Posted on 09/08/2016 9:54:32 AM PDT by Kaslin
With just two months left until Election Day, the "conventional wisdom" says that Hillary Clinton will win. The New York Times this week gave Clinton an 83 percent chance of winning. And it's bipartisan: The writers for conservative magazine National Review wallow in the same glum predictions; there's scarcely an NR column critical of Hillary Clinton that doesn't simultaneously contain a statement about the "inevitable" Hillary Clinton presidency, offered with Eeyoresque resignation.
I find this baffling and counterintuitive. I also wonder whether there is an element of wishful thinking, media manipulation or even deceit. It wouldn't be the first time.
Consider the 1994 congressional elections. That fall, I was living and working in London. The British papers -- even those with distinctly liberal editorial postures -- were predicting that Republicans would likely take control of the House of Representatives for the first time since 1952. The New York Times on the other hand, danced around the subject, wrote puff pieces on Democratic candidates, and pooh-poohed predictions of a "Republican Revolution." It was quite clear to me that The New York Times was endeavoring not to report the news, but to shape it into an outcome more to their liking.
The New York Times was, of course, proven wrong. Republicans took the House and the Senate. Democrat incumbents were slaughtered. Not a single Republican incumbent was defeated.
Fast forward to 2010. Predictions made by some of the same media outlets touting Clinton's inevitable ascendancy now, were wrong then. Although a number of pollsters and pundits predicted Republican gains in the House, few expected the pickup of 63 seats -- the highest number gained by a party since 1938. And the rejection of President Barack Obama's party spilled over into the state legislative elections as well, as GOP candidates picked up 680 seats across the country -- even more than Democrats had in the election immediately following Watergate.
2014 was even more inaccurate. Remember when "everyone knew" that the tea party was dead? The Economist magazine, citing polls by ABC News, CNN and Talking Points Memo warned that the GOP had been "deeply damaged" by the government shutdown in 2013, and that voters would punish them at the polls. In race after race, the mainstream media predicted that the 2014 election results would be "too close to call," or decided by "a razor-thin margin."
It was a blowout. Not only did Republicans regain control of both houses of Congress but also GOP candidates won record-setting percentages of state legislature elections and gubernatorial races.
The 2014 results were so embarrassing that "how-could-we-have-been-so-wrong" was a media meme for months. Time magazine and The New York Times conveyed the oft-repeated explanations that polls were skewed toward Democrats, didn't anticipate Republican voter turnout and disproportionately relied upon landlines, thus leaving cellphone users out of the polling data.
Ok. So explain how they got it wrong again during the Republican primaries this past year? Remember when Nate Silver and FiveThirtyEight said that Donald Trump didn't have a chance? (To his credit, Silver published a mea culpa in which he admitted that he "was subject to a lot of the same biases as the pundits" he usually criticized.) What about when the Huffington Post refused to publish anything about Trump as news? "Instead," they wrote condescendingly, "we will cover his campaign as part of our Entertainment section. Our reason is simple: Trump's campaign is a sideshow. We won't take the bait."
They must have a hell of an entertainment section at this point.
Trump broke records for Republican voter turnout in the primaries, and for total primary wins. Clinton received nearly a million fewer primary votes in 2016 than she did when she ran in 2008.
A good deal of Trump's support is due to Republican voter dissatisfaction with GOP leadership, the Republicans in Congress who have done virtually nothing despite the mandate they were given two years ago, and -- most importantly in a presidential election -- widespread dissatisfaction with President Obama's policies. (A Rasmussen poll this week shows 78 percent of those polled believe the country is going in the "wrong direction.") This smacks of 2010 and 2014.
Clinton's scandals and the questions about her health are too numerous to list here. Voters don't trust her. Liberals and progressive voters who backed Bernie Sanders either have tepid support for her or have switched their support to Jill Stein.
Yes, I get it. Some people will vote for Clinton because they don't like Trump. (Apparently, this includes a lot of Catholics and disaffected GOP #NeverTrumps. Good luck with that, guys.) But which voters are more motivated? Do Trump's supporters love him more than Clinton voters hate him -- or love her?
Trump visited Mexico and distributed relief supplies in Louisiana, while Obama golfed and Clinton was -- resting? If the rallies are any indication, Clinton is in much more trouble than her devotees in the press want us to believe. In August alone, Donald Trump held over 30 rallies where nearly 200,000 attended. Clinton held far fewer, and did not get 10,000 attendees. He's filling stadiums; she can't fill a bookstore. How does any of this translate to a Clinton landslide?
I'm not issuing predictions -- yet. But you'll have to forgive me if I'm not persuaded that Hillary Clinton has it all wrapped up.
I just want to see her having a public meltdown when it becomes apparent she is losing
Wishful thinking? Are you kidding? President Hilda? No way do I wish for that!!!
This is the-fix-is-in thinking
This may be why I just assume Trump will win: I don’t follow the MSM, in any media.
Soros voting machines will save the day. And if it gets too close, that 1% of the precincts not reported for two days will save the day, and if that does not work recounts of recounts of recounts will occur until hillary has one vote over
Stoopid crooked cankled bitch ...
I have a lot of reasons I believe Trump has a shot at it. I think the MSM dem campaign arm are leading with their chin and painting a picture that’s more rosy than it is. However, I’m not 100% sure Trump will win.
Elections do have consequences and I just don’t want to consider them with a Hillary win.
Is ‘President Hillary’ Wishful Thinking?
Yes...by the Devil !
Any comment from you?
The democrats have good internal poling, which tells them exactly how many votes they need to manufacture by fraud to get them 270 Electoral Votes. They have the entire country mapped down to the precinct level, and know exactly where to spread and target the fraud so that it tips the scales. The machines in predominantly democrat areas will be preprogrammed to report what they need to report to give Clinton the presidency.
Given the one sided nature of the media, I believe there is no “margin of fraud” as there once was. The fraud can be as high as they need, no limit. There is no practical limit to the fraud, no fear of public outrage, because the media will not report it. They will be complicit in perpetrating it and covering it up.
If Trump loses, it will be by fraud, and it’s not a question of whether the Republic is dead. It’s only a question of how long ago it died.
Ms. Hollis failed to mention the most important item in this election. The RATS are masters at skewing votes, voter fraud, etc. They get better at it and more brazen every election.
IMHO, Trump needs to win by a sizable margin just to overcome RAT fraud. I figure somewhere between 8 and 15 percent should do it.
“The democrats have good internal poling, which tells them exactly how many votes they need to manufacture by fraud to get them 270 Electoral Votes. They have the entire country mapped down to the precinct level, and know exactly where to spread and target the fraud so that it tips the scales. The machines in predominantly democrat areas will be preprogrammed to report what they need to report to give Clinton the presidency.”
I agree 100%. I don’t see how Hillary can possible be “ahead” in all the polls. I think they are being manufactured so no one questions Hillarys “big win” November 8.
If you look at things outside the polls, Trump is clearly the choice of most people. He draws 5,000 to 15,100 (depending on size of venue) to his rallies. Hillary can’t fill up small venues. Trump has double the Facebook likes. All the comments posted on his page are positive towards him. On Hillarys page, 8 out of every 10 comments is negative towards her. On You Tube, a vast majority of comments are negative towards her.
Yet, the Hillary and her Democrats are not panicked. they are very confident. And that is because they have all the “operations” in place to put her over the top November 8.
I'm far more interested in watching the media meltdown on election night and beyond - the gift that keeps on giving.
A win by Hillary will instigate national revolt against government. The government will fall as a result. This is a very simple issue.
We are a Constitutional Republic, not a democracy. Hillary’s ascension will end government submission to the Constitution. The rights of the individual will be trampled by the majority.
Patriots will not allow democracy to overthrow our Constitutional Republic. The tree of liberty will be nourished once again with the blood of tyrants and patriots.
If Hillary were a paragon of virtue and her every act was the essence of morality, she would still be wrong for the USA. She is firmly committed to the authority of government in all things. She has stated on many occasions that the Constitution is an antiquated document that has served its purpose and needs to be discarded.
Hillary is firmly committed to global government and global authority. She sees no place for a nation state such as the USA.
This is the crossroads. The end of government obedience to God given rights is at hand. Atheist globalists are breaking down the door. We stand or we fall with this election.
This is a typical tactic used by the Communists and their fellow travelers in the past: Demoralize the opposition, make them think things are really bleak.
It won't work this time because too many know the truth and are fed up with the media lies. Rest assured Trump is ahead and will win big.
Yet, the Hillary and her Democrats are not panicked. they are very confident. And that is because they have all the “operations” in place to put her over the top November 8.
It's not confidence it's hubris. They're about to have a very rude awakening if they plan to win by cheating. Trump will not stand for it.
Watch the movie I Was A Communist For The FBI (1951) on youtube. You'll see their tactics haven't changed a bit since '51.
The Democrats own the voting machines. If Mrs Bill loses the election it will be because the Democrats, probably the obamanite wing of the party, have decided that it is better for their own fortunes for Trump to win it this time.
She believes (knows?) that the election is controlled by Soros and the Democrats through control of the voting machines. She believes that it does not matter how high Trump rises in the polls or what sordid information spills out at her feet. She believes she will be the next President/Dictator.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.