but do you now see his appeal among those two groups? I still predict he will beat Bush, McCain and Romney in support from Union members and blacks. He’l still lack a majority, but he will do better.
I think hrc will easily reach 270. But, its crazy out there and I suppose anything can happen on 11/8. Down the rabbit hole, through the glass darkly, and hrc vs. djt, what a long strange trip.
“But deep inside my heart I know I can’t escape… oh mama, can this really be the end to be stuck inside of Mobile with the Memphis blues again?” No wonder BD has the Noble for literature.
Do you think Cruz could have won?
I do not. I think Rubio would have. JEB! No! Walker, maybe. I’d like to think Fiorina or Paul could have won, but I wonder?
Parker, she could win all 52 states!
Rufus T. Firefly:
Show me evidence that he has attracted blacks (other than a few random people). There is none, and there never was any (as I pointed out in the past). It was something the MSM wanted Republicans to think, as part of the MSM’s promotion of Trump’s nomination.
The blue-collar Democrat and/or union worker support for Trump is a bit different. I don’t believe I ever claimed there wasn’t some, but I never thought it would amount to much. As it turns out (and it’s very hard to measure), it appears to have risen somewhat during times when Trump was doing best (mostly around late August, or whenever he had that small surge not too long after the conventions, when Hillary was having a bad couple of weeks, and around the time he went to Mexico). Since then it’s been going down, and that little surge was pretty short. For example, in states such as Pennsylvania, which Romney lost by 5%, Hillary is leading Trump by an average of 6.2% (see this). In Ohio, which Romney lost by 3%, it is closer, basically neck and neck at the moment (see this). In Michigan, Romney lost by 9 and a half, and right now Hillary is beating Trump by an average of 11.6. In Wisconsin, Romney lost by 7% in 2012, and right now Hillary is beating Trump by an average of 7%.
Only in Ohio does it appear close, and in 2012 Ohio was already relatively close (it’s a state that Bush had won fairly narrowly in 2004 and was instrumental in his victory, by the way, and that he won handily in 2000).
So I simply do not see any particular movement towards Trump by the demographic you mention, although there’s a smallish one in Ohio that might represent a slight reversion to trends there that ended with Bush. In those other states, Trump is doing the same or even worse (according to polls, anyway) than Romney did.
But, but neo. This time it is different.
I am hanging my hat on the Brexit effect and the huge turnout at Trump rallies. I also hate Hillary so much that I just hope I am right.
IBD and Rasmussen both have Trump winning.
Right now, djt leads hrc in Iowa according to reliable polls. It is a narrow lead, and it feels fluid to me, so things may change in the dwindling days ahead. I am seeking a reason to be never trump along with never hillary. I would enjoy writing in Cruz/Fiorina.
Rufus,
She won’t take all 57 states, but 350+ EC votes is within the realm of possibilty. IOW a landslide. 😉
Cornhead,
Yes, hrc as POTUS is a terrible (but highly likely) prospect. But wishing and hoping is as djt would say sad, bad.
I like Nate Silver’s forecast because he consolidates multiple polls with his own modeling filtered through an electoral college simulation to calculate the odds on the race.
He has been spookily accurate in the last two elections on not just the overall outcome but predicted the state outcomes with 99% accuracy.
Yesterday Sharon W. accused me of Trump Derangement Syndrome because I said Trump had “nuked” his chances with those attacks on the Muslim Gold Star mother.
If you look at the graph of Silver’s forecast over time on you can see Trump’s odds plummet starting August 1 with the furor over those remarks.
http://projects.fivethirtyeight.com/2016-election-forecast/
Trump had just barely edged out Clinton after the RNC then stuck a fork in his chances. It might be a very different election today had Trump not attacked that mother.
Even my cousin, a stone Trump fan early on, was aghast with Trump’s remarks. His faith in Trump never recovered and though he will vote for Trump he is no longer a fan, but joins me in wringing his hand over this election.
I hope Trump wins, which is to say, I hope Hillary loses.
If Trump loses, I hope he loses very, very big in the popular vote.
Analogy alert. Stay with me.
Musing about what North America would be like if there had been no revolution and what would have happened to slavery if there had been no Civil War, I was unable to dismiss the forces that led to each of those. You don’t, when doing a historical counterfactual, dismiss the forces that caused something as serious as the thing, whatever it is, you’re cutting out.
They do not simply fade out. They have to be dealt with, and considered.
From which I recall somebody’s observation that he hoped Trump won. Because, if he loses, you’re really not going to like who’s next.
Candidates do not reach that stage by climbing a rope ladder attached to…something. They, metaphor alert, stand on, are raised up by, various forces. Should they win, or lose, those forces remain.
Consider that Trump is an unconventional candidate coming from a field of the most conventional types it is possible to imagine.
What about the forces that passed them by to reach for Trump?
Where are they going?
Who will they raise up next?
I agree that Nate Silver’s 538 web site is interesting. Silver even gives a detailed explanation of how his model works. He uses things like “adjustments for house effects” and “trend line adjustment” and also uses demographic data if a state is polled infrequently.
Here is a very interesting column by Matthew Continetti titled The Crisis of the Conservative Intellectual
Republicans have walked this tightrope for decades. When the party has integrated the issues, goals, and tactics of the New Right into its campaigns, it has been remarkably successful. Think 1968, 1972, 1980, 1984, 1994, 2010, and 2014. But there also have been signs, on the presidential level most clearly, that the alliance with populism is bringing diminishing returns. The GOP is on the brink of losing the popular vote in six out of seven presidential elections despite its current nominee running precisely the type of campaign the New Right has wanted to see for years.
Here is the link to The Crisis of the Conservative Intellectual
http://freebeacon.com/columns/crisis-conservative-intellectual/
“Who will they raise up next?”
Since the current signs point quite distinctly toward idiocracy, we can fairly surmise that it won’t be anyone remotely akin to Calvin Coolidge.
Artfldgr Says:
you still refuse to understand that in a dirty world there is no such things as pure white.
Art very thoughtfully confirms what I’ve been saying: Trumpkins view decency as a weakness and deny that a morally-decent candidate can win.
That’s okay. After November 8, I won’t have to take those views seriously anymore, nor anyone who made them.
Artfldgr Says:
the saddest part about free people who have never lived under the auspices of the belief system that is gaming them, is that they desperately want to trust something when there is no longer anything to trust that way.
Got that, neo-neocon? You’re living in false consciousness, and people like Art are privy to the secret truth. LOL
Here is a link to a podcast where Nate Silver explains his statistical model.
http://fivethirtyeight.com/features/how-much-uncertainty-is-left-about-the-election/
Hey Spiral, check out Steven Hayward’s piece titled “The Crisis of the Conservative House Divided” as well. He troubles to get to the heart of the modern problem of regime: the administrative state.
Rufus Firefly Says:
Do you think Cruz could have won?
Cruz’ one mistake was relying too heavily on Evangelicals. His Achille’s heel is linking him to Bible-thumping. He might have overcome that perception, maybe not. I think he would’ve annihilated Hillary in the debates, and would’ve pointed out her every lie and mistake.
Next time, if he tones down or eliminates the overt appeals to religiosity, he’ll do better.
Polls are a means of calculating the likelihood of one candidate or the other winning the election.
How do we calculate the likelihood that one brave FBI agent will stand up and tell the truth? Has our national character become so depraved that the likelihood of that is zero?
For those pulling hard for Trump and fearing the worst with President Hillary, I suggest history usually does not proceed as in straight-line extrapolations.
Given all the kettles about to boil over with the economy, foreign policy, terrorism and god knows what else, Hillary could be President when things explode. It’s possible we will be grateful a Democrat is in office to be blamed.
Richard Aubrey Says:
From which I recall somebody’s observation that he hoped Trump won. Because, if he loses, you’re really not going to like who’s next.
I’ve been hearing these vague threats from the Trumpkins and alt-right for a year. They are the vain and idle threats of adolescents when they don’t get their way.
If Trump loses by 10%, he will be radioactive. The people who still willingly cling to him will become sad pariahs, like those Japanese soldiers on islands who never found out the war was over. Or like dope-smoking hippies who get misty-eyed when remembering McGovern.
If their answer next cycle is to “Trump harder,” they will be laughed at until they either slink away in shame or are forcefully ejected as the kooks they are.
sdferr wrote:
Hey Spiral, check out Steven Hayward’s piece titled “The Crisis of the Conservative House Divided” as well. He troubles to get to the heart of the modern problem of regime: the administrative state.
I read Steven Hayward’s piece this morning. It’s very good.
I think an easier question to answer, compared to the questions Hayward is asking, is:
How different is the United State from Canada, Great Britain and the nations of continental Europe when it comes to politics?
I used to think that the United States was significantly different from, say, France or Belgium or Canada.
Now, I reflect on the past 24 years (the presidential election years since 1992, when the Democrats started their current dominance in Presidential elections), I conclude that during this period of time the United States has become much like Europe. The American Left has become more politically powerful and the American Right has become weaker.
I’d almost like to shoot Steven Hayward an email and ask him to consider this hypothesis and write another interesting column.
@ Spiral:
The Crisis of the Conservative Intellectual
This isn’t rocket science, and why Trump lost isn’t a mystery. He is a largely incompetent doofus who talks a lot of shit, and people mistook that for ability. Oh, he also was boosted by leftwing media (just like we said), and people fell for it. Todd Akin, all over again.
1) No jerks
2) No squishes
3) No incompetents
That’s all that’s required to beat the Dems.
Cap’n Rusty Says:
How do we calculate the likelihood that one brave FBI agent will stand up and tell the truth? Has our national character become so depraved that the likelihood of that is zero?
The system is designed to prevent that. It would at least be career suicide and possibly physically dangerous. Such a person would have to be a loner with no deep connections, too, and the FBI doesn’t hire loners.
That column is adapted from his forthcoming book Spiral, so he may have more to say already. What’s kind of funny-odd to me is that while America morphs into a quasi-European political creature, Europe has spent the last few decades aping America, albeit altogether in a top-down and hence ass-backward doomed to fail manner.
“She won’t take all 57 states, but 350+ EC votes is within the realm of possibilty. IOW a landslide.” – parker
And then watch the MSM declare that she has a “mandate”, when that so-called “mandate” is really only “No effing way trump”.
Only a hoped for GOP turnout for down-ticket votes, and retention of both chambers of Congress would counter that.
Matt_SE,
I also think that there are elements on the Right (or more accurately, in the Republican party) that have what I call an Al Pacino approach to politics.
In the movie Scent of a Woman, Al Pacino’s character says If I were the man I was five years ago, I’d take a flameflower to this place!!
This is essentially the Trump candidacy in one sentence.
Matt SE
“Career suicide” and possibly “physically dangerous?’
You really think that no one in the FBI would put his country above himself?
You don’t know the kind of men I know.
The people who nominated Trump screwed up. They thought they were a rising force, and could do whatever they wanted. They were drunk on the idea of obtaining power. Power to enact their revenge on all the groups who had wronged them.
That is not the behavior of people who want to reform the system. It is childish lashing out.
When those people realize they made a mistake, and when they can control their emotions, then we’ll make progress. If they refuse to admit their mistakes, they’ll keep bashing their (and our) heads in for years.
Next time, no squishes (they’ve lost too many times in a row already and are obviously out of touch with the base), no jerks (decency still matters to a great number of people), and no incompetents (that especially applies to people who cannot articulate their ideology).
Another factor that the polls aren’t accounting for is that there might be a lot of techies around the world who want all the dirty politics and corruption hidden in Democrat emails to see the light of day. Why, they might even bring down the Internet to be sure WikiLeaks can deliver the truth!
Ya think?
Cap’n Rusty Says:
You don’t know the kind of men I know.
Then why can’t you find any volunteers? The FBI is either full of virtuous men or it isn’t.
If Trump loses by a massive margin, it will both discredit his brand of populism and the idea that Dems rigged the election through voter fraud. (they did rig the nominations, though)
The worst case scenario is a Hillary win by 2%. I think that would erupt into violence.
Matt_SE,
I also think Cruz alienated too many main stream Republicans. And he just doesn’t come across well on television. I liked a lot of his policies, but I never thought he could win.
Matt. Missed the point. It’s not the people who supported Trump I’m talking about. It’s the forces which caused them to support Trump. Where are those going?
Just fading away?
Neo-neocon, I can’t give you anything better than anecdotal evidence, but the union folks I know like Trump. Probably more than any single demographic I’ve spoken with. Admittedly that’s a small sample size (Unon members who talk to Rufus about politics), but I imagine it carries to states like PA, where Union guys also like to hunt deer and aren’t fans of open borders.
Trump’s numbers are so bad among women (deservedly so) it’s hard to gauge demographic support within a state, but it seems logical more Union folk would be drawn to him than Romney. And, regarding blacks, I never thought he’d do overly well, just better than Romney, and I still believe that. A lot of blacks do not like open borders and he’s the first Republican to go somewhere like Detroit and ask for a shot. I think that won him a few folks. Also, a lot of blacks ant stand Hillary for the same reasons so many others find her unlikable.
Cruz did rely too heavily on his faith, that never bothered agnostic me, but I agree it may have hurt his campaign. But IMO his biggest mistake was not hitting djt hard and early on. Plus, he should have made best friends with Fiorina after his Iowa victory. As a team they would have been a force to be reckoned with. Now we have Trump and an ambitious lap dog Pence.
Richard Aubrey Says:
Matt. Missed the point. It’s not the people who supported Trump I’m talking about. It’s the forces which caused them to support Trump. Where are those going?
Just fading away?
There are no disembodied forces, there is no inevitable March of History. The people ain’t gonna Riiiiiiise Up!
They are going to start questioning whether they know what they’re doing, and if they fail too many times, will simply drop out in frustration.
They have lives, just like Cap’n Rusty’s missing FBI agents. If they keep getting smacked down, what are they going to do about it, go on a shooting spree?
I know that’s the alt-right’s “righteous fury” narrative, but it won’t happen.
The people will either get their shit together or they will give up. There are no forces, only people.
“Where are those going? Just fading away?”
That is the crux of it. As the cliche says, even a cornered rat will fight. The left has pushed, and pushed, wormed its way into every nook and cranny, and is relentless without thought of the consequences and drunk on their own hubris. There will be a reckoning one way – or the other.
No there won’t.
Matt_SE, totally disagree with your take that the alt-right is the only force behind the anger. Those people attending Trump rallies are not alt-right. Those who organized and attended Tea Party rallies were not alt-right goons. For all your self-hyped political acumen, you ignore the most obvious signs. And I think you are full of it in discounting the average conservative’s sense of siege.
There’s that righteous fury we discussed.
You’re about to be handed the first lesson in how the world really works: if you’re unprepared, you will lose. The world doesn’t care if you’re right or more moral than the other guy. It cares about your chops.
If you have none, you have nothing.
If you keep insisting that the world owes you a victory without earning it, you will continue getting beaten by criminals.
So the real question is:
What did you do wrong this cycle, The Other Chuck?
Matt.
Missed again. Probably my fault. Haven’t started drinking yet.
The forces exist and affect people and the people do…what?
The scorn and dismissive attitudes of the so-called elites for the rest of the country will not change, nor will its effects.
The left’s attacks on gun rights, ditto.
Increased use of the IRS to punish political enemies….
Greenies killing jobs, and doing so with the most galling show of moral superiority.
Economic opportunity falling for a great many people, including those who dropped a hundred large for a degree in the humanities.
Endless stories of illegal immigrants committing violent crimes after being released by ICE or sanctuary cities. The discrediting of those who point to Kate Steinle (aka “who?”).
Those, and many like them, aren’t going away. What will their effect be now that the people feel they’ve been thwarted in their completely legitimate grievances?
I have no idea if Cliven Bundy was right in that the feds didn’t manage the range land he’d rented or not. Point is, the feds backed down, until something like the Bonnie and Clyde ambush.
You might be a happy small-town cop, until nobody you know talks to you in the grocery store, your kid can’t get a ride to soccer practice, people turn their backs at church fellowship hour. Not because you’ve done something wrong, but because you’re authority. What do you do? Become Them. Or sabotage Them in your duties?
When Kelo takings are obvious cash cows for the city commissioners who determine a “blghted” neighborhood.
Just for grins, look at civil asset forfeiiture, Kelo, Waco and Ruby Ridge, three felonies a day, and several other issues and compare them to the list of particulars in the Declaration.
Oh, yean. People who live in large cities have no idea of the speed and efficiency of self-organization in small towns when necessary. Tocqueville is right.
It isn’t criminals who are beating us as much as the most highly educated who infest our institutions with their deranged socialism and cultural nihilism and who are war[ing the minds of our young. Would you call the brilliant minds at Google and Microsoft criminals? Why aren’t they leading the charge at rolling back the administrative state?
You seem to have it all figured out. More political activism with better candidates will not get you very far without the intellectual credentials, the means to disseminate it, and an informed electorate. Want Ted Cruz to lead the charge, to what, the presidency of the one true state religion?
The fact is that we’ve reached this stage of non-leadership and are becoming increasingly irrelevant. The forces that Richard Aubrey speaks will be heard, one way or another.
As I oil my way across the floor, exuding charm from every pore, the grammarian in me complains that “more seldom wrong” is bulky and “less wrong” would have done the job!
Frog:
And I immediately grasped the “My Fair Lady” reference.
I often think of you as “oozing charm from every pore” (that’s the actual quote) 🙂 .
As for your suggestion, though, I don’t think so. It would change the meaning. I didn’t mean they were “less wrong.” I meant they were wrong less often—that is, more seldom. I agree it’s not an especially elegant phrase, however.
Rufus T. Firefly:
Unfortunately, I haven’t seen any state polls that break down the demographics of Trump’s support. But my point is not that some union people didn’t go over to him (I always assumed that some would, as best I can recall), but that it’s not going to be a significant enough number and that he wouldn’t do well in most of those states.
And certainly, the people who said he’d turn NY, or that significant numbers of black people would vote for him, were either lying through their teeth or in a dreamworld. Not only is Trump not doing better than Romney with blacks (according to polls, that is), he’s doing worse.
Frog: lol
I actually saw two Trump lawn-signs on my walk today, in a very exclusive high-value Denver metro neighborhood.
No Clinton signs, but I only covered a few blocks.
Hayward’s article is excellent; however, the argument about the Administrative state running the government (instead of the other way ’round) is not a new observation. See Philip Hamburger’s book “Is Administrative Law Unlawful?” in which he argues that question. IMO, Hayward is right that no single president can unravel this mess alone; too many entrenched interests, including Congress-peeps, make a living out of it.
But harnessing it in the yoke of a single party is not good.
It’s also the inevitable outcome of socialism, FWIW.
Companion piece:
http://libertyunyielding.com/2016/10/21/implicit-bias-idea-violates-rights/
If the pols are right, it’s time to start thinking about what we should do for the next four years.
A Hillary Presidency means:
Continued open borders with all the problems that emanate from that.
Higher taxes – especially on businesses and the wealthy which equals less economic activity.
Continued obstruction of fracking and exploration on Federal lands and off shore, which equals less energy security.
The demolition of the coal industry with attendant higher electricity prices, which equals less economic activity.
A carbon tax, which equals less economic activity.
A liberal SCOTUS. which will, in the absence of Congressional cooperation with Hillary, pass the laws she requires to blunt the First and Second Amendments.
An empowered Black Lives Matter movement.
More interference by the Feds in local law enforcement issues, which equals more crime.
Continued wasting of taxpayer money on subsidies to “Green energy.”
Increases in Muslim refugees into the country with the potential for more terror attacks that may bring.
I have no idea what she might do in the area of foreign policy. I doubt she will continue to follow Obama’s policy of minimal engagement and apology. If she engages, will she overdo it as in Libya.
Actions I am contemplating:
Continue to support Judicial Watch, Project Veritas, and the Heritage Foundation.
Continue to stay engaged on the local level, supporting the three Republican legislators that represent me in the State Legislature.
Continue to add to silver coins to my rainy day fund.
Buy more shares of Ruger and Smith & Wesson.
Stay alert to other investment opportunities and ways to safeguard my home and financial assets.
Well, it’s a start. I’ll be flexible and adjust to events as they come. Anybody have any other good ideas for how to operate during the coming Clinton administration?
IIf a majority can not rise above Mitt’s 47% its over. We had our second chance and fumbled, we got the donald. Water, food, ammo..
Parker
It’s never over. As long as we have a country and a vote (and there will continue to be elections) we need to keep fighting for the best for our country
The apocalyptics on this site will tell me I’m wrong and yo just give up if HRC wins. I’m impervious to their doomsaying.
Trump was never our savior.
The Brexit polls were accurate. Provided you ignore the last two weeks, because almost all polls go wrong in the last two weeks. I suspect people lie in the last two weeks to try to make a contest of it.
Where Trump is two weeks out is where he will finish.
A distant second I’m picking.
I’m certainly with Neo on the likely accuracy of the RCP poll average. but I think the most illuminating statistic at RCP is the favorability rating which shows Hillary underwater at around -10% and The Donald at -25. A contest of deplorable candidates but also a clear indication of the outcome. Conrad Black said as clearly as anyone I’ve read that Trump simply had to change his tune and act presidential after the convention and the election was there to win. All he had to do was get that faorability rating up to where he was competitive and he just plain has not done that. I’ll admit that I am a little surprised that he has apparently disdained even trying. He may well have failed, but I can’t see that he made any serious effort and am not upset that he will very probably lose. BTW 538 had an article last week that pointed out that as the election outcome becomes clearer the GOP senate candidates are gaining ground. So I think it is important for Republicans to vote for those down ticket candidates particularly in the Senate. A -10 favorability rating is a strong motive for Republicans and independents who don’t trust her to present her with a divided government. I’ve sent my Florida absentee vote in for Rubio.
The Editors of National Review have just released their latest weekly podcast.
http://www.nationalreview.com/media/editors/editors-mcmullinmentum
Rich, Charlie, Eliana, and NR’s Ian Tuttle (filling in for Reihan) discuss the third presidential debate, Donald Trump’s refusal to say he’d accept the election results, and the surge of Evan McMullin.
Title: McMullinmentum
My fit of the 538 probabilities was reset to September 21 as that’s the date that Trump began to decline. Now fit with a declining quadratic, putting Trump at around 11% odds. Silver’s models based on past performance seem to be very accurate, so I would say the election has been over for about 3 weeks. Start planning on how to deal with Her Majesty. Vote for as many GOP candidates as possible at all levels.
If a mirace occurs and her Parkinsons becomes obvious, things could change ( see the excellent set of videos by Dr Noel at vidzette.com ), but they have her so doped up I doubt it will happen.
@Spiral – re: flamethrower!
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7qaCJEKBWJc
“”Do you think Cruz could have won?” – Rufus
Cruz’ one mistake was relying too heavily on Evangelicals. His Achille’s heel is linking him to Bible-thumping.” – Matt SE
Yes Cruz could have won, but of the remaining candidates, likely only Jeb would have had a tougher row to hoe.
Jeb would have made it a “clash of the dynasties” race – in a race where folks want change, that was going in the wrong direction.
Cruz’s weakness was always looking and sounding a bit too much of a religious ideologue.
What both men, and all the other candidates, had going for them was they really did represent a largely conservative world view that is very different from what we have been living under for the past eight years in the WH.
They all should have been able to articulate a clear differentiation and vision, while also being “not clinton”.
“But IMO (Cruz’s) biggest mistake was not hitting djt hard and early on. Plus, he should have made best friends with Fiorina after his Iowa victory. As a team they would have been a force to be reckoned with. Now we have Trump and an ambitious lap dog Pence.”
An emphatic yes!
I got pilloried on disqus where I made this very point while Cruz slipstreaming / drafting behind trump, as they were saying at the time.
Cruz had the most credibility to challenge trump head on. Instead he went along with a “my friend Mr trump” strategy, hoping for trump’s eventual crash.
It was swimming upstream against a tidal wave. Most everyone else (who supported Cruz) knew better.
.
Fiorina’s strength was her articulate ability to attack clinton woman to woman.
Would have been a great combo whoever was on top of the pair.
“If a mirace occurs and her Parkinsons becomes obvious, things could change “ – physicsguy
Disagree.
That would leave tim kane to become a relatively “fresh face” to run in 2020.
Having kane step up, somewhere in the next four years, if clinton steps down for some reason, won’t much change the direction and consequences of electing a dem.
Would much rather run vs clinton with all her current baggage and then some.
“If the pols are right, it’s time to start thinking about what we should do for the next four years.” – JJ
Now we are talking!
We may disagree on the scope and scale of consequences of clinton, but agree on direction.
But relitigating voting trump vs clinton has little impact / value anymore.
What is relevant is “plan B” – what do we do now?
.
“Actions I am contemplating:
Continue to support Judicial Watch, Project Veritas, and the Heritage Foundation.
Continue to stay engaged on the local level, supporting the three Republican legislators that represent me in the State Legislature.
Continue to add to silver coins to my rainy day fund.
Buy more shares of Ruger and Smith & Wesson.
Stay alert to other investment opportunities and ways to safeguard my home and financial assets.
Well, it’s a start. I’ll be flexible and adjust to events as they come. Anybody have any other good ideas for how to operate during the coming Clinton administration?”
Also support efforts like the IJ
http://www.ij.org/
and others that follow this strategy from Charles Murray…
https://www.aei.org/wp-content/uploads/2015/04/charles_murray_civil_disobedience_infographic.jpg
It will be VERY nice to stop talking about Trump after he gets his ass handed to him by the worst Democratic presidential candidate in history. Too bad we didn’t have a decent candidate on our side, because I think we could have destroyed her and gained in both houses of Congress. Opportunities lost 🙁
If we could somehow coordinate ourselves, we could take a page out of the left’s playbook…
A rolling boycott.
Pick a day or a week and boycott, say all things NBC. (Make sure to use the time elsewhere rather than tune in to CBS or ABC rewarding them instead – e.g. read a book, play with your children).
Google’s seems to be filtering / blocking sites like Prager U. How about we all switch to alternatives like DuckDuckGo, making them stronger?
Eric should step in here with a handful of ideas, since he’s the one talking specifically about activism.
Huxley, 9:42
“Given all the kettles about to boil over with the economy, foreign policy, terrorism, and God knows what else, Hillary could be President when things explode. It’s possible we will be grateful a Dem is in office to be blamed.”
Yes. “Things fall apart.” Let the Dems own it.
J.J. Says:
If the pols are right, it’s time to start thinking about what we should do for the next four years.
Most of those points depend heavily on external events, even if you don’t realize it. If there’s another severe recession (which Hillary cannot control well), the effects would be:
– reversal of illegal immigration, just like in 2008. No point in coming to a strange country if you know there’s no jobs.
– no tax increases. Even Dems know not to raise taxes in the middle of a recession.
– no action against fracking because the industry will be crushed by the recession.
Then, there’s the positions Hillary CLAIMS to hold, but may be reversed if she wins:
– BLM is a distraction trotted out every 4 years to gin up black support. In between, lawlessness in the streets isn’t a popular position, and Hillary’s plenty cynical enough to squelch that group for her own benefit.
– increased Muslim immigration. Maybe, maybe not. Huma has Hillary’s ear, so it’s plausible.
Then, there’s external events like war and the overthrow of governments (or in the case of Syria, the restoration of one).
There’s no telling what will happen.
Lorenz Gude Says:
He may well have failed, but I can’t see that he made any serious effort and am not upset that he will very probably lose.
This is why character matters: it is a window into the mind/soul of the candidate and gives an indication of whether they can be trusted. Trump’s character has always been rotten.
Big Maq Says:
“If the pols are right, it’s time to start thinking about what we should do for the next four years.” — JJ
My second bite at this apple:
Even though we can’t know for sure what will happen, per my first post, we should start planning for the Senate races in 2018, when they are very favorable to the GOP.
Everyone who wants to change the party should join their local GOP as a committeeman. In numbers, we can overpower the establishment.
Big Maq, thanks for the links. There is much that can be done to oppose the coming deluge.
I would like to see someone with national clout recruit a group of 1 million conservatives who would stand ready to flood the White House and Congress with phone calls and e-mails opposing specific progressive actions with pithy sound bites. When the President or Congress don’t hear opposition from the citizenry, they feel emboldened to continue on course.
All of us have a group of e-mail correspondents that we can encourage to take action on various issues and to support those organizations that are activists oriented such a JW, PV, and the Madison Group.
If 10 million people (3% 0f the population) each gave $100 per year to those causes, it would provide $300 million – that’s not chump change when it is spent wisely.
“If 10 million people (3% 0f the population) each gave $100 per year to those causes, it would provide $300 million — that’s not chump change when it is spent wisely.” – JJ
Excellent point!
Makes me think that maybe we are mistaken to focus our contributions solely on the candidates, the party, the PACs.
Much of how the dems, particularly sanders, and also some of trump’s funding has come about is through small donations – but in large volume.
“we should start planning for the Senate races in 2018, when they are very favorable to the GOP.” – Matt SE
Hear. Hear.
We tend to think of the POTUS race in these discussions, but the House and Senate are on different cycles.
And, let’s not forget state and local, while we are at it.
If we were to ever get to something like a Constitutional Convention – it would only work by having a super majority represented there – we don’t, yet.
Matt_SE, your points are well taken. We can’t know for certain what Hillary will do. (Other than continue to enrich herself at the public’s expense. I think that ranks right up there with the certainty of the Sun rising in the East.)
My fortune-telling activity is calibrated to assume the worst.
When Obama came into office, I was hoping he would not be as bad as I feared he might be. Boy, was that a wrong stance. One thing I did do right after he was re-elected in 2012 was to buy Ruger and Smith & Wesson stock. He has been the best gun salesman – ever. I assume Hillary will continue in that role.
It looks like the Congress will have a slightly Republican Senate (meaning the Dems can continue to thwart any Republican efforts at opposition to Hillary) with a substantial Republican edge in the House. That augurs for a continuation of an inability of Congress to oppose the Presidency. Once Hillary gets a replacement for Scalia, she will be able to push her issues into law using an activist SCOTUS.
Now as to the possibility of a recession. I believe we are in a recession right now. It just hasn’t been officially recognized because the numbers are fudged. The recession will be a long, slow “U” shaped recession because the central banks will continue ZIRP and money printing, as that is the only thing they have. The world’s financial entities (banks, brokers, insurance companies, etc.) want them to do that hoping that they can eventually work their way through the mountains of bad debt.
Inflation or deflation? Ah, that is the question. My guess is it will be deflation. As all the bad debt is written off value is destroyed, incomes decrease, demand decreases, and prices fall. That augurs well for cash or cash equivalents and poorly for commodities and real estate. However, a stash of silver coins and regular currency could be handy if the computer powered banking/credit system (ATMs, credit cards, etc.) should fail for any significant period of time. Pace the internet provider attack of yesterday. How long could you get by without being able to buy necessities with your credit card?
I will be spending a great deal more time scanning the markets for clues as to how to proceed. I will be spending more time than I would like to looking for what transpires that can be deleterious to me and mine.
@JJ – the scenario you describe is very much like Japan for the last 20 years. To see how far it can go, their spending deficit is >200% of their GDP.
Aside from the G-March continuing things down the same path fiscally, or perhaps as a result of it, the “Sword of Damocles” is really the unfunded liabilities, which hits critical mass in the mid 2020s.
It is the coupling of sustained stunted growth and those claims (without major reform) that may be enough to trigger a crisis (think Detroit city, or state of Illinois).
J.J.:
You may want to reconsider your deflation bet.
http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2016-10-22/standard-living-irredeemables-continues-plunge-not-so-hidden-inflation-soars
Thanks, The Other Chuck, for the link.
Zero Hedge is an interesting site. They are describing what has happened since 2008. Yes, the CPI (not the official one, but the unofficial, REAL one) has been rising. What they describe is that the ‘”deplorables” are becoming more and more desperate, trying to maintain their lifestyles with credit cards and payday loans. At some future point they will no longer be able to do that. (I don’t know when that is.) That is when demand will slump and prices of most things (especially necessities) will have to either level off or fall.
The people they are talking about are the people that are Trump’s biggest supporters. They are desperate for the economy to grow again with the hope that better jobs and better wages lie in the future. I know a few of these people. I know how financially desperate they are. They are convinced, as am I, that Hillary represents four more years of Obama policies of obstructing businesses at every turn. Of more stagnation and desperation. These are people who cannot afford Obamacare and can’t afford to be sick. Obama’s policies have been like pushing on a string. To the progs it seems like they are doing something. In actuality it creates an economy where those who can raise prices do so but because of a scarcity of jobs wages stay down. It creates an economy where people live pay check or on credit or in their parent’s basements. They are working but they can’t earn enough to raise their standard of living and their prospects have gotten worse as the Obama years have rolled on.
The day may come when prices and wages rise in concert and the dollar actually loses value as was the case back in the 70s. Then the place to be is commodities and real estate. That time isn’t here yet.
Makes me think that maybe we are mistaken to focus our contributions solely on the candidates, the party, the PACs.
It’s a waste of money. Project Veritas is a much better investment than any of those, but do people realize that? Nope.
People are so used to outsourcing their responsibility to politics, they have no idea how to fight a 4th generational war, how activism works, how organizations are hijacked, or how to defeat the Leftist alliance, let alone any organization at all.
As long as we have a country and a vote (and there will continue to be elections) we need to keep fighting for the best for our country
The apocalyptics on this site will tell me I’m wrong and yo just give up if HRC wins. I’m impervious to their doomsaying.
Trump was never our savior.
So long as you have a country yes.
Many of the Doomsayers here, as you say, were the very ones who refused to believe me when I said CW2 was inevitable. Now look at what they are writing online, without restraint.
The problem with speaking and writing the truth? I don’t have to prove any of it, the world, the Left, or some other entity with power will smash your heard in with the truth sooner or later, and it has nothing to do with me proving anything.
The truth is the truth. And it’ll become a big enough problem that comfortable Americans like you Bill, won’t be capable of ignoring.
It is precisely because America has no human Saviors, that you will see civil war 2. And CW2 will be much more problematic than just losing an election or internet argument.
As for JJ and others hoarding silver and precious metals… just realize that you only need a small quantity for trade or barter, the rest you should stock them in Switzerland’s banks. That way nobody from the gov or goons can confiscate it by law or gun. More millionaires were created during the Great Depression than at any other time combined from US history. Know why? Because people hoarded precious metals and bought up all the property and assets, after the economy had stabilized. People were selling all kinds of land and high value material, for food and gold/silver used to trade for food and other things. Same for Chile.
What was just a few millions worth of property could be bought with some jewels and a bag of light silver, which isn’t even 100,000 US dollars, let alone 1 million US dollars. The rich and smart ones in America are planning for the collapse, and also after the collapse when the economy stabilizes.
JJ
You got it mostly correct, but add
-Flat growth at 1%
-Flat wage growth.
-Exploding federal deficit when interest rates normalize on $20 trillion of debt
-Health care meltdown
-Energy prices radically higher and that ripples through the whole economy.
But, hey, The Street and MSM are protected so everything’s good.
New Podesta Email Exposes Playbook For Rigging Polls Through “Oversamples”
http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2016-10-23/new-podesta-email-exposes-dem-playbook-rigging-polls-through-oversamples
In 2012 gave an ear to those who I gave credibility to argue that the polls were wrong, biases, rigged, etc., etc., etc..
“Romney Landslide!” Several declared, claiming some uncounted and “silent majority” would swoop in and save the election.
It all turned out to be a huge effing pile of bull ship!!!!
So, LB and people like you, believe what you want. You want to cling on to trump and believe nothing is wrong with him nor his campaign, that the only way he loses is if it is rigged and he is stabbed in the back by fellow GOP voters who won’t for trump. Fine.
But, just like those who cheered when OJ was acquitted, there will be a time when you wake up and realize the truth and how foolish it was to give that man your support, and the opportunity that was wasted by doing so.
“You want to cling on to trump and believe nothing is wrong with him nor his campaign, that the only way he loses is if it is rigged and he is stabbed in the back by fellow GOP voters who won’t for trump. Fine.”
Wow! You got all of that from my link, incredible! You are psychic mind reader.
Trump is an @$$, big f-ing deal. Like we haven’t had one of those in the WH before.
Mark my words – we will see nuclear war with a Hillary presidency. Go ahead tell me I’m wearing a tin foil hat… I’ll wait.
Mark my words — we will see nuclear war with a Hillary presidency. Go ahead tell me I’m wearing a tin foil hat
Hillary already put Trum on the Republican ticket, so now what? Go ahead, tell me I’m wearing a tin foil hat.
LB – tin foil? No.
But, since you challenged me with such a silly question, and mock my statements as psychic, this might be appropriate…
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/opinion/2016/04/17/a-modern-dunces-cap/
/jk