2016 election forecast – 19 September


Between now and the November election we will make periodic checks as to SST members opinion as to the outcomes.  Please give your view as to results in the congress and for the presidency.  pl

This entry was posted in Politics. Bookmark the permalink.

154 Responses to 2016 election forecast – 19 September

  1. Nancy K says:

    I am not sure about the presidency, it could go either way. If Democrats come out to vote in record numbers than Clinton will win. If they don’t then Trump could win. I think the House will stay with the Republicans, but the Senate could switch. Here in NC Ross looks good at this point but it is really too soon to tell. I think Gov McCory will be defeated by Cooper, he is not even popular with his own party and this is a state that loves sports and losing some championships being played here because of HB2 is not setting well with voters who are not conservative or rural.

  2. Eric Newhill says:

    I’ve been saying for over a year that Trump will win in a squeaker. I’m now revising to say that Trump will win handily; not a landslide, but by a comfortable margin.
    Hillary’s general weakness/declining health, her looking down her nose at “reprehensibles”, her desire to import a gazillion people, some of whom, want to kill us, into a bad employment situation and her lying and corruption will all work against her with increasing force. Her vaunted assured minority block voting is beginning to unravel. Obama is not helping her on that front with recent arrogant and, frankly, stupidly insulting, comments to blacks. The Obama years have not been good for most Americans and they are not looking forward to more of the same.
    Trump, otoh, looks/behaves increasingly “presidential”. He releases increasingly detailed policy positions. Trump offers hope.He represents “change” that many want. Soccer moms may be offended by him. He may make them nervous, but bombs on street corners and train stations, jihadi slashers in their malls make them much more nervous. Socially, they deny Trump. In the voting booth, they pull the lever for him.
    At bottom, excepting some die hard utopian dreamer lefties, the country is sick of the progressive/RP2 wackiness and the debt, poor economy, destroyed communities and destroyed morale/moral fabric that it has wrought upon us.
    This sentiment carries over to congressional elections. The country will not return to hardcore Christian right-ism, but is looking for moderate conservatives. Any running will win.

  3. Margaret Steinfels says:

    Have expressed my views here before; I repeat: I will vote for Clinton, my vote being as much against Trump as for her. I agree that his chances have improved.
    Too little has been written about the New York real estate world that Trump inhabits. That alone is reason to hope he doesn’t win the election. Watch out fly-over land, he will sell you to the highest bidder and get a tax-break to boot.
    It’s possible the Senate may go Democratic, but I am not enthused about the possibility that our NY Senator Chuck Schumer becomes majority leader. Dick Durbin of Illinois would be better for the Democrats and for the United States.

  4. morongobill says:

    Trump and I don’t think that it will be that close.

  5. kooshy says:

    Colonel thank you for keeping the US elections as an ongoing discussion on SST, but, do you think Assange will have a (big) say in this, if so I agree, he could, but, that is if he can pass the MSM shield and on to the voters. So far DT is gaining and has the momentum at least last week’, if he can control his impulses, and his loose mouth. I also agree that a businessman who must meet payroll every friday, will not risk his own money, will risk the bank, or investor’ but not (very risky) his own’.

  6. BabelFish says:

    I would have bet HRC until the basket of deplorables comment. POTUS is begging African American voters to vote, a sign that they feel a level of regurgitation when thinking about her. She has not energized the Obama constituency and it is probably too late.
    I believe it all hinges on North Carolina. Unless there is a second Snowden apocalypse. Or a Trumpalypse. I am betting Drumph, in a close one. And if that finally destroys the Democratic Party, so it can be reborn with real Bern in its soul, I am ready for that.

  7. Ramojus says:

    I believe that regardless of the actual vote totals, the Borg will never permit a Trump presidency. Therefore I see a repeat of the 1960 Nixon – Kennedy election with vote fraud in Cook County Illinois and certain counties in Texas (or something similar).
    For the first time, since I was eligible to vote at 19 years of age, I am sitting out this election.

  8. kooshy says:

    Colonel on the other hand I tend to think domestic , muslim related terrorism may be a bigger deciding issue . Unless an internal email realised, will indicated that actions taken in ME, NA etc. will increase indiscriminate terrorism domestically and was ignored.

  9. LeaNder says:

    New York real estate world that Trump inhabits.
    I shouldn’t comment here, considering we have election troubles of our own.
    But: I am vaguely aware of that part of his history. But how would he fare from a comparative perspective as one among others in the NYC real estate tycoons scene?

  10. Tyler says:

    Trumpslide as the Left doubles down on invade the world/invite the world and Hillary only has more Leftist boilerplate/identity politics nonsense to offer.

  11. TAD says:

    Trump. The Clintons are methodically losing the election. The election shock will be the Republicans holding the House and Senate because of really bad planning and candidate recruiting by the DNC.

  12. Tyler says:

    Glad POTUS took time from his busy schedule of golfing and lecturing blacks to vote for Hillary in order to lecture the nation about how we shouldn’t notice facts and if you notice Trump’s Muslim ban makes sense you’re a racist.

  13. kao_hsien_chih says:

    To me, what is remarkable is how the fundamentals of the election really hasn’t changed much. To recap:
    Clinton enjoys solid support among the “wonkish” class of the Democratic Party, while deeply distrusted by the young people, liberals, what’s left of the union voters, and the minorities. While 3 of the latter 4 will not turn to Trump, their turnout is likely to be low, even if the numbers among the few who do vote will be overwhelmingly in her favor.
    Trump enjoys solid support among the working class whites who turned to the Republican Party, but is deeply unpopular among the “wonkish” class of the Republican Party. This is much harder to read than the Democrats: I can say fairly confidently that Clinton will bleed a lot of voters to “none of the above,” but the wonkish voters usually vote–and this is why Clintons had been courting the wonks heavily on the Democratic side. Despite the unpopularity, it seems reasonable to expect that Republican wonks will, by and large, vote for Trump while their noses. The dropoff may be enough to make some states (e.g. North Carolina and Colorado) more competitive (or turn them more Democratic) than they otherwise might be, but Trump’s edge among the working class whites will also make other states more competitive (e.g. Iowa, Michigan, probably Wisconsin.) Others (Ohio and Pennsylvania) are harder to predict: both feature a lot of both working class voters and wonkish voters–what Trump gains in the middle PA, he might lose in Philly suburbs.
    Overall, demographics still favor the Democrats: I figure Clinton still enjoys an advantage–I expect she will win popular votes with about 60% probability or better, more or less–BUT, the actual margin will be tiny: I expect 44% vs. 43%, or something in that range. However, things are more volatile this time than usual, with a lot depending on who drops out of voting for the two party system. If the 3rd party votes are between 10-15%, I think Trump has an advantage–Discontented Democrats are more likely to withhold their votes than discontended Republicans. If the 3rd party votes approach 20%, Trump is certain to be toast. Given the distributions of the votes of different types–significance of working class white votes in key swing states–there is a not insignificant possibility that Trump would lose the popular vote but captures an electoral majority. Still, I’d give Clinton 55-60% chance of winning the whole enchilada, though.
    I think Republicans keep the House–that’s a no brainer. They might lose half a dozen seats, or maybe a dozen, but that’s to be expected in a presidential year.
    The Senate is harder predict. Republicans will almost definitely lose Illinois. Many of the rest (NV, NC, PA, NH, WI, probably IN and OH too) depend heavily on Trump factor. I actually expect, even if “regular” Republicans vote third party for president, they will still vote Republican down the ballot if they show up. What “new” voters Trump can mobilize, on the other hand, might add to their totals. Many potential Democrats who defect from HRC will sit the election out altogether and, even if they show up to vote third party, they may not be as loyal down the ballot as their Republican counterparts would be. If Trump wins, Republicans will hold on to the Senate, with the Trump voters/Clinton non-voters providing the winning margin (which would be highly ironic, given how Republican leaders think Trump will be bad for their downballot candidates). If Trump loses, especially by sizable margins, Republicans will probably lose the Senate.

  14. Lars says:

    Ask the question after the debates when it will be much clearer. HC still has an easier path to 270 and the “momentum” is largely a myth. Typically, most people do not really make up their minds until the last 3 weeks of the campaign. We are not there yet.

  15. Dante Alighieri says:

    The Congress is beyond my European horizon, but Pepe the Frog Trump can (and according to my bets will) win the presidentials. After that though, he’ll be totally out of his league. There is no telling what he will do, and those who speculate about his “nationalism”, “isolationism”, “risk aversion” or even “common sense” might be in for some very big and unpleasant surprises. I’m not ruling out he will simply outsource his foreign policy to the neocons. Trump has played masterful tricks on the moron MS media but, once president, will play the same tricks on his voters. I haven’t been offered any reason why he shouldn’t. This is a unique and most memorable presidential election. The Trump phenomenon has not really been cogently analyzed, the US is hysterical and Europe is clueless about it. Perhaps something is deeply wrong with a political system that leaves voters with no more than deciding who is the worse of two abysmal candidates.

  16. mike says:

    Clinton will win easily except in states that are restricting voting. SWWMB will vote for her and so will I, gladly. I am agreeing with Margaret S’s comment above on the Senate.
    My crazy neighbor, the lady with 22 cats and almost as many Trump signs berated me the other day at the mailbox. She had received her latest copy of the National Enquirer and waved it at me. She claimed it was proof that my choice of candidates has had three strokes, Alzheimers, cirhossis of the liver from her excessive drinking, and suffered from violent rages. She is predicting Trump in a landslide. I hope she is wrong.

  17. Freudenschade says:

    With the electoral college map skewed against him and a late start on a ground game, Clinton will be our next President.
    Senate: dems will get 50 or 51, which amounts to the same thing with Tim Kaine casting the tiebreaker.
    House: best case, they crack 200. More likely they are somewhere in the mid 190’s.
    Lars is right. Most undecided voters don’t break until late. Let’s see what the debates bring.

  18. b says:

    Not Hillary
    No change

  19. Imagine says:

    People really hate Washington. Dems believe if they simply show Trump lies often enough that people won’t vote for him. Trump is a grandmaster at BS, he promises the moon then changes the topic, never says how, but that’s what brains remember. So everyone who voted for GWB, and everyone who hates Washington, is going to vote for Trump in spite of knowing that he lies. They don’t care. He represents change.
    Taking down ObamaCare is going to end up being the secret tiebreaker force. Won’t be discussed but ppl will think about it. Vote w/wallet.
    Hillary will win amongst anyone who’s read Hitler’s history and can think. That’s about 3% of the population.
    Duterte and Ergodan show this is the era of the successful strongman. During times of economic crises, people respect demagogues who act like mafia lords.
    Hillary may very well be able to pull it off using computer voting fraud.
    Hillary might be able to pull it off if enough electoral college representatives change their votes, through conscience or motivation. This is quite rare, but we are a republic.
    Otherwise, (Sept) I’m predicting Trump wins, 51% to 49%.
    If God forbid Hillary should suffer a stroke between now and mid-October, Kaine wins handily.

  20. Will says:

    Trump will win. I’ve been watching the odds change at realclearpolitics. The’ve gone from roughly to 4:1 to 2:1 in a month. i’m ready to put skin in the game and place a bet on Trump, if i could figure out how. haha
    i generally support Trump b/ am worried about his Iran rants. He has some good genes. His middle name John is for his uncle who was a distinguished electrical engineer. and his sister is a senior judge on a federal Court of Appeals.

  21. Anna says:

    “…our NY Senator Chuck Schumer becomes majority leader.” Another image that stimulates Clinton’s major “donors” of Israel-first persuasion.
    Considering the bloodthirsty womenfolk that Clinton has assembled in DC – among them the lying psychopath Samantha Power and the Nazi-fraternizing psychopath Nuland-Kagan – the US mothers (as well as Ukrainian and Syrian and Libyan mothers) should expect more of their children dying for “democracy on the march” and other Golan Heights & oil projects.
    It would not be surprising if Clinton’s major moneyed enforcers begin regrouping, rather soon, around Trump, since Clinton’ failing health makes a heavy addition to her sinking reputation of “we came, we saw, he died…”

  22. kooshy says:

    This from BHO lecturing the black community, must have been really encouraging, appealing, to the rest of this nation (whites, asians, latinos, etc.) who want and hope to put the racial difference away a quote from president of United states who says, he wants to keep the nation united , go vote for Hillary because I am worried for my legacy
    “We have achieved historic turnout in 2008 and 2012, especially in the African-American community. I will consider it a personal insult and an insult to my legacy if this community lets down its guard and fails to activate itself in this election,”

  23. BabelFish says:

    Correction to Assange, not Snowden.

  24. Will says:

    former guv Martin suggested a HB2 cure last year. the charlotte city council repeals their ordinance. then the Assembly takes back their bill. status quo ante. i saw where the idea is now getting traction. Ahh u have moved from VA

  25. MRW says:

    For the first time, since I was eligible to vote at 19 years of age, I am sitting out this election.
    If you would permit me to intervene in your private decision: I think you are wrong. I believe you need to look at this in terms of numbers, and how your canny participation can have a marked effect.
    Suppose a hypothetical district has 125,000 legal voters. If 100,000 make your decision out of disgust or anger, personal protest, only 25,000 vote.
    Let’s suppose 10,000 of that 25,000 vote for Candidate A. 15,000 vote for Candidate B. Candidate B wins.
    Candidate B rolls into DC claiming he or she has a mandate. A 60% mandate. In terms of who voted, that’s true. And that’s all the winning party cares about.
    However, what if all 125,000 voted? But left a particular race blank (president, congressional, senate)? Or wrote in a candidate? (Not Donald Duck or Mickey Mouse, a real person so the vote isn’t pitched.)
    What does that show?
    125,000 felt strongly enough about getting into the booth and registering their distaste.
    Now Candidate B only has a 12% mandate.
    Do you honestly believe the “winning party” is going to run that candidate two to four years from now?
    Do you honestly believe Candidate B is going to be sitting in his DC office secure in his belief that lobbyists and donors in the heady power magnet of DC will get him re-elected back home in his district?
    Not a chance. His win was a fluke; furthermore, his party will be noticing. They’re going to be running a primary. He’s going to be living with a four-foot cube of Charmin®.
    Your vote, or dramatic lack of one, has tremendous power even if the wheels grind slowly. Don’t waste it.

  26. MRW says:

    Too little has been written about the New York real estate world that Trump inhabits.
    What does that have to do with the price of fish? We’re electing a president, not voting on NYC real estate.
    he will sell you to the highest bidder and get a tax-break to boot.
    NYC real estate is highly regulated, and the finance is extraordinarily complicated. Do you understand Internal Revenue Code Section 1031? If you don’t, you have no clue how the tax benefits pile up. Any mortal engaged in commercial real estate in Manhattan can take advantage of it. Your remark shows frightful ignorance of the basis you wish to claim. It’s jejune.

  27. crf says:

    Clinton will win the Presidency, and the Republicans will retain the Senate and House. Why would I make that prediction? I can’t see either Clinton or Trump appealing to any cross-party or swing voters. It will be a low-turnout election: just core-support voters. More like a mid-term election than a Presidential election.
    So a heaping spoonful of More of The Same.
    The Republicans blew this election. It’s like they don’t even want to lead the country.

  28. Allen Thomson says:

    Well, there’s all of October for October surprises, but as of 19 September, my crystal sphere says
    – GOP keeps House, of course
    – GOP probably keeps Senate, but not by much
    – Hillary squeaks through, but maybe not
    I’m watching and voting in TX-23. The incumbent and challenger/former incumbent are both fairly inoffensive examples of their type and the result might hinge on general political trends in TX.

  29. Outsider says:

    Sometimes during the American election campaign we see Trump supporters, particularly “white working class” supporters. characterised as “fascist”. I’ve seen academics join in, with PhD theses circulating, complete with surveys and tables of results, showing a correlation between “personality disorders” and supporting Mr Trump; though I suppose one could argue that any American who doesn’t contract a “personality disorder” after experiencing the Beltway in action must be either a saint or unconscionably rich. Comparisons are even drawn between Trump’s appeal and the appeal of Hitler to the German people in the 1930’s. I don’t know whether any Americans truly believe all that, or whether they just brush it off as another of the PR attacks that enliven American politics, but that and similar attacks obscure what this election is really about.
    White working class voters, if that category has any real meaning nowadays, don’t appear to be seeking a Fuhrer, nor most Americans. If you look at the stories coming out of America that show how the more active of the dissatisfied and the disadvantaged are conducting themselves at present you gain quite the opposite impression. From the Bundy ranch to the Occupy Movement they are on a different tack altogether. Each in their own way – and to an outsider some of those ways do admittedly look pretty idiosyncratic – the dissatisfied and the disadvantaged are after the same thing. Far from seeking a Fuhrer they’re trying to cope with the ones they’ve already got. Maybe most of the American electorate, Trump supporters or not, are trying to do just that as well.
    We should look elsewhere for the explanation of the strange course American politics is taking. “It’s the economy, stupid” isn’t the only key to electoral politics but without it no others work. So it is here. Americans are waking up to the fact that their jobs have been outsourced, that this outsourcing is now hitting higher and higher up the income scale, and that this process is occurring at a time when automation is rapidly losing them jobs in any case. They are waking up to the fact that the orthodox economic model not only doesn’t work, it can’t work. In this and in so many other respects they are waking up to the fact that the shining City on a Hill is derelict.
    They have two options. There are no others. An anti status quo candidate, or at least a candidate who claims to be so. That’s Trump, now Sander’s gone, though it’s always possible that this first option might lead to the Obama trap – voting for a candidate who offers hope and change but finds himself unable to deliver. Or they can vote for the mixture as before.
    That’s certainly one more option than we’ve had in UK Parliamentary elections over the last few decades but even so it’s not much of a choice. An uncertain and unspecified future under Trump or more of the same under Mrs Clinton. Up to the Americans, you might say, and outsiders should hold their peace and let them get on with it.
    But of course it is legitimate for an outsider to offer an opinion. American foreign policy after the election will continue to shape the world all of us live in. For many thousands of people it’s going to determine more than that. It will determine whether they live or die.
    That is no hyperbole. When the dust has settled and the historians of the future are picking over the evidence they will conclude that what we are seeing done by the Western powers at present is comparable to the evils committed by the regime of Nazi Germany. Only the means are different. We are deliberately using the techniques of hybrid or proxy warfare to destabilise and destroy countries throughout the Middle East. We have done the same in the Ukraine. We may do yet more if the opportunity offers, from Serbia and Macedonia up through to Kazakhstan and the Chinese border. At no time do we stop to consider that the squares on the chessboard are occupied by real people, men and women who, it is true, are easy enough to stir into conflict but who die like flies when the conflict starts.
    We don’t know how many deaths our interventions have caused – not up to Holocaust numbers, let alone the other grim numbers of that time, but it’s rising fast. Nor do we know how many communities have been destroyed. But as far as those victim communities are concerned the devastation is as great as that suffered in Eastern Europe and in Russia during the Second World War,
    The data is in on this now. This is no longer a “point of view” or an “interpretation of the facts”. This is what happened.
    And is happening. That is the point. Trump, just maybe, will turn away from this evil. It’s only a maybe but with Clinton this evil will continue. Of course the UK, and France and Germany, bear equal or in some cases more responsibility for the carnage but it is America, with its overwhelming military power. that has the say.
    The lives of several millions of foreigners will therefore hang on the forthcoming American election. Trump, and some of them may live and the rest remain undisturbed. Clinton and they probably will not.
    It’s only a chance that’s on offer– when did we last see a President able to hold to campaign assurances? – but any chance is assuredly better than none.

  30. JMH says:

    Smacks of desperation, he should just be happy that he got his eight years.

  31. Allen Thomson says:

    P.S.: Somewhat related to the topic, I continue to be fascinated by the question of what the GOP plutocratic core/donor class is doing about the election or will do if Trump wins.
    This is probably a discussion for a separate thread, but it might bear on the events between now and 8 November and the outcome thereof.

  32. Tyler says:

    Huff into your paper bag a little harder and you’ll sound less panicked.

  33. Tyler says:

    “Here’s my mind reading of Trump”
    “No one can predict this”.
    Pick one.

  34. Tyler says:

    Exhibit A for liberal_projection.txt as well as stuff that never happened.
    May I remind you which candidate gave a speech recently railing against a cartoon frog?

  35. Dave Schuler says:

    Clinton wins narrowly, Republicans hold the House and Senate.
    Secondary prediction: if Clinton wins and there have been shenanigans a la 1960 it will be taken much, much worse than it was in 1960.

  36. Jack says:

    While I have a decent track record of analyzing and forecasting the financial performance of manufacturing and technology companies, I really have no competence in analysis of the voting intentions of my fellow citizens. Having said that my forecast is based purely on anecdotal evidence.
    I live in a Democrat liberal state. So, the outcome in my state is preordained. However, I am seeing among my extended family and friends a great apathy driven by a deep dislike for the Borg Queen. Those who normally vote Democrat and lean liveral are either voting third party or leaving it blank. At the local working class watering hole I see a lot of enthusiasm for Trump. Among my traditionally independent close friends and family I see an even split between Johnson and Trump. Among my Republican friends I see some enthusiastic about Trump and others voting him because they cannot think about the Clintons in the WH and a reprise of their dramas. I work with a lot of companies in the Mid-West and the Rust Belt as well as Colorado and the South -East. Here I find that by and large the workers are enthusiastic about Trump while the bosses are split between holding their noses to vote for him and outright despondency and indecision as they can’t countenance both major party candidates. Now this a limited sample of voters and skews heavily to white people. So, when I add my feeling that Millenials and minority turnout will be lower than 2008, at this juncture I have to assess that Trump will likely win the electoral college. Looking at the recent polls in the battleground states Trump is now running even in several states and ahead in others. He’s definitely got mo after Les Déplorables and the “pneumonia”.

  37. kao_hsien_chih says:

    The undecideds this time around are a bit different from the usual:
    On the Republican side, the undecideds are the affluent, educated whites. If HRC sounds sufficiently like Mitt Romney, their support for Trump, already weak as it is, will wane. Some, especially younger women, might even vote for HRC in some numbers, as polls already indicate as a possibility.
    On the Democratic side, everyone who is not “wonkish” is undecided between HRC and not voting (at least for not for her). Very few (except possibly union Democrats–but there are not that many of them left) are “undecided” between Trump and Clinton. For Clinton, moreover, trying to gain the Republican “undecideds” will likely ensure that she will lose these voters.
    Among the rest of the voters, not especially clear who the “undecideds” really are. I maintain that, while Trump has had the potential to make inroads by demonstrating that he is not like those bums inside the Beltway, he has failed to make good on this potential by being able to go beyond a lot of jumbled prevarications and pseudomoralistic posturing. People who already like Trump might like his sermons, but to those who are unsure, they are likely to be turnoffs. There will be still be some people who will be willing to listen (probably not that many, but probably enough to make things happen) because they recognize that Trump is different, but will need to be given a “good reason” that satisfies them to actually push them into actually voting for Trump (rather than not voting). This will be tricky, and I am skeptical that Trump will be able to deliver on this (because he has shown no indication of an ability to go beyond his existing support base, in terms of rhetoric and this kind of credibility does not materialize out of thin air).
    Still, it seems like a reasonable enough bet that Trump will be able to win back many of the currently “undecided” Republicans while Clinton will flop in her attempt to win them over and alienate many potential Democrats along the way, without the “true” undecideds becoming a factor, though. Clinton is trying to do something very difficult for anyone, and she is too flawed a candidate to pull off that balancing act, I think.

  38. “NYC real estate is highly regulated.”
    You bet it is–by the real estate industry itself and its lobbyists and representatives in Albany and at City Hall.
    You’re electing a president who learned everything he knows in NYC real estate.

  39. kao_hsien_chih says:

    What Trump is doing is what exactly pretty much every successful “democracy activist” in (allegedly) authoritarian countries do. The people in those countries know that the status quo is corrupt and/or failing. They throw their support behind those who seem competent and/or honest enough. Most of these “democracy activists” tend to be showmen (defined broadly) rather than capable political leaders who know what they are doing, though, usually with serious problems of their own, and most “democratization” movements fail. If lucky, things settle for a “reformed” version of the old status quo (Poland, Czech Republic, Taiwan, South Korea, maybe even Russia.). If not so lucky, things get far worse without a good chance of getting better (Russia under Yeltsin being a singular big example but there are far worse ones throughout the developing world).
    I don’t see most–if any–of the alleged fascism that the left is harping about. I do see plenty of signs that Trump could be the American Yeltsin on that tank. (I suppose that makes Clinton the old Soviet apparatchiks–an apt metaphor, I guess). It sure feels nice to see someone stare down the corrupt old geezers, but he does not seem to have a program worth mentioning.

  40. Fred says:

    ” what’s left of the union voters”
    What happened to those voters, they certainly didn’t all drop dead? Perhaps some of them might be interested in things in addition to wages – like being pro-life or pro-gun? Thus there’s an incentive not to vote straight line democratic, or perhaps not vote democratic at all.

  41. Swami says:

    Opinions are great but I’m more of a fact person myself. Based on evidence currently available, Clinton with ~300 EV. Of course this would depend on how well each side gets out the vote, and assumes no black swan events.
    This is a great place to track the (science-based) forecasts:

  42. herb says:

    Nothing fundamental has changed since late August.
    This race was always going to tighten, as I have long said. Even with the race tightening, Trump’s numbers stay between 39 and 44% in nearly every poll except the outlier LA Times poll. This is exactly where they have always been. The race has gotten tighter as undecideds and weak Clinton support have migrated to considering Johnson. Her numbers and Johnson’s are the only ones that move. Nobody is moving from Clinton to Trump, and nobody ever will. Likewise, nobody is going to move from Trump to Clinton: there may be some “undecideds” left but almost everybody who has decided to grasp the Trump nettle has already done that loud and proud. I said long ago that Trump may just win if Johnson pulls enough of Clinton’s support. That still may happen, but I doubt it, Johnson is more of a flake than I ever knew.
    Stein managed to get herself arrested in North Dakota. She is out of the picture. That also helps Clinton, God knows she needs it, because she is a horse-shit candidate. Trump is doing everything he can to boost her turnout, and she keeps finding ways to tamp it back down.
    The 50% of Trump’s supporters like (((Tyler))), that Clinton fairly called “Deplorables” are lashing out (see above) and dreaming of sparkle ponies. Nerves will do that. And what is with the PC sensitivity? Can’t people say what they think anymore? Do you Deplorables need a trigger warning? Sure looks like it. A quarterback takes a knee at the wrong time and their brains melt. Talk about sensitive.
    The House certainly will stay Republican, and almost certainly the Senate will as well.

  43. herb says:

    epublican friends. Most of them are PISSED that Trump was nominated, and that the party is run by ineffective and incompetent fools. If there was ever a time to cement an 8-year run, it was this election cycle against the awful Candidate Clinton. You are right, it’s almost as if governing is an inconvenience. And, even if you think Trump is all that and a can of Spam, the fact still remains, he wasn’t the Republican party’s choice, and they blew it.
    In Minnesota, the R party couldn’t even follow their own rules or the law to get Trump on the ballot, the Supreme Court bailed them out by saying their wasn’t enough time to investigate. That is how bad it is.

  44. Bobo says:

    The Senate looks interesting and will come out a draw or 51-49 but not sure which party. Does not matter too much as not much change.
    The House remains Republican though their lead is whittled down a bit
    Donald overtakes Hillary by 1/2 percent and ekes out an Electoral win with Rhode Island and that part of Maine with one vote going his way. Now should Hillary do the collapse again “Katy Bar the Door”. Only concern is that he may be peaking too early.
    Best thing to occur will be the MK breakup as Mika will not be able to handle it and takes a rest while Joe knows he has gone too far out on the limb. Willy survives to continue with Plagerist Mike but they need some Gravitas so I propose the Colonel.

  45. Mac says:

    Nor sure of the latest numbers, but I could forsee the gentleman from NYC winning the popular vote, yet losing at the EC.
    Thoughts on that outcome?

  46. Bill H says:

    We knew BHO was hubristic, but “African Americans have to elect Hillary in order to preserve my legacy” is simply awesome.

  47. jerseycityjoan says:

    His comment reflected poorly on him, I agree.
    I voted for Obama twice — and the second time my vote was made with a lot of disappointment, I can assure you.
    I get mailings from the Democrats that ask me to sign “Birthday Cards” for both Mr. and Mrs. Obama. I am disgusted every time I get one of these and delete them right away. I am not friends of the Obamas and they are not my friends, either.
    I see the President’s statement here as a further evolution along this new and dangerous line that people have a personal relationship with office holders.
    No, they do not.
    The public owes President Obama nothing in the way he claims here.
    It is funny to see how eager the professionals persuaders are to turn whatever screws they can on us voters while they and the professional politicians, lobbiests, etc. show us every day that they don’t put our interests first or care about what we want or what’s good for us.
    We are supposed to “care” about them now? Baloney.

  48. Laura says:

    Eric…”detailed policy positions” compared to what? A piece of paper with a slogan written on it and blank on the reverse side?
    It’s fine that you are voting for him but, please, don’t go all hyperbolic on his policy positions. Have I missed something brand new? I checked the website and it is pretty thin.

  49. jerseycityjoan says:

    After the most recent round of bombs, shootings and stabbings, I feel less certain that Clinton will win the popular vote. She is not popular with me personally but I will vote for her.
    While I agree with some of what he says — I believe that Trump is unfit to be president and I hope he doesn’t get anywhere the nuclear codes.
    What I feel surest of is that Trump, if elected, would not complete a four year term. I do not know what is more likely: that he’d be impeached or otherwise forced out by his own party or that he would resign to escape.
    A lot of his views are not conservative; some are not Republican; the uproar he’d cause both Republicans and Democrats in Congress would start immediately and never stop.

  50. Laura says:

    kao_hsien_chih–I agree completely with your analysis on all levels. Would love to win the Senate, but …. it’s gonna be interesting for sure.

  51. charly says:

    Or something similar. Texas will vote republican outside of a gigantic landslide

  52. Tyler says:

    A question for the Fifth Column here: How many Americans need to be killed or maimed before you consider Trump has a point about not importing more violent 3rd Worlders? Shoot us a basement number on h9w many need to be bombed walking down the street before you consider your virtue signalling has a price.

  53. tilde says:

    Prez- 50/50 at this point. We’ll see who puts their foot in their mouth more during the debates. My vote remains neither (Stein).
    Congress- No clue.

  54. Fred says:

    The real estate industry and lobbyists (for them) imposed rent control regulations? I find that rather hard to believe.
    “…earned everything he knows in NYC real estate.” You mean he learned to be a ruthless SOB in NYC not at Wharton? On a bright note at least the Deplorables will have a ruthless SOB they can believe in.

  55. jonst says:

    I got a feeling “typically” is of less relevance this election than any since, say, Truman-Dewey (and Wallace and Thurmond, lest we forget). And I emphatically disagree with the (recently popular) notion that ‘momentum’ is “..largely a myth.”. Hillary is in trouble. Trump (and the Borg) both are certainly capable of ‘getting her out of it’. But I would not bet the house on Hillary. Nor Trump, for that matter. But we’ve taken the latter as a given, for the most part. Not so with Hillary. She is reeling. If the debate is even a draw (or, more relevantly, perceived as a draw) she will be done.
    My two cents.

  56. Fred says:

    ” …. what we are seeing done by the Western powers at present is comparable to the evils committed by the regime of Nazi Germany.”
    Yeah, Pol Pot, Stalin, Mao, Idi Amin and the dj’s @ Radio Rwanda have done nothing compared to USAID, Médecins Sans Frontières, the Rotary clubs and what ever soulless group put out this song:

  57. kao_hsien_chih says:

    I thought I had written “what’s left of the union voters IN THE DEMOCRATIC PARTY.” SOME people are very presumptive about what they think they are reading.

  58. Fred says:

    Authoritarian countries don’t stuff the ballot with “capable political leaders” they stuff the ballot box instead. (just like one party’s super delegates do) “The people” voted in what started out as a thirteen way primary race leaving Trump the winner. Jeb, the capable two term Governor of Florida, thought his $100+ million would lead to a different result.

  59. Fred says:

    The symbolism in this campaign cycle is telling. Trump, after playing the media and the Establishment like that Southern boy played the fiddle when the devil went down to Georgia, emerged as the Republican Candidate. Now he has changed to the classical genre: “acting presidential”. The candidate forum showed he could behave and wasn’t a complete buffoon. Hilary on the other hand collapsed at the anniversary memorial event honoring victims of 9-11. There is a steady drum beat of truth contained in all those emails the great sell out, Bernie, didn’t care about. Every beat of the drum there is another revelation of what all fear to know about the Democratic candidate. This Sunday a jihadist bombed Chelsea. Does that name remind you of anyone’s daughter? I think if this continues Trump is going to win easily. The down ballot races are going to be harder to predict.

  60. kao_hsien_chih says:

    Not really “forecasts,” just an intelligent summary of how the current poll numbers are changing and the implications for the electoral college–that is literally what Sam Wang does. Clinton has consistently led, which is not a shocker, considering two things: the overall demographic advantage that favors Democrats and deeply held distrust of many Republican voters for Trump.
    Missing from the picture are two things, though: 1) will the Democrats turn out in such numbers to actually take advantage of their demographic advantage? Clinton is deeply unpopular among many Democratic demographics, while Obama did induce higher-than-usual turnout among the young and the minorities. Will this be a serious factor? (The way pollsters deal with the “likely voter” question is a bit dicey. Since we don’t know who got screened out as “not likely voter,” we don’t know how things are different this time. USC/LATimes poll has tried very hard to avoid the turnout/partisan response bias and has produced a set of numbers that consistently estimate significantly higher Trump votes–I wonder if they really are seeing things that others are not seeing, or if they went too far…) 2) will the Republicans who say they don’t like Trump hold their nose and vote for Trump? As far as I know, no poll has satisfactorily addressed these problems (not that we’d know if they have, since we don’t know the “real” numbers–but actually collecting and publicizing data on “not so likely voters” would go a long way.)
    Both these factors suggest that Clinton is probably weaker, by significant margin, than what the polls suggest, but we lack the data to quantify how much weaker. That’s the salt (the limitations of what the polls tell us) we need to approach the polls numbers with.

  61. Tyler says:

    Vs. One who learned everything from Ayers and the Choom gang.
    Glad you’re voting for Emperor Trump.

  62. Tyler says:

    This is the insult version of a two year old handing you a page of scribbles and declaring “its a plane!” or some such. Misusing memes, anecdotes that ring of fabulism, and the ever present liberal projection as your candidate rails against a cartoon frog.
    In between the lines, you can almost hear the shrill panic as you (herb) realise Borg Grandma is going down hard.

  63. BraveNewWorld says:

    I’m not American so I don’t like to meddle to much in your election as is really chaffs my ass when Americans do it to us. But I would like to ask. What do people think the odds are that the next prez who ever that turns out to be servers two terms?

  64. Cold War Zoomie says:

    Trump will win because:
    1. The Democrats under Bill Clinton abandoned the blue collar middle class workers, signing NAFTA and falling in love with Wall Street and “triangulating” for short-term political gain. Meanwhile…
    2. Young voters and left leaning Liberals who were part of the Obama coallition got a middle-of-the-road northingburger president who’s biggest accomplishment is a Rube Goldberg contraption called the ACA that will likely implode, and nothing much more. Meanwhile…
    3. The Democratic Machine pushed across the primary finish line the absolute worst candidate imaginable. Meanwhile…
    4. Trump’s supporters will crawl over hot coals to vote for him. No amount of “gaffs” and inside-the-DC-bubble analysis by TV talking heads is going to change that. Meanwhile…
    5. Hillary will be over-rehearsed and a cut-out caricature of the consummate DC insider during the debates. And it will be all over at that point.
    To paraphrase a line from 1994: It’s the enthusiasm gap, stupid!
    The House will stay Republican, as well as the Senate. But the Senate will be a squeaker with 51R to 49D. Pundits won’t understand how Trump became president or why the GOP did not implode as predicted because they’re too far gone inside Beltway groupthink.

  65. kao_hsien_chih says:

    The trouble with many of Trump supporters, and to a large degree, Trump himself, is that they act like they don’t need to reach out beyond their current coalition. Even if they get all the regular Republican votes and add maximally to the working class white turnout, they will barely have enough to get a majority, or not. One would think they’d try to reach out, but nope.
    I dislike the Clintons enough that I was willing to see if Trump and his people would actually ask for votes from people like me. Not only they are not, they react as if voters have no right to expect that politicians should be asking for their votes. (Ironically, exactly the biggest problem I have with the Clintons.) If neither wants my vote, and votes of the people like me, then they ain’t getting it.

  66. Bill Wade says:

    A while back some neocon said “Florida will decidedly vote Clinton”. Here in my neck of the woods (SW Florida) I see only Trump signs and bumper stickers, and lots of them, Trump by a landslide is my prediction. Clinton is seriously ill I believe and a well-known liar, what is there to like about her. BTW, I’m still a Ron Paul guy. Had he not been media marginalized to death, we’d be far better off today. The MSM can’t even lie with a straight face anymore, the Borg will die, thank God.

  67. Linda Lau says:

    But you didn’t mention his father who was such a crook that Woodie Guthrie wrote a song about his greed.

  68. Les says:

    I claim no great insights into US being a canuck.
    We canadians voted out a neocon & got a neoliberal, who photographs well.
    Anyhow I read this at American Conservative last night:
    The historian author fires off wads of historical analysis & says it’s Trump.
    Also says it’s Trump vs Obama’s last term, because that’s what people remember.
    And Hilary has not endeared herself to anyone who isn’t already sitting on a bag of money.
    Trump doesn’t scratch any of my resentments but at at least great power war might be off the table for a couple years…

  69. Linda Lau says:

    I tremble as I write this, but I think Trump will win for a very simple reason, not enough Democrats will vote. By the way, I am writing this post from Panama.

  70. MRW says:

    You’re electing a president who learned everything he knows in NYC real estate.
    This is a crime? There’s something untoward about being a developer?
    And I doubt NYC real estate taught him everything he knows.
    IRC Section 1031 is federal, btw. Go to Starker.com and read about it. Read the brochure on the panel on the left side. You’re going to have to reduce the View to read it, or you will need to download. Starker.com explains it the easiest.

  71. MRW says:

    I would have bet HRC until the basket of deplorables comment.
    I think that comment rekindled old animosities toward Hillary.

  72. MRW says:

    Read this Dan Sanchez article on Samantha Power. Note the Hillary connection.

  73. David says:

    More of Obama talking like the narcissist he is, as it is all personal and all about him.

  74. Old Microbiologist says:

    I think Trump has entered into his end game. His campaign is pure marketing genius. He did and said whatever necessary early to keep his name out there and get free advertising. Now in the late game he will settle down and solidify his positions in a manner pleasing to those close to making a decision but not yet having decided. It is useless to tray and attract anyone from the left and he isn’t wasting any effort there. Hillary has only to lose as she had and should still be far in the lead. But, her weaknesses are attriting her voters. Most will stay away from the polls out of disgust. The alternative candidates are attracting mostly liberals, particularly those who supported Sanders. I believe most of these votes are being lost by her and will result in the lead enjoyed by Trump. The closet Trump supporters are still out there and may become more apparent after the debates. But, it is still early and a lot can still happen. My bet is she drops out and there is some flurry to get someone who can actually beat Trump, perhaps Sanders which might explain his counter intuitive actions.

  75. Phil Cattar says:

    I’m going to hold my nose and vote for Trump.About a month ago I predicted on this site that Clinton would win and there was a 50% chance that the word landslide would be used by the networks to describe her electoral college votes.Since my prediction she has” fainted” in public and made the “deplorables” comment.I STILL think she will win .I’m not as sure about an electoral college landslide……….The debates could be hugh.If Clinton has another serious health episode ,all bets are off.

  76. LeaNder says:

    I agree with DA, but admittedly don’t have anything better then a suspicion either: he is simply riding the hope wave of the opposite camp into power.
    Random Pick: Why is China more a currency manipulator then the US? Explain.

  77. LeaNder says:

    “i generally support Trump b/ am worried about his Iran rants.”

  78. Anna says:

    “…Trump is unfit to be president …” – Perhaps.
    But Mrs. Clinton is not even a contender for the US Presidency but for the Ziocons’ approval. Moreover, she has no qualms about starting more wars. Who need to know nuclear codes when Sec of State Mrs. Clinton “manages” Middle East and Ukraine? She is the most irresponsible high-level politician on all fronts (the emails scandal is a minor detail). Look for the incessant provocations against nuclear-armed Russia at the Russian doors – where is the US statesmanship? Samantha Power and Nuland-Kagan as standard-bearers for the US policies? – thanks but no thanks.
    “After the most recent round of bombs, shootings and stabbings…” – Clinton has been promoting and augmenting the bombings and shootings in the Middle East and Ukraine as if these lands were inhabited by toy soldiers. She is a war criminal. One more time – Hilary Clinton is a war criminal unfit to be a US president. She would certainly hep promoting Senator Schumer (and other Israel-firsters), for sure – but what this ‘virtue” has to do with the well-being of US citizenry at large?
    Clinton has transcended the party affiliation long time ago to become a loyal servant to plutocracy. She is a nowadays cannibal, and a frail one physically – and perhaps mentally.

  79. Martin Oline says:

    I think it likely, given the unpopularity of both candidates and the presence of Gary Johnson in the race, that neither will win a majority in the electoral college. This has happened before in 1824 when a four-way split failed to yield the required majority so the vote went to the House. Although Andrew Jackson had won the popular vote in that election, the House picked John Quincy Adams as president. Jackson went on to win the 1828 and 1832 elections outright.
    If this happens then our new commander-in-chief will be the speaker Paul Ryan.

  80. Anna says:

    The Filth Column wants their children to serve for other country than the US. They still do no get that the Newton’s law “For every action, there is an equal (in size) and opposite (in direction) reaction force” could work for the human relationships as well.
    The consequences of the US massive killing, ruining, maiming in the Middle East have been falling on European Union. The US remains protected by two oceans from the desperate refugees from the US-destroyed Middle East countries as well as from the sub-Saharan migrants whose westward migration used to be controlled by Libyan state. The interventionists broke it – they own it.

  81. Eric Newhill says:

    Laura, Detailed compared to Clinton – from whom I have heard no – zip, zero, nada – policy; only sinister (drunken?) old witch cackles (“Ha ha ha”) and promises of freebies in a form that appeals to whoever was cajoled into being included in the paltry crowd at the event.

  82. dr.puck says:

    This election is very shapeable by unknown future events, so, it is too early for me to weigh in with a hunch. It will be a turn out election because the national elections always are so.
    I’m a supporter of HRC, a weak candidate in a weird year. No. the weirdest year.
    That the money and the biddings of liberal and conservative wing elites have long imposed two differing variations on self-serving social engineering has been the rolling case for how long? When has this not been the case?
    It would take a gun to my head to vote for Mr. Trump. Well, you’d have to find me first and yank me to the polls.
    (Is Trump serious about putting armed poll watchers outside Black precincts in Philadelphia, Cleveland, Detroit, and Pittsburgh?)
    I suspect HRC would navigate the inevitable gridlock as President Obama has done so during the last six years. Also, I think the foreign policy of Obama she inherits will continue, with its principle feature being aversion to throwing thousands of ground troops into a meat grinder. The mayhem on the ground in the mideast will continue with its horrifying consequences for the innocent.
    It is possible Trump wins and the GOP sweeps the Congress, yet, doesn’t come close to the sixty votes required to legislate freely. What would he do? He doesn’t strike me as someone who feels that his messianic mission (evidently based in the reasoning power of a 5th grader, and the personality of a 3rd grade playground bully,) need yield to the exigencies of the rule of law.
    (I do know that there exist jaw dropping fantasies on the far right about what Trump “must do,” irrespective of the constraints given in our well-formed governing structure.)
    However, I will confidently predict he will direct his children to make him as much money as humanly possible given the opportunity a President has to cue up the overnight markets. I would suggest betting against the markets starting on January 20. I’m certain Trump’s kids will do so, and, do so with borrowed money.
    (Really, everybody here does understand that Trump plans to deliver giant tax decreases to the very persons he rightly claims are helping to rig the system.)
    Well, Trump visits my hometown Wednesday to sit down with Hannity and a local minister who understands that the God of all has delivered Trump to us for the sake of vanquishing, literally, the forces of Satan in a ‘last chance’ situation. Insane.

  83. LeaNder says:

    “African Americans have to elect Hillary in order to preserve my legacy”
    I was close to grant Dr. Michael Brenner one point in his evidence collection for Obama’s narcissism reading that. Problem, the correct quote is slightly different:
    If you care about our legacy, realize everything we stand for is at stake, on the progress we have made is at stake in this election.
    The context is voter’s registration.
    But yes, your argument would support Trump’s charge that Obama was the most divisive president ever.

  84. Out of Steppe says:

    Debates will be huge. External events will be huger. Assorted players will try to have their say: various bombers/shooters, cybercreeps, leakers. Maybe “decisive action” by DOD in Syria to drown out the noise. I suppose Clinton wins. All rather disempowering. Like watching the slow-motion car wreck that was Iraq 2003.

  85. Fred says:

    The preemption is thinking that being a member of a union makes a voter a Democrat. My fellow democratic party members do the same thing all the time.

  86. Fred says:

    “neither will win a majority in the electoral college.”
    Interesting suggestion. Aren’t all the states winner take all? If so which states is Johnson likely to win? On another note how was the event in Fort Myers?

  87. herb says:

    If Trump wins, this country is going full Ferdinand Marcos. Trump isn’t even bothering to make it a secret, he uses campaign press conferences to show off hotels.
    From a business perspective, this is the golden egg laying goose.

  88. Tyler says:

    So why do we keep importing these people who we “broke” then.

  89. Tyler says:

    Virtue signalling so hard dogs are barking across the nation.

  90. Tyler says:

    Because it devalues its currency to maintain cheap goods in order to sell those goods and maintain a trade imbalance.

  91. Warpig says:

    Portman (r) is almost certain to win in Ohio. Strickland is a forgotten man here, apparently. If anything Portman may help pull Trump’s numbers up despite lukewarm support. He’s very popular.

  92. different clue says:

    Nancy K,
    A question . . . if the SanderVoters and also the wanted-to-be SanderVoters all vote for somebody or something Other Than Clinton, will Clinton supporters have the Record Numbers to be able to elect Clinton all by themselves, assuming every last potential Clinton supporter comes out to vote?

  93. different clue says:

    Eric Newhill,
    What are some examples of Obama insulting black people? If such examples exist, would they be taken as insults by the black people who hear them? Or would they be the kind of things which . . . ” well, he can say that because he is one of us. And we can say that about us among us.”
    The last I heard, worshipful support for Obama among black people is still about 95% or so. The only black people I have heard of criticizing
    Obama are Adolphus Reed, Cornell West, and the black radical Marxists at Black Agenda Report. ( Of course the black radical Marxists at Black Agenda Report are not “cultural marxists”. They are straight-up political-economic Marxity Marx-marx MARXists).

  94. different clue says:

    Why would Clinton’s major moneyed enforcers begin regrouping around Trump? Wouldn’t they rather regroup around Kaine instead? Isn’t he more in tune with their agenda than Trump would be?

  95. different clue says:

    “Basket of Deplorables” allows some bumper stickers and yard signs to just write themselves.
    Deplorable Lives Matter.
    In the Basket for Trump.
    Deplore THIS!
    And so forth.
    This will be the Election from the Black Lagoon. Mr. Deplorable vs. Madame Execrable. Plus a little swarm of Third Party Wannabes nipping at the System’s ankles.
    The Clintonites have been insulting and belittling and condescending-to ( and just lately guilt-tripping and emotional-extorting) all the SanderBackers. I have seen Clintonite commenters on pro-Clinton blogs bragging about how “left wing heads will explode” when they see the Clintron get elected without any of their pathetic little left-wing SanderBacker votes. This sort of behavior on the part of the Clintonites should cost Clinton some SanderVotes she still might yet have gotten otherwise. We’ll see if its enough to deny her the Ultimate Prize, the Final Fruits, the Big Brass Ring, etc.

  96. Cee says:

    Clinton is bleeding African American support and Obama acting like her HNIC didn’t help a bit!
    The endorsements to Clinton from Cheney, Bush Sr, and probably his boy in addition to the neocons are also driving people away.
    I think Trump wins but Dems take the house and senate to keep him in line.

  97. different clue says:

    What if Trump got so many more votes than Clinton that the Establishment found the vote totals to be simply unfraudable? How big of a margin would Trump need to be pushed into the Zone of UnStealability?

  98. different clue says:

    I don’t know how one counts or measures this, but Sanders ( a little bit) and some of his supporters ( a little bit more) are trying to figure out how to support Sanders-type Democrats as against Clinton-type Democrats in this and coming elections. I read, for example, that many SanderVoting Democrats consider Senator Wyden of Oregon to be an anti-American Treasonist Conspirator for his vote to support Fast Track for TPP. I believe Senator Murray of Washington is also considered a Free Trade Treasonist Conspirator for her pro Fast Track vote. I believe other so-called “Democratic” Senators may also be hated and voted-against by the SanderVoters because of their votes for TPP Fast Track against America. It will be interesting to see how much power and persistence the SanderBackers have in this regard.
    If I were faced in my state with the literal choice of a Clintonite Senate Candidate for Fast Track against America or Senator Sessions his very own self with his America against Fast Track position, I would set everything else aside and vote for Sessions on that one crude brute survival issue.

  99. Fred says:

    “Trump himself, … act like they don’t need to reach out beyond their current coalition.”
    You mean like when Trump asked African Americans to vote for him?

  100. different clue says:

    Thomas Franks once wrote a book about that called What’s The Matter With Kansas? His liberal audience all missed or dodged the irony of his title. They also all missed or dodged his basic argument which was that . . . Democratic working-class voters of culturally conservative leanings voted for Democrats anyway when Democrats supported economic survival and security for the working class. It was only AFter the Clintonite Democratic Party doublecrossed and backstabbed working-class American hard-job doers that they finally realized that the Democratic Party was now their Social Class Enemy. And since the Democratic Party no longer offered them support for economic or social-political survival, and the Republican Party at least offered them support and agreement for their cultural beliefs and desires, they began voting Republican.
    But since the Liberals spent all the years from then to now deliberately disunderstanding the point of Franks’s book, he has recently written another book just for them which it will be harder for them to disunderstand. ( Though they will certainly try). And that book is called Listen Liberal! (Perhaps a play on the title of C. Wright Mills’s book of decades ago called Listen Yankee!)
    The self-styled Leftists over at Naked Capitalism are voicing a suspicion that the Two Brand Name Parties are reversing their polarity. The Rparty may become the Working Class Survival party if Trump can win the election and the Trump supporters can begin purging the Free Trade Traitor Country Club Republicans from out of the Rparty. Whereas the Dparty is becoming the “lifestyle liberalism” party of the self-styled Meritocratic high-salaried Professional Classes. One could say that our class system is just a little more complex than the One Percent versus the Ninety Nine Percent. One could say there is the One Percent, then the Next Nine Percent, and then the Ninety Percent below all that. And the Democrats are becoming the party of the Next Nine Percent (plus the Identity Voters).
    (Of course if Trump wins and yet retains Stephen Moore as his principal economic adviser, Moore will work very hard to convert Trump to the Social Security Abolition and Free Trade Treason viewpoints of the more traditional Republicans and also the New Democrat Clintonites — though Moore would be offended at having his views on Social Security and Free Trade branded as Clintonite . . . even though his views on Social Security and Free Trade are Clintonite. And that would delay or derail that polarity switch with the Rparty might otherwise make.)

  101. different clue says:

    Old Microbiologist,
    If Clinton falters or falls, Kaine is right there to take her place. The Dparty will never allow Sanders the Dparty nomination. The Ds would rather lose to Trump than see Sanders become President.

  102. different clue says:

    Is there evidence that African American support is bleeding away from Clinton? Anecdotal? Linkable?
    How much bleedaway?

  103. jonst says:

    They would respond Tyler “which Americans?”. If it is even remotely possible that it might be their kids (speaking of a Class now, not anyone person) they will answer one thing. Other people’s kids….different answer.

  104. herb says:

    “You’re living in poverty, your schools are no good, you have no jobs, 58% of your youth is unemployed — what the hell do you have to lose?”
    That is an insult, not asking someone to vote for you.
    And talk about “virtue signalling”, Trump said that to a white crowd in Lansing, MI, where the virtue signalling is “those blacks are shiftless and helpless” at the same time as “look at me showing how much I care about the blacks”.
    Nobody signals virtue better than The Donald.
    But no “virtue-signalling” or anecdotes or fabulism needed. The data does the talking. Aside from the LA Times tracker, despite his “surge”, there is no recent poll that has Trump support over 44%. He isn’t expanding his base and won’t expand his base. It’s baked in.
    People don’t take a flyer when buying a house, they don’t do it on a “what the hell” basis. They won’t do that for President either. They may stay at home and say screw it, but they aren’t going to pull the lever for the lulz.

  105. herb says:

    Well, according to that noted liberal bastion, the Cato Institute, your odds of being killed by an immigrant in a terror attack, including 911, is 1 in 3.6 million. The odds of being killed by a refugee terrorist are 1 in 3.6 BILLION.
    So, when the odds get higher than dying from something like getting my necktie caught in a machine, then that would be the number.

  106. Laura says:

    herb…best summation ever. “the golden egg laying the goose!” I hope I can quote you!?

  107. Sam Peralta says:

    Cee & DC
    Here’s one black guy’s take on Obama saying it would be a personal insult if black folk didn’t vote the way he wants them to.
    Man, that was some serious talking down to! Really, what’s he done for the hood? More black kids in poverty.
    Contrast Trump’s message to them: (h/t: Jack)
    “The Democratic Party has run the inner cities for fifty, sixty, seventy years and more.
    4 in 10 African-American children live in poverty, including 45% of those under the age of six.
    2,900 people have been shot in Chicago since the beginning of the year.
    For those suffering and hurting, I say: give Donald J. Trump a chance. I will fix it. What do you have to lose?”

  108. Sam Peralta says:

    At least he’s pitching his products in the open for all to see. Unlike the Crooked Clintons, who talk the kumbaya game but are all sleaze as they take the big bucks from the Saudi sheikhs under the cloak of charity.

  109. smoke says:

    “If God forbid Hillary should suffer a stroke between now and mid-October, Kaine wins handily.”
    This raises a question that I have seen addressed nowhere. Lots of speculation about various Hillary replacements, should she not make it to the finish line. But nothing have I heard about any order or procedure for addressing the situation.
    So if a prez candidate, after the nomination but before the election, or before inauguration, falls out of the contest due to health, law, or other circumstances, are there any written guidelines for how a replacement is selected. Is it a Party decision, and do they have club laws addressing the question? Party hierarchy? Or is it decided at the federal level? What would be the procedures?
    Surely on both sides, esp DParty, there are contingency plans by now.

  110. Sam Peralta says:

    I agree with you. There’s a huge enthusiasm factor difference between Trump and Hillary voters. The pictures of Trump rallies vs Hillary rallies really speak to that point visually.
    The media gasbags just can’t figure out what’s going on. How can they? They’ve never got out of their own cocktail circuit and can’t fathom hanging out with the Deplorables.
    If Trump wins it will be epic meltdown among the MSM and the establishment as well as the PC acronym soup crowd.

  111. Martin Oline says:

    I was wrong. In the event of a tie in the electoral college, the election does go to the House but the options are limited to the candidates running. If you want to know more I went to here:
    Johnson could win in Utah.
    I didn’t make it to the event. The noon news showed a very large crowd waiting outside and it was HOT! They were going to open at 1 P.M. for a 3 o’clock rally. It was raining hard over there at 12:30 (according to the weather map) but they had opened the doors early because of several cases of near heat stroke. I came real close to heat stroke a couple of years ago so my thermostat doesn’t work so good anymore. I stayed home.
    I wanted to get a TRUMP bumper sticker to partially obscure my Bernie sticker. You are right: I just want to piss off the smug Demoncrats!

  112. kao_hsien_chih says:

    May you and all your grand virtues elect Trump, without any of the votes from us real deplorables. So virtuous you are that you don’t need any votes to outvote the unvirtuous.
    Geesh, whose’s virtue trolling whom?

  113. kao_hsien_chih says:

    Trump did not “ask” the blacks. He told them, in a highly offputting manner, to vote for him, or “else.” That’s arrogant and insulting virtue-signalling, worthy of his and, I suppose, your pals the Clintons. I am not voting for any of these Trumplintons after all these nonsense.

  114. Fred says:

    Thanks for the Donald Trump quote that you do not attribute to him. I want to thank you, the national spokesperson for black Americans, for telling me what is insulting to black Americans. Thank God I no longer need to listen to Jesse Jackson, Al Sharpton, Michelle Obama, Colin Kaepernick, Kanye or any of the other well known black Americans to find out what black Americans think. (wasn’t that one of Trump’s point?) Thanks for setting me straight on these other things:
    Is unemployment among young black Americans 58%? I see it’s Not disputed by you or any of our national politicians.
    What is it black Americans have to lose by voting for Trump???? It can’t be that crooked politicians like convicted felons Mayor Kwame Kilpatrick, Congresswoman Corrine Brown or even crooked school principles like the baker’s dozen going to jail here in Detroit are any better.
    He didn’t speak in a venue you approved of? Well you left out the church in Flint but you make the point (by implication) that a televised address is not acceptable. I guess he better knock on a few million doors personally. Don’t be too shocked when he decides he can get some free media doing that by going – secularism forbid – “Straight into Compton” (That will make a great twitter hash tag). I’m sure the Secret Service detail will love that almost as much as the media elite.

  115. Fred says:

    Maybe Hilary can mention that next 9-11. I’m sure the families of the dead will appreciate the mathematical insights.

  116. Thirdeye says:

    Five Thirty-Eight shows Trump still behind but on a trend to overtake Hillary in the coming weeks. Of course there’s no guarantee that the trend will continue. I suspect that movement in the polls is strongly event-driven. Race riots, terrorism, email revelations, health issues, and elitist insulting comments from Clinton and Co. have all been moving things towards Trump these past few weeks. If, and that’s a big if, Trump can avoid high profile mistakes he’s in a position to win it.
    I’m a little more confident about predicting that the next President will be deeply unpopular, face a midterm electoral disaster, and have a real problem staying in office (maybe even face impeachment). If Trump is weak in his presidency and farms out policy to his veep and other Republican establishment figures that would be the biggest mistake he could make IMO. He’s a roll of the dice on foreign policy, pragmatic towards Russia and Europe but nuts about Iran and Israel. Maybe the former could modulate the latter if Putin impresses on him what is truly needed to deal with ISIS and Al Qaeda.

  117. kao_hsien_chih says:

    There is this story from NYT, a few days ago:
    Not really a clear sign that Clinton is especially “bleeding” black support lately, or indeed, any minority support, but since such large proportion of minority voters, if they vote at all, vote Democratic lately, that Democrats enjoy overwhelming support among them is meaningless. The real question is whether they will turn out, and the answer seems to be probably not. There really is no enthusiasm for Clinton at all, except among the Freds and Tylers of the world (oh, wait, were they supporting the other woman? Who can tell the difference between the two of them anyways?)

  118. Jack says:

    I’m a Ron Paul guy like you having written him in the last 4 presidential elections. I wrote him not as a protest vote but because his philosophy aligned with mine. This time I’m seriously considering voting for Trump. If I do, it will be the first time voting for the duopoly in over two decades.
    I was in Iowa 2 weeks ago. Among the people I met, there was a clear enthusiasm for Trump. The distaste for the Clintons was palpable. The media attacks on Trump are having the opposite effect as these people wear it like a badge of honor.

  119. Tyler says:

    You keep using that term. I do not think it means what you think it means.

  120. Tyler says:

    I’m sure your numbers are very comforting to the people digging shrapnel out of their shoulders and the families of those killed in San Berdoo, Boston, Miami, and NYC.
    So basically infinitely as long as you get to moral signal? Good to know.

  121. Tyler says:

    Also, ridiculous methodology that ignores the fact that Muslims go kaboom at much higher rates than about anyone else. And yes, you are right that Cato is quite liberal. They’d be down with Hillary’s globalist agenda.
    You are like a little baby, struggling to comprehend physics. SAD!

  122. Sam Peralta says:

    “For those suffering and hurting, I say: give Donald J. Trump a chance. I will fix it. What do you have to lose?”
    What do you think this is? “Offputting”? To whom?
    Check out what some black guys are saying. They get it.

  123. Fred says:

    I’ve stood in some similar lines before, I think I’d have skipped this one too.

  124. Fred says:

    He made no threats. Or “else” what, they get Hilary? Here’s the transcript.

  125. Fred says:

    I read that book but if memory serves it was more about the magic of Frank Luntz style word smithing than any attempt to understand that people don’t live by money alone.

  126. Lars says:

    No doubt this election has some new elements but it is mainly “noise”. The Electoral College has not changed and demographics actually favor HC. So far in the polls, Trump has a ceiling that he has been able to penetrate, whereas HC has a floor that she has not gone below.
    But as I said, the last 3 weeks will tell more. Last time around, the Fox News crowd were convinced that Romney would win in a landslide and they had the polls to show it. They ended up 5 million votes short.

  127. Fred says:

    “USAID” Ask your employers what America got for the aid that :
    “over the 18-year period 1931-1968 …averaged 6.4 per cent of Taiwan’s GNP, formed 34 per cent of its gross investment, and covered 91 per cent of its aggregate net import surplus of goods and services.”
    Yep, after 30 years in the Ivory tower you’ve worked your way to the outpost academia doing whatever it is you do. If you’re an American citizen that’s a pretty piss-poor return for covering a third of Taiwan’s bills for decades; not that we’ve stopped. I sure hope nobody from BLM starts looking into why we invest in foreigners first and Americans last, they might just start to wonder if their lives really matter and then decide not vote for the status quo.

  128. Tyler says:

    Scanned and saw it was just more unrepeatable social science voodoo gris gris wishful thinking. So basic.

  129. rjj says:

    KHC, WRT “what do you have to lose?”
    Never mind the opportunists crying “whiplaaaaaash!!” The absence of condescension (talk to me like a mensch) is more respectful and most likely a pleasant change.

  130. rjj says:

    KHC – “Not only they are not, they react as if voters have no right to expect that politicians should be asking for their votes. ..If neither wants my vote, and votes of the people like me, then they ain’t getting it.”
    It is a crisis, not a cotillion. We can opt out of choosing, but not the outcome of the choice.

  131. Bill Wade says:

    Clinton fell again while boarding a plane, cancelled her NC appearance, if there’s a debate on the 26th I’ll be surprised. I see my last post was deleted, I must have pissed off the right person, thanks. Trump – landslide.

  132. turcopolier says:

    Bill Wade
    do you have a link to the Clinton fall incident? I didn’t delete anything of yours. pl

  133. Stephanie says:

    What Herb said. Although I think Clinton has strengths as a candidate that are generally overlooked along with her weaknesses.
    She has bled some support, but not to Trump. The country is sufficiently polarized that he will probably not fall below a certain level – 40%?, but I expect that barring anything unexpected Clinton will start moving back up in the polls.
    Looks like Portman and Rubio are going to hold on in the Senate. Lucky for Rubio the Democrats couldn’t find a halfway decent candidate. So Marco gets another six years in the job his friends say bores him to death and probably another run at the presidency. Truly failing upward.
    I will say for the Donald that he did perform a public service in the primaries, possibly rescuing the country from Jeb! and Rubio the empty suit by wiping the floor with them. (Well, Chris Christie did the demolition job on little Marco. While I”m not sure the GOP would have chosen a second governor from the northeast so soon after Romney, it’s hard not to think that the George Washington Bridge scandal denied the GOP a formidable national contender. Remarkable to think how far Christie has fallen.)

  134. Fred says:

    Unlike you I never claimed 30 years in academia so my history wouldn’t be quite so bad as to not know that Chiang Kai Shek was a Chinese nationalist who didn’t initiate lend-lease but did fail to listen to Stillwel and thus managed to lose a civil war to the author of the “little red book”, winding up in Taiwan as a result. Nice try with the trolling though.

  135. Fred says:

    I think we are both wasting time conversing with a Taiwanese expert on Amerika.

  136. different clue says:

    Pacifica Advocate,
    Your point is of course correct. They are black and I am sure their comments would be criticism. But since I don’t much follow Sowell and Thomas, I would not have been very aware of their comments. I only know that they have been criticizing “liberals” and “Democrats” for lo these many decades, so I would not have expected them to say anything “new” or even “Obama-specific” about Obama.
    In that vein, I feel confident that Alan Keyes would also be criticizing Obama, and no . . . I haven’t been following his work either.

  137. different clue says:

    If you are referring to the book What’s The Matter With Kansas; all I read were sympathetic reviews and synopses and also articles Franks wrote during that same time-period. So I probably should read the book itself and see just how much of it is Luntz-focused.
    I would suspect the most basic thrust of the book would indeed be that cultural-conservative Democratic-voting working people voted Democratic until the Democratic Party went Clintonite and betrayed their economic survival interest. But of course I should read the book its own self to see if my assumptions about the most basic thrust of the book are right or wrong. If my assumptions about the book are wrong, then I still think my theory is right and that a book deserves to be written about it.
    (The “Reagan Democrats” might be cited as a counter example. My rebuttal to that counter-example would be that a lot of the culture-conservative Democrats in the MidWest who voted for Reagan still also voted for Democratic Representatives. McComb County is considered to be Ground Zero for the UAW-style Reagan Democrats who voted for Reagan, and they kept voting for Firm Leftist David Bonior as their Congressional Representative. Bonior was an economic patriot against Free Trade and everyone knew it).

  138. Tyler says:

    I’m amazed you can type with your head buried so firmly in the sand. Brava!

  139. Tyler says:

    Lol there are no facts there. Pure gris gris. Tell me more about America from your box in Taiwan.

  140. Tyler says:

    Was amazed at the essay he pumped out. The loneliest progressive, the saddest man in Taiwan – Pacifica Advocate.

  141. Tyler says:

    Plz link!!!!!

  142. Nancy K says:

    I don’t think she would have the votes if none of those who voted for Sanders voted for her, The Millennials are now the biggest block of voters and they were the group who were the most dedicated Sanders voters. However they are also more liberal than older voters and many if not most will vote for Clinton.

  143. Tyler says:

    I’m not surprised that the hens above you are clucking together.

  144. Nancy K says:

    I have never lived in VA, although it is a lovely state. I am a native of CA, moving to NC 4 1/2 years ago.

  145. Tyler says:

    Charlotte was ablaze last night, Hillary siding with criminals in NC and OK.
    Reality continues its Trump favorability.

  146. Fred says:

    Melania can afford her own shoes. As to laying eggs:
    “It was poorly managed, treated too glibly, patronizingly, completely lacking empathy at the fact that so many young people were going to be laid off,”

  147. Fred says:

    I noticed that it was a white female officer in Tulsa and a black male officer in Charlotte. Those don’t fit the narrative but the response by those burning down the house sure fits the stereotype. The WAPO comments are rather enlightening. Meanwhile in Dearborn Heights Michigan an ex felon man killed his four children and shot his wife. No comment from BLM or Mr. Kaepernick and not even the front page on the Detroit Free Press. Sad.

  148. herb says:

    After 911, the second biggest casualty “kaboom” was one of (((your))) guys. But how are we going to outlaw white supremacists? It’s a free country, ain’t it?
    What’s really interesting (or not) is that neither you nor Fred bother to dispute those actual hard statistics. It’s not hard, really, there have been so few refugees who have committed terror acts you could even use your fingers to count them, as usual.
    Anyway, this is all pretty off-topic.

  149. herb says:

    Why wait? She should mention it during the debates. If I gave you a bowl with 3.6 billion Skittles and said somewhere in there, one of them could kill you, would you have the stones to eat a handful? I know I would.

  150. herb says:

    Can Crooked Donald pardon himself for tax evasion? I know you guys would like to find out, but will the voters?
    He settles a personal lawsuit by sending a check from his “charity”, i.e. other people’s tax-free money.
    “In another case, court papers say one of Trump’s golf courses in New York agreed to settle a lawsuit by making a donation to the plaintiff’s chosen charity. A $158,000 donation was made by the Trump Foundation, according to tax records.”
    There is one thing only that Trump cares about: $$$. It’s amusing (or not) that so many people thinks he cares about them. Being a con artist is a skill.

  151. Fred says:

    The IRS should fine him, though since this was a decade ago so what took them so long? The WAPO does not list the time of the second allegation.

  152. Martin Oline says:

    I have seen a spate of articles lately denigrating the white working class male in the U.S. Some even go so far as to insult the men and women who make up our armed forces. All because of political party and perceived bias. Remember Jim Webb said “If you’re poor and white you’re out of sight”. I found this early today and want to share with the readers of SST:
    Am excerpt:
    What do you call sweeping generalizations about groups of people, and unfairly assigning malign, hateful motives to them, as Hillary does to Trump supporters? Well, you could say that is the definition of bigotry. Clinton and company believe that, as long as it is in the name of fighting racism, sexism, etc, then it is okay to denigrate huge swathes of people. Trashing the white trash is today’s socially acceptable form of elitist bigotry.

  153. Imagine says:

    After first debate: Trump basically just said in front of 100M people that he pays virtually zero federal taxes and that’s a good thing. Wow. At this point I think that’s going to move the needle, and I’m changing my call to Hillary by a whisker.

Comments are closed.