This is probably a legitimate mistake, but it does not induce any level of confidence in the American electoral process:
October 31, 2024
State of the Race - Halloween edition
In the latest RCP average of polls in the swing states, Kamala Harris has pulled back ahead of Donald Trump in Wisconsin and Michigan, while Trump has opened his lead further in a few of the other states. For any new readers, I don't go by a straight lift of the RCP data, as not all polls are created equal. I filter out polls that do not share their poll population, or where the polled population is too low to consider statistically significant. I also filter out polls that are more than 10 days old (this week I am lowering that to 7 days). Any poll with a margin of error greater than 3.5% is not reliable in my opinion either. Likely voters are a must but pretty much every poll now is only looking at likely voters rather than registered voters or all adults.
All of that has to be taken into consideration, without even getting into the crosstabs of who was polled. Many pollsters still, oversample Democrats and it skews their results.
Here is what I am seeing as of today, but I have a caveat to apply to my findings:
But here are my caveats on my own results; (1) I have not looked at the crosstabs of any of the individual polls, and more importantly (2) these polls that do meet my statistical standards, are mostly all conservative leaning or neutral pollsters. The latter point means that while Trump leads, the may truly be razor thin leads, making a stolen election possible.
Where the Democrats seem to be conceding are states that do not matter. They appear to have written off Georgia and Arizona. Trump needs those, Kamala does not. The Harris campaign also has apparently pulled a bunch of ad buys from North Carolina. Trump needs the state, Kamala does not. Nevada, does not matter to either candidate in the current calculus. The Rust Belt is what matters. Kamala needs all 3, Trump only needs one to win.
Despite the polymarket betting that Trump has a 2 out of 3 chance of winning, despite Trump apparently leading in the national vote total, and despite him leading in enough (or conceivably all) the swing states, if Harris wins Pennsylvania, Wisconsin and Michigan, she wins 270-268. That still makes this race a nail biter.
October 30, 2024
What's this garbage?
Let's Go Brandon tries to trash Trump and as an added bonus, Trump supporters. It overshadowed Kamala Harris' closing argument (which lacked substance anyway). Way to go Brandon, thank you for sucking the remaining oxygen out of her campaign with this.
Always Be Closing
The sales saying Always Be Closing, is no less true in politics. But you have to do it right and in politics the optics matter. Kamala Harris is doing it horribly badly. Not that I'm complaining; it's not gonna help her get elected.
October 29, 2024
This settles it
October 28, 2024
Polymarket has Trump 2 out of 3
I don't ascribe a lot of relevance to the betting markets on who is going to win the presidential election because it's not scientific. But there's clearly a trend to be seen here.
The 'smaller' rally down the street
For posterity purposes, this was the 'smaller' rally down the street:
October 27, 2024
October 26, 2024
October 25, 2024
Hillary Clinton's Trump is Hitler moment
Okay these comparisons are way beyond ridiculous. Hillary Clinton, not at all surprisingly, has hopped on the Trump is Hitler train. Why? Because of 1939. Wait, 1939????
It's an absolutely absurd linkage but it's happening because Democrats are desperate. They have nothing; no plans to discuss, not even joy. All they have is "NOT Trump!". So they have to amp that up with Trump is Hitler. While Donald Trump is floating 'No income tax', all they can float is 'No Trump'. Pathetic and not worthy of leading the country.
This is the woman who compares Trump to Hitler
October 24, 2024
We're back to calling the opponent Hitler? Really?
Democrats cannot comport themselves like adults. They can't seem to help it either.
October 23, 2024
Trump's Rogan podcast appearance could seal the deal
President Trump is going to sit down with Joe Rogan on his podcast on Friday. Could this seal the deal for Trump? It might. It won't hurt, that's for sure.
Tulsi Gabbard's surprise announcement
It seemed like this was inevitable, eventually. This is a great thing; Tulsi Gabbard confirming her team.
October 22, 2024
My swing state view as of Oct 22
This morning I read the TIPP national tracking poll that showed over the weekend the race was tightening. It had this to say:
Trump's weekend momentum has fizzled out, and Harris and Trump are locked in a tight contest. Despite Trump's earlier momentum, the TIPP tracking poll shows former President Donald Trump and Vice President Kamala Harris tied at 48%.
My first thought was okay it's a tracking poll, there is a daily fluctuation that shouldn't be taken as gospel. So I decided to look further, and I discovered two things. Firstly, despite the rounding, overall the details show Trump with a fractional lead at 48% and Harris somewhere around 47.7%. That is still a Trump lead, however small. The second thing I discovered was that within their tracking poll, Trump did indeed drop from 49% to 48% on the rolling score while Harris gained from 47% to just under the 48% mark. That could be anything from a weekend Democrat response bias to real movement. It's hard to tell.
Keep in mind this is a national poll. If Trump is even in a national poll, he is in a strong position to win the national total vote count, which is of course, merely bragging rights. Perhaps it's a little more consequential this time around but that's a discussion for another time. What's interesting is that it matches a couple of my updated swing state results. What really matters is the swing state polls.
Taking a look at the RealClearPolitics battleground state polling average (which are not the gold standard and why I try to average the polls a bit differently than RCP does) we see the following:
- Pennsylvania - Trump +0.8%
- North Carolina - Trump +0.5%
- Georgia - Trump +2.5%
- Arizona - Trump +1.8%
- Wisconsin - Trump +0.4%
- Michigan - Trump +1.2%
- Nevada - Trump +0.7%
October 21, 2024
My swing state view as of Oct 21
Here's what I see when I look at the polls and include only polls from the last 10 days, with only Likely Voters, only polls of 700 or more respondents, and with a margin of error less than or equal to 3.5%. Just like RCP, I'm seeing a swing state sweep for Trump.
This would equate to a significant electoral college sweep for Trump. There's good news and worrisome news in this. Firstly, Georgia and Pennsylvania look like they are approaching outside of margin of error leads for Trump. The worrisome part, the other states are all tin to razor-thin leads. The momentum is in Trump's favor BUT...
The Kamala Harris honeymoon was almost certainly a product of media and push-pollster hype. The polls 100% had to move towards Trump because the Harris leads were pure vaporware wishful-thinking, pie-in-the-sky unicorns and fairy dust. Which means that the polls have in reality, probably moved very little towards Trump. I don't doubt he's leading, but the margins may indeed be slim in these key battleground states. And if that's true, vote tabulation malfeasance is a risk.
McKinsey implicated in drone scandal
I'm dubious, CBS
60 Minutes obfuscates to hide their own manipulation of their Kamala Harris interview. It sure took them a long time to craft a response. And it sure was carefully worded. So it sure doesn't make them look any less deceptive.
October 20, 2024
October 19, 2024
Meanwhile in Canada, Trudeau is desperate
October 18, 2024
This is a clear failure
October 17, 2024
And the spin continues
The spin has spun out of control, from the disastrous Kamala Harris interview, right on into some recent polling. Here's a discussion on why it's a lot of crap.
Democrat spin cycle
When you don't have facts, you spin. And with Kamala Harris, all you've got is a spin cycle; the facts are she's a bad candidate. Not only didn't that stop Democrat talking heads from spinning, it mandate that they had to do exactly that.
It was a train wreck
I by far, most often, am a glass half full person but more often than I'd like, I revert to a glass half empty mentality. This is particularly true when it comes to politics and sports. "We're gonna lose." kicks in way faster than it should. And most of the time it's unwarranted pessimism.
Last night as Brett Baier was interviewing Kamala Harris on Fox News, it kicked in. He started off soft. I get it, he was setting her up for harder questions later. Interviews should be polite even if the subject matter is contentious. But last night with that start to the interview, I turned it off. He was going to softball her, I just knew it. Waste of time. Fox is helping Kamala.
Normally I would force my way through it but not last night. This morning I watched it. I'll happily admit it; I was wrong to doubt Kamala's ability to implode just as badly as Let's Go Brandon. It was indeed a train wreck. Not the interview, just for the vapid candidate that is Kamala Harris.
Do I think it hurt Kamala Harris? A little bit, yeah. Did it help her in any way? Definitely not. I'm sure there are those who are spinning this as a win for Harris, just as I predicted yesterday. But there were so many soft underbelly openings she left that even if Brett Baier didn't catch them all, others would. And sure enough, there have been no shortage of those noticing how badly she did.
For example, they're even commenting on the other side of the world:
October 15, 2024
What comes of desperation?
Rewriting this because somehow, most of my post was somehow deleted while I posting it. This is a much shorter version as I am not inclined to rewrite as much as I wrote previously, and to be honest, did not have any notes to work from. Below is my attempt to game theory out why Kamala Harris is going to be interviewed on Fox News.
Tomorrow on Fox News (Fox News!) Kamala Harris is going to sit down for an interview. This is very likely going to be her first, and only, real interview this election cycle. Why is this happening now? I have a few thoughts.
Wednesday— I’ll have an exclusive interview with Vice President Harris on #SpecialReport. pic.twitter.com/Ry63iNH4fW
— Bret Baier (@BretBaier) October 14, 2024
Kamala Harris would not be sitting for an interview with a 'hostile' Fox News unless her campaign knew the truth; she's losing. But what will come from this interview? I see two ways the interview can go, and possible outcomes that result from that. The first factor is whether or not Fox News asks her tough questions.
There's no guarantee that Fox News actually does ask Kamala Harris tough questions. It's one thing to have journalistic standards and wanting to get answers to tough questions. But that's not all that motivates newsrooms. There's money, there's viewership, there's acceptance among peers and/or interviewees. None of these things should play into investigative reporting or interviews - but they do. Worse still; there's politics. Any of these could lead to Fox giving a softball interview to Harris.
Money in the form of powerful advertisers with a lot of financial pull who might be pro-DEI, would not take kindly to Fox hammering Harris. Money drives business and alienating current and/or potential advertisers is not something Fox would want to do. There are a lot of woke companies out there with a lot of money.
From a viewership perspective, while Fox will get eyeballs for the interview, an unduly hard interview might scare off potential disaffected centrist viewers who tuned in specifically for this and got hit with a meme; Fox is unfair and biased against Democrats. No viewership growth would come of it. Conversely an even handed interview might grow viewership and be a better long run strategy.
Fox has drifted towards the center since Rupert Murdoch handed off control to his children. They are far less conservative than their father. But there's also the idea of media acceptance. Fox News, and Fox television in general has always been an outsider in the industry. Playing along with CBS, NBC et. al. would go a long way to garnering not necessarily clout, but perhaps acceptance, within the industry. We cannot pretend that such things do not matter to if not Fox, at least those who work there.
If Fox does take it easy on Harris, they will definitely lose viewers from those who currently watch it expecting fair and balanced at a minimum. Remember, Kamala Harris has not faced anything other than controlled softball interviews so far. People want to see her face tough questions. If she doesn't get them on Fox News, she will never get them.
But this is not about Fox, it's about Harris. Another softball interview could easily work in Harris' favor; making her look tough for willing to go toe-to-toe with the 'enemy' and come out shining on the other end, having handled the questions with ease. I know, I know, I laughed re-reading that myself.
Getting obviously softball questions on Fox could easily backfire too; it would show that she is only going places she knows are safe, and clearly had something lined up with Fox. It would amplify the elites-agenda-versus-the-common-man notion that is clearly driving the election cycle. That's not a good outcome for Harris or for Fox News.
All that said, Fox still could go tough on her, and they probably will to at least some extent. If they go too hard, it's a nasty look (but honestly, who cares? Look at what Trump has had to endure since 2015!). But if Fox goes tough but fair Harris could still do well (haha, okay not bloody likely) or get ruined. If she gets ruined though, don't think the Democratic brain trust hasn't pre-planned for that outcome.
How hard would it be to paint Harris as a victim? "They went after her unfairly because she's a woman." "They went after her unfairly because she's black." "They weren't fact checked as they interviewed her, let us do that for you now." The list goes on. While Harris-as-victim is a really bad look for her if you are say named Putin, there are key voting blocks (women for example) who may feel sympathy as a result. A president should be tough enough to handle a rough ride. If not, why are they president? Voters shouldn't matter as much as a leader who can take the tough shots and fight back for America and its people, but in an election year, voters matter a lot.
There's one further possibility here; the back room Democrat elite know Harris has lost and they see no way out, so they are hanging her out to dry, now, while they can make a difference elsewhere. The cabal that runs the left, clearly knew Let's Go Brandon was many, many egg noodles short of a meal. They hid it for years. When they knew they could no longer hide it, they concocted a plan to deal with him. The Democrat elite are schemers; they put him out there to debate Trump so far ahead of the nomination, they knew they would have time to replace him with someone nobody voted for in the Democrat primaries.
Protecting Democracy has always been the last thing on their minds, except maybe as a slogan. They want puppets. When their main puppet was full of holes, they discarded him and grabbed onto the next available option; Kamala Harris. They are not protecting democracy in doing this; in fact it is the exact opposite. It's Covid lockdowns all over again. They're thinking we can get away with this because we own the news.
What they actually are protecting is their club. Not democracy, not the American people, they are protecting their own grip on power. They want to ensure that the down-ballot impact of a feckless Kamala Harris doesn't affect the senate or congress, and leaves them open to a midterm rebound in 2026. They have given their puppet one chance to do well, far enough out, so they can react. A weak performance and you'll see every Democrat in a swing district or state, run from her so far and so fast it will make your head spin.
After failing to fake a euphoria of joy for Harris, this is Democrat insiders' last best shot at changing the trajectory of the election, whether Harris does well or not. I strongly doubt it will make a positive difference for Harris, but I think the Democrats already know that themselves and no longer care.
Trump gaining or no?
Let's not pretend Donald Trump has been making up ground on Kamala Harris; he was always doing better than her, but the push polls are being forced to stop playing games and start reporting reality. They have to report the truth or their integrity and validity will be challenged post-election. They are moving their polling towards the truth because they must.
20 days until the most important election of our lifetime
Yes, they were. But times change, and as they have changed, elections have become more important. Technology is on another level. Illegal immigration is out of control. There are high stakes wars in progress. The deep state is extending its tendrils into more and more of American life. Morality has decayed to an abysmal level. I now believe that this is indeed, the most important election of our lifetime.
In 2020 America decided to roll the dice with Trump. Despite all of the bulwark of the deep state and Democrats and even many establishment Republicans lined up against him and his America first agenda, the roll of the dice paid off. This election Trump is no longer a roll of the dice. You know what you'll get; a better economy, America first, normalized immigration, a restored military, a leaner and more efficient government and plenty more. Democrats want to define Trump by a phony January 6th narrative, but Americans should see through that.
Conversely if there is a roll of the dice candidate in this election it's Kamala Harris. She's changed her opinions and policy positions more often than they change Let's Go Brandon's diapers. You can't tell what she really believes, it's all lies designed to appeal to the voters in the room with her at that moment. There's no substance, no real conviction there. Of course there is an inkling of what her real positions actually are. For example, it's almost certain she doesn't really own a Glock. Tim Walz; that dog don't hunt either. Her policy positions will be similar to Let's Go Brandon's; her positions will be what she's told they will be.
In reality a Kamala Harris presidency is far worse than a roll of the dice. A Kamala Harris presidency is an outright bad bet. Americans may be willing to roll the dice but I cannot fathom Americans are willing to make a bad bet. That's especially true when there is a really good bet available to make. You only make a bad bet out of sheer desperation. Americans are struggling in numbers too great, but Americans are not desperate. The only people who are desperate, seem to be the Democrats and the Kamala Harris campaign.
As a non-American, but one cheering for American success, I urge you in the most strenuous possible way, go make a good bet. I would also add that it extends beyond the presidency. If you want Trump to make a difference, you need to vote for congressional representatives and senators who will support his agenda. If you don't he won't be able to do for America what needs to be done.
Did Bill Clinton get injected with a truth serum?
Bill Clinton admits the truth about illegal immigration, at least part of truth:
October 14, 2024
State of the race: October 14th
![]() |
Click to enlarge. |
Democrats' hyperbole leads to yet another crazy targeting Trump
Coachella planned assassination on Trump. This is the third individual. Ridiculous.
October 13, 2024
End Double Taxation; vote Trump
October 12, 2024
Justin Trudeau over-ripe and can't tell
Ana Kasparian semi-red-pilled
Ana Kasparian has shown signs of not drinking the Kool Aid for the last two years. She's left the left. But she's not quite been red-pilled. Maybe more to come, probably, in the months to come.
October 11, 2024
60 Minutes: Part of the Coverup
Trying to make Kamala Harris look good when she can't do it on her own, will eventually have fallout for those who try to participate in the cover-up (just like it made the media look incredibly foolish for lying about Let's Go Brandon).
60 Minutes could implode for trying to cover up for Harris. This isn't going to just go away I think:
Pre-Trudeau vs. Post Trudeau, as predicted
THIS IS Trudeau's fault
I'm not going to sugarcoat this, Trudeau has not only allowed this to happen in Canada, he has not only enabled it to happen in Canada, he has passively (perhaps even actively) encouraged this to happen in Canada. What I'm talking about is support for terrorism.
Trump's plan for the auto industry
Astroturfed
Democrats trying to buy votes is a real thing. In this case, buying influence (influence peddling):
This is crazy
CBS to it's reporters: Don't ask questions. But I guess that's par for the course, leftists don't want leaders to run the country properly. They also apparently don't want journalists/reporters to do their job properly either.
October 9, 2024
October 8, 2024
FEMA troubles keep growing
KJP = blame-thrower. This is not a money problem, this is an operational (i.e. administration) problem. How do we know that? Mayorkas = liar. Watch:
A question for Democrats
October 7, 2024
They just don't care
I'm sure most people outside the leftist bubble already know about this, but it bears frequent repetition:
Former Obama senior adviser David Axelrod argued that Vice President Kamala Harris voters will be clever enough to navigate voting in the wake of the devastation from Hurricane Helene, while saying that rural Trump voters will have a harder time getting to the polls.Axelrod made the claim during an episode of his podcast "Hacks on Tap" that aired Wednesday, predicting that liberal voters in Asheville, North Carolina – a predominantly blue area in the state – will "figure out a way to vote" more so than conservatives in the storm’s aftermath.Describing Asheville as a "blue dot" in the state, he continued, "Those voters in Asheville are – they’re, you know, the kind of voters that will figure out a way to vote. You know, they’re upscale, kind of liberal voters, and they’re probably going to figure out a way to vote," Axelrod said.He continued, stating that rural conservatives may not be as resourceful in finding ways to vote following the destruction of their homes and communities."I’m not sure a bunch of these folks who’ve had their homes and lives destroyed elsewhere in western North Carolina – in the mountains there – are going to be as easy to wrangle for the Trump campaign," the political commentator hypothesized.
That's not just political opportunism, it's vile, sick and evil.
October 6, 2024
October 5, 2024
Conservative vs. Liberal priorities on display
October 4, 2024
October 2, 2024
3 on 1 and Vance still won the debate handily
The moderators were not moderating the debate they were supporting panicky Tim Walz and still JD Vance was able to kick butt in the debate. It was brilliant. When polling comes in I'm sure it will be a win for Vance. I'm equally sure, though it won't be polled, Vance pointing this out further chipped away at the abysmal levels of trust for the mainstream media.
Unfortunately, I'm also sure this debate will do little to move the polling, as VP debates have only a small impact. I would caveat that a little here; it might mean more than normal, but just not a lot more.
October 1, 2024
I'm running out of entertainment options here!
I stopped watching the mainstream media, for the most part. It's a rare occasion I watch network or cable television. Why did I stop? Left leaning agendas that I could not stomach were making their way into most every broadcast show. But there was Netflix, Amazon Prime, YouTube and several other options.
Amazon Prime is grotesquely woke, I never watch it, even though there were shows on there I wouldn't mind seeing, I can't support it. Jeff Bezos is a leftist and it has infected the entire Amazon Prime platform. It's exactly what happened to CNN; Ted Turner's leftward bias could not be held out of it's newscasts, and now like a plague, it's infected every corner of the company. Bezos has stepped away from the day to day of Amazon but Amazon is already what it is, a progressive platform. So it's out.
YouTube is a Google platform that's even further left than Amazon. It's become my number one source of entertainment but the content creators I watch have been squeezed out slowly and systematically by YouTube. That's not to mention that despite the heavy leftward bias of Google and YouTube, YouTube has fallen heavily in love with a ridiculous volume of commercials. It's unwatchable from that perspective. I find myself on YouTube less and less and have become much more selective. From 6 to 12 seconds of ads to 60 seconds of unskippable ads every few minutes is not sustainable. It isn't for me at least. And I'm certainly not going to subscribe to a platform where all my favorite content providers are treated like dirt through shadow-banning, shadow-unsubscribing, ad revenue racketeering or through some other means.
Disney+ was a non-starter for me. ABC is ultra-woke, Disney itself has gone ultra-woke, so why would I buy into that to begin with? The platform as it turns out, unsurprisingly, is also ultra-woke.
The last refuge? Netflix. Netflix has not been any sort of paragon of neutrality they have worked with the Obama's, trashed history, presented ultra-woke content, etc. But they did have some decent content as well.
That unfortunately has fallen to the wayside for me in light of this:
I can't support Netflix any more.
So now where do I go? Gaming? Too late, already woke. Rumble? Good platform, not enough critical mass. Fox? Not terrible but it has been slipping since 2020 and Rupert Murdoch's handoff to his kids. X? It's been great since Elon Musk took over, retreating from the uber-woke status, but it isn't a big content provider. It should be, it should become one, Tucker Carlson's show has been great, but the platform needs more; it has the potential to become more. Facebook? Despite Mark Zuckerberg's recent 'miraculous' (suspicious) turn towards libertarianism, the platform is not really a content platform. It's more just a big pile of mess. And the platform is not libertarian by any stretch.
I'm running out of entertainment options here! Seems to me a wise person who is either conservative or at least unconcerned about politics, and who had enough capital to do something about my current conundrum, would recognize that it is likely a massively common problem. There is a huge opportunity to create an entertainment platform that is not woke, and is simply concerned about quality content for it's audience. It would thrive. Advertisers may be woke but eyeballs mean money. YouTube knows this as I mentioned above. That's why despite being woke, they pepper us with ads. The new entertainment platform would not go broke. It would thrive.
Just saying.