Posted on 11/11/2016 5:26:45 PM PST by Hojczyk
Like many people around the world, I expected a comfortable Hillary Clinton victory on Tuesday. But I’m not a random pundit when it comes to understanding presidential races and the electorate — I managed one Obama presidential campaign and oversaw another from the White House. So of all the forecasts that got it wrong, my prediction that Mrs. Clinton was a 100 percent favorite was a glaring miss.
My confidence was not partisan spin. It was based on public data, voting history and some sense of the Clinton campaign’s own models. I played with various state scenarios, and even in the most generous outcomes, could not get Donald J. Trump to 270 electoral votes.
But he ended up winning 306 electoral votes and, most important, did it by breaking into the Upper Midwest, leaving the blue Big Ten firewall in ruins.
What happened? We will know much more when all the data is in and we can see exactly who voted. But based on what we know, it was a combination of several factors that led to this stunning upset.
STRONG AND WEAK CURRENTS BEAT DATA AND ANALYTICS The models for both support (vote share) and turnout were off significantly. It appears that there really were hidden Trump voters, meaning his ceiling of support was higher than most of us believed possible based on polling and modeling survey responses. And millions of potential Clinton voters who the models suggested would vote stayed home.
(Excerpt) Read more at nytimes.com ...
Commie media kept on saying his large crowds did NOT matter..that large crowds don’t equal votes..well this time it DID..those crowds we saw, those were his voters and we came in droves to vote for this man
A kindergartner could have read the stats from polls better than the press.
What needs to be studied now, is how can so many incompetent people work in media when the polls told them otherwise.
Bottom line is..people wanted REAL CHANGE..and #2, Wikileaks exposed EVERYTHING..it showed the Commie media for what they are, it showed the Govt hacks for what they are..that is why Trump won
This is a significant part of the Democrat's leverage over the MSM, members of which know that if you make a Democrat look bad, if you ask an awkward question or fail to properly promote and suck up to them, you will never get another interview with anyone important. It's very simple.
I don't think very many Republicans do that, and they should. I hope President Trump does.
Where's Matt Lauer these days?
They DID have that data. They just chose to ignore it. It was well known that a clear majority thought we were headed in the wrong direction. But, of course, it wasn't the "leaders" fault?!?
I think some of the same attitude of those being polled who did not care to admit to supporting Trump; i.e., there wasn't any upside to such an admission, also decided that there was no upside to denigrating Obama.
It was The Wall, stupid.
You have to give it to the Rats. No matter how badly they loose THEY NEVER BLAME IT ON THEIR POLITICAL PHILOSOPHY.
RINOs ALWAYS do.
That's your problem, Davey, you're looking for salvation in all the wrong places. Identity politics is all you have, and you'd better start pimping Michelle Obama now.
He glosses over the fact that they didn’t use an objective sample and that, by vilifying Trump, voters were loathe to admit they were voting for him.
Their lack of objectivity was their downfall. They saw what they wanted to see, and were so partisan that voters decided they weren’t worth sharing the truth.
They lied their asses off and that is where they were wrong.
“A kindergartner could have read the stats from polls better than the press.”
That’s what happens when you work backwards from the answer you are seeking, because in order to do so, you have to ignore the facts. I don’t think they got it wrong so much as they refused to see what was really happening, hoping that what they knew would not come to pass. Plus they were not going to have to have a fusillade of ashtrays being thrown at them by Hillary.
Democrats just didn’t believe the Rust Belt would leave them for a presidential election.
There were democrat congresscritters trying to tell them otherwise.
Even with Wisconsin’s legislature and governor going Republican they didn’t even campaign there once, they just presumed it would fall in line like it always has.
And that Philadelphia and Detroit would turn out with a rich entitled white lady topping the ballot.
Mrs. Clinton talked about what she wanted to do from a policy perspective every day, but this campaign was not the Lincoln-Douglas debates, it was "Mad Max: Fury Road."
Just the imagery here is awesome. LOL.
Trump won Ohio, PA, Michigan, Wisconsin, Florida, and North Carolina..ALL states Obama won handily in 2008..but now leftists call those people “White Nationalists” LOL..and they are against the electoral college now..they weren’t against it when Obama won twice
What you got wrong dunderhead was Hildabeast. She was the worst candidate ever fielded by the evil party. As for you fluff head, you are merely another stain on the sidewalk of history.
We all knew Trump was leading but the media, pollsters and pundits all made fools of themselves by calling it for Hillary, because they think they are smarter than the rest of the country.
They are not....
Cursory review of the electoral college map, shows that Hillary got only 50 electoral votes from states in the interior of the country. The vast majority of her support came from the bicoastal liberal enclaves — The Northeast and the Pacific Coast states.
The liberals who run the Democrat party live in these liberal enclaves, and are in a bubble; an echo chamber.
And the media who report on all of this are mostly in the New York/Washington axis, and just don’t get out much. They are within the liberal bubble as well.
I don’t like Michael Moore, but before the election, he was saying he thought Trump was going to win. And he mentioned his home state of Michigan as a pick up for Trump. Michigan was not considered in play at all by the liberals, or the media.
There was a lot the professional punditry and political operatives got wrong about this election.
The crooked Dems put up a crooked, dishonest, incompetent, unlikable old hag as their candidate, and hoped the dishonest media could lie her into office. They misjudged the people’s level of distrust of the MSM.
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.