I would suggest going back to 1976 and comparing what happened to Jimmy Carter-enthusiasm in 1980. The general enthusiasm after four years just wasn’t there (polls didn’t matter, if people won’t show up to vote).
Go look at photos of arenas rented by Hillary and her team from summer and fall of 2015 during the primary build-up, and the during the spring primary season of 2016. They would rent a 3,000 capacity arena, show pictures of it looking full, but the reality was that maybe only 700 to 1000 actually showed up. Trump rents a 5,000 person capacity arena, and a minimum of 5,000 people show up.
Enthusiasm is what matters. You need people who will go and actually vote. Trump has a factor of ten on this scale. Hillary at best....maybe a factor five or six.
Go look at Ford’s loss in 1976....he never generated enthusiasm and easily lost to Jimmy Carter-hype. This 2016 is about enthusiasm. If this were Bernie Saunders running against Trump....there would be more enthusiasm generated for the Democrats (that was the one thing that Bernie knew how to do). Hillary can’t bring that to the campaign.
In 76 we were the first 18 yr olds to vote in a presidential election. Watergate soured us on the status quo and Ronald Reagan was a True American and a breath of fresh air. When the RNC “Berned” him at the convention for the “incumbent” insider Gerald Ford we were so furious at the Republican Party (we didn’t realize there was a GOPe at the time) that we protest voted for Jimmy Carter to put them in their place. We then came back to our senses and rallied behind RR and saw Reagan elected and we’re proud to be Americans again.
This year Donald Trump is bringing back that sense of American Pride we all yearn for coupled with what may be a large protest vote from the Berners ( that cannot be reflected in the polls) as well as the new Trump Democrats in the working class. The one thing Trump knows that the elites don’t is that even George Bush (not supporting Trump) only gets one vote on Election Day. There are many more out of work working class Americans than there are out of office elites and they are going to vote in record numbers this year. We Americans are going to take our country back in November, Amercans are going back to work, and PC is going to be flushed down the toilet bowl. As “Hillary” says - we have come too far (The Donald as our nominee) to turn back now! To the GOPe/DNC/UN/Globalists/etc. from Donald “You’re Fired”!
The RCP chart of aggregated polls certainly shows the enthusiasm gap. Hillary is far ahead in the Registered Voter polls the media uses to promote her, but leads a statistically meaningless 1% with Likely Voters.
Obama’s popular vote margin of victory in 2012 was about 4 million votes. This 4M was covered by the Dem “overvote” in New York and California. If you give Hillary the NY and CA electoral votes, and examine only the poll results for the entire rest of the US, the story becomes a large Trump lead, not +1 for Hillary. Obviously, state by state polls are what matter at this stage.
“I would suggest going back to 1976 and comparing what happened to Jimmy Carter-enthusiasm in 1980. The general enthusiasm after four years just wasn’t there (polls didn’t matter, if people won’t show up to vote).”
Special Report
How Carter Beat Reagan
Washington Post admits polling was “in-kind contribution”; New York Times agenda polling.
By Jeffrey Lord – 9.25.12
Dick Morris is right.
Here’s something Dick Morris doesn’t mention. And he’s charitable.
Remember when Jimmy Carter beat Ronald Reagan in 1980?
That’s right. Jimmy Carter beat Ronald Reagan in 1980.
In a series of nine stories in 1980 on “Crucial States” — battleground states as they are known today — the New York Times repeatedly told readers then-President Carter was in a close and decidedly winnable race with the former California governor. And used polling data from the New York Times/CBS polls to back up its stories.
Four years later, it was the Washington Post that played the polling game — and when called out by Reagan campaign manager Ed Rollins a famous Post executive called his paper’s polling an “in-kind contribution to the Mondale campaign.” Mondale, of course, being then-President Reagan’s 1984 opponent and Carter’s vice president.
All of which will doubtless serve as a reminder of just how blatantly polling data is manipulated by liberal media — used essentially as a political weapon to support the liberal of the moment, whether Jimmy Carter in 1980, Walter Mondale in 1984 — or Barack Obama in 2012.
First the Times in 1980 and how it played the polling game.
The states involved, and the datelines for the stories:
· California — October 6, 1980
· Texas — October 8, 1980
· Pennsylvania — October 10, 1980
· Illinois — October 13, 1980
· Ohio — October 15, 1980
· New Jersey — October 16, 1980
· Florida — October 19, 1980
· New York — October 21, 1980
· Michigan — October 23, 1980
Of these nine only one was depicted as “likely” for Reagan: Reagan’s own California. A second — New Jersey — was presented as a state that “appears to support” Reagan.
The Times led their readers to believe that each of the remaining seven states were “close” — or the Times had Carter leading outright.
In every single case the Times was proven grossly wrong on election day. Reagan in fact carried every one of the nine states.
Here is how the Times played the game with the seven of the nine states in question.
• Texas: In a story datelined October 8 from Houston, the Times headlined:
Texas Looming as a Close Battle Between President and Reagan
The Reagan-Carter race in Texas, the paper claimed, had “suddenly tightened and now shapes up as a close, bruising battle to the finish.” The paper said “a New York Times/CBS News Poll, the second of seven in crucial big states, showing the Reagan-Carter race now a virtual dead heat despite a string of earlier polls on both sides that had shown the state leaning toward Mr. Reagan.”
The narrative? It was like the famous scene in the Wizard of Oz where Dorothy and her friends stare in astonishment as dog Toto pulls back the curtain in the wizard’s lair to reveal merely a man bellowing through a microphone. Causing the startled “wizard” caught in the act to frantically start yelling, “Pay no attention to the man behind the curtain!” In the case of the Times in its look at Texas in October of 1980 the paper dismissed “a string of earlier polls on both sides” that repeatedly showed Texas going for Reagan.
Instead, the Times presented this data:
A survey of 1,050 registered voters, weighted to form a probable electorate, gave Mr. Carter 40 percent support, Mr. Reagan 39 percent, John. B. Anderson, the independent candidate, 3 percent, and 18 percent were undecided. The survey, conducted by telephone from Oct. 1 to Oct. 6, has a margin of sampling error of plus or minus 4 percentage points.
In other words, the race in Texas is close, assures the Times, with Carter actually in the lead.
What happened? Reagan beat Carter by over 13 points. It wasn’t even close to close.
http://spectator.org/articles/34732/how-carter-beat-reagan