Nothing is over until we decide it is!
Eight years ago on August 15, 2016, Nate Cohn of the New York Times reported:
It has been three weeks since Democrats gathered for their convention, and Hillary Clinton still holds a large and consistent lead in national and battleground state polls.
Her national lead over Donald J. Trump of seven to eight percentage points could slip a bit over the next few weeks. But it has been long enough that much of her expected convention “bounce” should have faded. It leaves Mr. Trump in an unenviable position: No modern candidate who has trailed by this much a few weeks after the conventions has gone on to win the presidency.
On that basis, you can expect a wave of articles about how the presidential race is basically “over.”
Miraculously, Cohn still has his job.
Oh he hedged his bet, of course, writing that she had only an 88% chance of winning.
But he said, “The possibility of a landslide victory for Mrs. Clinton — one larger than any since 1984 in the national popular vote — is larger than the chance that Mr. Trump will pull it out. According to The Upshot model, Mrs. Clinton has a better shot at winning the red state of South Carolina than Mr. Trump has at winning the presidency. In that sense, perhaps Mrs. Clinton’s position is more like having a double-digit lead at the beginning of the third quarter."
“At this point, it’s probably fair to say that Mrs. Clinton’s lead is real and durable. Gallup data indicates that the post-convention bounce is largely over: Both Mr. Trump and Mrs. Clinton’s favorability ratings have returned to where they were before the conventions.”
The polls said this. On Election Day, voters said otherwise, much to the chagrin of the media. The Telegraph reported, “Newsweek recalls 125,000 copies of its souvenir Madam President issue.”
It had no Mister President issue as a replacement.
This is just a reminder of what Rush Limbaugh said about polls:
The polls are just being used as another tool of voter suppression. The polls are an attempt to not reflect public opinion, but to shape it. Yours. They want to depress the heck out of you.
Evidence supporting Limbaugh abounds. The polls in June showed Trump breaking away from FJB, which conveniently gave Democrats a reason to dump Pedo Joe. Now the polls show Kamala breaking away from Trump.
I doubt many people are buying this because years of abuse have made Limbaugh’s belief so mainstream that Democrats now are pushing betting odds instead, using the conventional wisdom that bettors know the score better than we do because they have skin in the game. If bettors were really smart, they would not bet because over time the house always wins.
JUST IN: Kamala Harris hits all-time high on political betting site Polymarket despite new polling data showing Trump outperforming himself compared to 2020. Polymarket odds: Donald Trump: 45% Kamala Harris: 54%
The betting market doesn't appear to be factoring in new data that shows Trump outperforming himself compared to 2020. A new analysis from Real Political Data compares the swing in support for Trump in Pennsylvania when comparing 2020 to 2024. Trump is outperforming himself in every category except 30-44-year-olds and male voters which has not changed. With the 18-29 year old demographic for example in Pennsylvania, Trump is performing 28 points better than he did in 2020.
That is too much fretting over teensy demographics. How is he doing with white males 23 to 32 who go mudding twice a month or more? Be sure to break it down to mullet wearing and regular-haired.
Hillary’s campaign tried using bookies to wear us out in 2016 and failed.
Eight Augusts ago, USA Today reported:
Here's what eight predictors (models, betting sites and prediction markets) had as of 1 a.m. EDT Monday:
hypermind: 65% Democratic victory
PredictIt: 70% Clinton victory
Election Betting Odds: 75.5% Clinton victory
PredictWise: 76% Democratic victory
FiveThirtyEight's polls-plus forecast: 76.4% Clinton victory
The Upshot's elections model: 83% Clinton victory
FiveThirtyEight's polls-only forecast: 83.4% Clinton victory
FiveThirtyEight's now-cast: 91.7% Clinton victoryFor those on the Trump Train, remember that Election Betting Odds gave Brexit only a 20% chance of occurring at its low point, and FiveThirtyEight had the Golden State Warriors at a 95% chance of winning the NBA Finals after Game 4.
Wasn’t that the NBA finals that Harry Enten said Trump had a better chance of winning than he did winning the presidency? He no longer works at 538. CNN hired him.
Now when I say, the house over time wins, that does not mean the house is run by geniuses. Just because they can make a living off the math challenged does not mean the bookies are a bunch of Einsteins.
Though there are still three weeks left to the presidential election, one prominent bookmaker already has called the race.
Ireland’s Paddy Power has paid off on more than $1 million in bets on Democrat nominee Hillary Clinton, who has become a whopping 2-to-11 favorite to become the nation’s 45th president and defeat Republican challenger Donald Trump. The odds translate into an 84.6 percent chance of winning, the bookmaker said.
My guess is Democrats paid Paddy Power to pay off the bets to make Hillary look inevitable.
But the story also said, “Paddy Power had done similar early payouts before, correctly anticipating that Scottish voters would opt to stay in the European Union and that President Barack Obama would win re-election in 2012, but missing the mark in anticipation that Greeks would approve an austerity referendum and that Tiger Woods would win the 2009 PGA Championship.”
Well, OK. Surely the stock traders know who will best help the economy. Follow the money.
In September 2016, Market Watch did just that and reported:
The stock market has already picked the next U.S. president
Market strategist says history favors Clinton; ‘investors like landslide victories’
The GOP is traditionally known as the party of Wall Street, but this year investors, for the most part, are betting against the Republican standard-bearer.
“The market appears to have decided not only that [Hillary] Clinton will win, but that it won’t be close,” David Woo, a strategist at Bank of America Merrill Lynch, said in a report distributed Monday. “Investors like landslide victories.”
Woo noted that the S&P 500 has risen more than 4% since July 5, which marks the beginning of the 90-trading-day countdown to the election on Nov. 8. During years when presidential candidates won by a margin of more than 80% of Electoral College votes, the S&P 500 posted average returns of 8.4% in the 90 days leading up to the election.
As Stevie Nicks sang, “Well, the landslide will bring it down.”
Maybe the 2016 election was a one-off election — a rare moment when all the political experts were wrong.
You know, just like covid was a one-off virus — a rare moment when all the medical experts were wrong.
I get that people are anxious about this election. FJB locked up 1,200 Trump supporters. Judge Merchan the Moocher is about to imprison Trump. England will extradite my ass if I dare say a person of color should not be allowed to kill little girls.
But bear in mind the news is all an illusion now. Maybe it always was. The facts are there though, in plain sight. This is not 2016. Kamala is a worse candidate than Hillary and Democrats are a house divided against itself.
Collin Rugg tweeted with video:
NEW: Pro-Palestine protesters storm a Kamala Harris campaign event in New York City, set off smoke bombs at the restaurant.
The incident happened after New York City Mayor Eric Adams was seen at the event according to Scooter Caster.
Police were seen fighting off the protesters and making mass arrests.
The incident comes as the Harris campaign struggles to navigate their position on the Israel-Hamas conflict.
If Hamas were not bad enough for Democrats, illegal aliens are dividing the party as well.
The DNC is in Chicago next week. I vaguely remember the 1968 convention in the same city. There were riots and just enough confusion to get Nixon into the White House in what should have been a banner year for Democrats.
This election is not a horse race. It is a morality play. The Lord did not spare Donald Trump in Butler, Pennsylvania, just to have him finish second on November 5. Patience and prayer help.
And remember the words of John Bluto Blutarsky: “What? Over? Did you say over? Nothing is over until we decide it is! Was it over when the Germans bombed Pearl Harbor? Hell no!”
He’s on a roll. Now excuse me while I go purchase 10,000 marbles.
Each election cycle, I used to ask my poor patients who they liked in the election. Rich people’s votes are predictable: Lawyers et al favor Dems generally, Doctors generally support republicans. Obviously there are exceptions, yet poor people give me a sense of what common sense is saying. With Obama, the people loved him in 08/12 though some favored Romney in 12. In 16 it was 90%+ with Trump, there were a few Clinton supporters in the clinic, but I knew Trump had it. To me no surprise. Same in 20, there was zero.zero Biden supporters among the poor. That’s how I knew 20 was a fix. This year once again, there was zero support for the old Coot Biden and surprisingly none for Kankles Kamala. The people know. Unlike 20, if Trump loses from the anger out there I suspect a Louis XVI awaits those that install another usurper. FJB
"JUST IN: Kamala Harris hits all-time high on political betting site Polymarket despite new polling data showing Trump outperforming himself compared to 2020."
If these polling/betting sites keep topping their previous score to make their headlines, they will run out of registered voters and kill their "perceived" legitimacy. Trump received 62M votes in 2016, 75M votes in 2020, which was exceeded by Biden's supposed 81M votes.
As these numbers explode, it is easier to understand why the Dems are importing so many illegals. They have to keep up this scam because their made-up fake votes will soon exceed the US voter population.