Red Mirage?

Across America , stores in urban areas are being boarded up in anticipation of rioting following tomorrow ’ s election .
It isn ’ t disappointed Trump voters store owners are worried about .
They are taking precautions because they think President Trump may win .
Democratic leaders , meanwhile , are increasingly nervous .
Turnout in heavily Democratic areas of several states has been unexpectedly light .
No one is enthusiastic about Joe Biden , while Trump is drawing unprecedented crowds and generating lots of excitement .
It seems that in response , the Democrats are formulating a strategy @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to seize power .
This morning , Trump ’ s deputy campaign manager Justin Clark sent out this “ Trump campaign statement on Democrat plans to delegitimize Election Day results.
” Democrats are panicking because Joe Biden has not run up a large enough lead in early votes in battleground states and they know that President Trump ’ s in-person votes on Election Day will make up the difference and propel him to victory .
Biden ’ s political operatives have already been distributing talking points and research to delegitimize Election Day results @ @ @ @ @ @ @ President ’ s Election Day success as a ‘ Red Mirage.
’ The operatives are advising surrogates and media to create a smoke screen by casting blame all around – imagining postal delays or falsely claiming that mail-in ballots that have simply not been returned should be considered legitimate votes that need to be counted .
None of this will be true , but it will be held up as proof that President Trump ’ s victory is a so-called ‘ Red Mirage.
’ No one should fall for it .
We are @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ads they are prepared to deploy to further cement the ‘ Red Mirage ’ misinformation , seeking to convince people that all Joe Biden would need for victory is more time , extending well beyond Election Day .
At the same time , we fully anticipate that Democrats will be in court arguing to extend deadlines for accepting and counting votes mailed and received well past deadlines enacted by individual state laws .
Americans should remember that Biden has assembled a massive team of lawyers who will try to loosen election integrity so @ @ @ @ @ @ @ also recall that Hillary Clinton advised Biden not to concede defeat ‘ under any circumstances.
’ The last gasp of the Biden campaign will be ugly and it will be ruthless .
What actually has happened is that Democrats fielded a candidate in Joe Biden who excites virtually no one , and his potential voters are not motivated to go to the polls in person .
Democrats also made the mistake of spending months frightening their supporters away from voting in person because of the coronavirus , and now they ’ ve realized @ @ @ @ @ @ @ be enough .
Biden ’ s campaign also committed the political sin of failing to build a ground game or field operation and now they are paying the price with their inability to turn out supporters .
Biden knows that the votes he already has in the bank through early voting are from supporters they already had , so he has cannibalized his own Election Day turnout .
Because of this Biden predicament , we are on guard for Democrats to attempt to subvert state deadlines for receiving and counting ballots and we @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to the law .
President Trump wants every eligible voter to be able to vote , vote once , and have it counted .

Across America, stores in urban areas are being boarded up in anticipation of rioting following tomorrow’s election. It isn’t disappointed Trump voters store owners are worried about. They are taking precautions because they think President Trump may win.
Democratic leaders, meanwhile, are increasingly nervous. Turnout in heavily Democratic areas of several states has been unexpectedly light. No one is enthusiastic about Joe Biden, while Trump is drawing unprecedented crowds and generating lots of excitement. It seems that in response, the Democrats are formulating a strategy to excuse their defeat and to try to seize power. This morning, Trump’s deputy campaign manager Justin Clark sent out this “Trump campaign statement on Democrat plans to delegitimize Election Day results.”
Democrats are panicking because Joe Biden has not run up a large enough lead in early votes in battleground states and they know that President Trump’s in-person votes on Election Day will make up the difference and propel him to victory. Biden’s political operatives have already been distributing talking points and research to delegitimize Election Day results by coaching surrogates to refer to the President’s Election Day success as a ‘Red Mirage.’ The operatives are advising surrogates and media to create a smoke screen by casting blame all around – imagining postal delays or falsely claiming that mail-in ballots that have simply not been returned should be considered legitimate votes that need to be counted. None of this will be true, but it will be held up as proof that President Trump’s victory is a so-called ‘Red Mirage.’ No one should fall for it.
We are aware that Democrats have already cut television ads they are prepared to deploy to further cement the ‘Red Mirage’ misinformation, seeking to convince people that all Joe Biden would need for victory is more time, extending well beyond Election Day. At the same time, we fully anticipate that Democrats will be in court arguing to extend deadlines for accepting and counting votes mailed and received well past deadlines enacted by individual state laws. Americans should remember that Biden has assembled a massive team of lawyers who will try to loosen election integrity so they can steal this election, and also recall that Hillary Clinton advised Biden not to concede defeat ‘under any circumstances.’ The last gasp of the Biden campaign will be ugly and it will be ruthless.
What actually has happened is that Democrats fielded a candidate in Joe Biden who excites virtually no one, and his potential voters are not motivated to go to the polls in person. Democrats also made the mistake of spending months frightening their supporters away from voting in person because of the coronavirus, and now they’ve realized that their early vote lead will not be enough. Biden’s campaign also committed the political sin of failing to build a ground game or field operation and now they are paying the price with their inability to turn out supporters. Biden knows that the votes he already has in the bank through early voting are from supporters they already had, so he has cannibalized his own Election Day turnout. Because of this Biden predicament, we are on guard for Democrats to attempt to subvert state deadlines for receiving and counting ballots and we will fight to make sure they adhere to the law. President Trump wants every eligible voter to be able to vote, vote once, and have it counted.


powerlineblog--2020-11-02--Why The Polls May Be Wrong, in One Chart

The handful of “ outlier ” polls , like the Democracy Institute poll out over the weekend that finds Trump tied or ahead in the popular vote , all have one thing in common : they don ’ t rely on traditional polling sample methods such as telephone calls , email or other internet contact .
They are coming up with estimates derived from a number of techniques , mostly proprietary , that may presage the future of opinion surveys if the election results tomorrow diverge sharply from the final estimates of the “ mainstream ” polls .
We will @ @ @ @ @ @ @ sauce ” works .
Why might the standard polls be underestimating the Trump vote , despite the efforts of pollsters to give greater weight and coverage of white working class voters they undercounted last time ?
Roll back the tape to a Cato Institute/YouGov survey last summer that found 62 % of Americans say they are now afraid to share their political views .
This in particular jumps out : “ Majorities of Democrats ( 52 % ) , independents ( 59 % ) and Republicans ( 77 % ) all agree they @ @ @ @ @ @ @ share.
” Majority of Democrats too ?
Given Trump ’ s crossover appeal , polls might not be missing only Republican voters .
Here ’ s the chart that shows how that 62 % overall number understates how polls might not be capturing the voting choices of many people : Given these startling figures—the result of the unrelenting censoriousness of the media , Hollywood , academia , etc—ask yourself whether you ’ d tell a stranger on the phone or in an email how you ’ re going to vote .
There are @ @ @ @ @ @ @ break off and await the vote tomorrow with this sendoff :

The handful of “outlier” polls, like the Democracy Institute poll out over the weekend that finds Trump tied or ahead in the popular vote, all have one thing in common: they don’t rely on traditional polling sample methods such as telephone calls, email or other internet contact. They are coming up with estimates derived from a number of techniques, mostly proprietary, that may presage the future of opinion surveys if the election results tomorrow diverge sharply from the final estimates of the “mainstream” polls. We will find out tomorrow if their “secret sauce” works.
Why might the standard polls be underestimating the Trump vote, despite the efforts of pollsters to give greater weight and coverage of white working class voters they undercounted last time? Roll back the tape to a Cato Institute/YouGov survey last summer that found 62% of Americans say they are now afraid to share their political views. This in particular jumps out: “Majorities of Democrats (52%), independents (59%) and Republicans (77%) all agree they have political opinions they are afraid to share.” Majority of Democrats too? Given Trump’s crossover appeal, polls might not be missing only Republican voters.
Here’s the chart that shows how that 62% overall number understates how polls might not be capturing the voting choices of many people:
Given these startling figures—the result of the unrelenting censoriousness of the media, Hollywood, academia, etc—ask yourself whether you’d tell a stranger on the phone or in an email how you’re going to vote.
There are other reasons, but I’ll break off and await the vote tomorrow with this sendoff:


powerlineblog--2020-11-03--Trump establishes 1776 Commission

Trump establishes 1776 Commission

This afternoon , President Trump signed an “ Executive Order Establishing the President ’ s Advisory 1776 Commission.
” The order marks an important step in Trump ’ s efforts to foster patriotic education .
Stanley Kurtz says of the Order : The text is longer and more substantive than typical presidential EOs .
It offers sharp criticisms of current educational trends , a definition and explanation of patriotic education , as well as a vision for how to realize it .
Following Trump ’ s remarks at the White House Conference on American History , the president was criticized @ @ @ @ @ @ @ favoring a simplistic view of patriotism and for trying to force a curriculum on schools in violation of local control .
This EO refutes both criticisms .
Trump ’ s EO does offer strong criticisms of “ polemics grounded in poor scholarship ” that vilify “ our Founders and our founding.
” The president evidently has Howard Zinn and the 1619 Project in mind .
“ Despite the virtues and accomplishments of this Nation , many students are now taught in school to hate their own country , and to believe that the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ not heroes , but rather villains , ” the EO continues .
The order rakes this approach over the coals for a time , then says , “ Failing to identify , challenge , and correct this distorted perspective could fray and ultimately erase the bonds that knit our country and culture together.
” Race , of course , is the jumping off for leftists who want America ’ s students to hold negative views about America .
The Executive Order seeks to counter this mode of indoctrination : [ T ] he @ @ @ @ @ @ @ : “ our country ’ s valiant and successful effort to shake off the curse of slavery and to use the lessons of that struggle to guide our work toward equal rights for all citizens in the present.
” .
.
.
Trump ’ s EO .
.
.emphasizes our shared striving : “ Viewing America as an irredeemably and systemically racist country can not account for the extraordinary role of the great heroes of the American movement against slavery and for civil rights — a great moral endeavor that , from Abraham @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , was marked by religious fellowship , good will , generosity of heart , and emphasis on our shared principles , and an inclusive vision for the future.
” The EO ’ s focus , though , is on America ’ s true founding : Throughout , Trump ’ s EO emphasizes the principles of America ’ s founding as the key to our history — above all God-given natural rights .
The EO warns : “ Without our common faith in the equal right of every individual American to life , liberty @ @ @ @ @ @ @ authoritarian visions of government and society could become increasingly alluring alternatives to self-government based on the consent of the people.
” The rise of an anti-free-speech American radicalism on campus and beyond makes this principled warning all too timely .
“ Thus , ” the EO continues , “ it is necessary to provide America ’ s young people access to what is genuinely inspiring and unifying in our history , as well as to the lessons imparted by the American experience of overcoming great national challenges.
” An “ informed and honest @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , ” this part of the EO concludes .
Trump ’ s EO empowers the 1776 Commission to produce and publicly disseminate a report within a year .
That report shall discuss “ the core principles of the American founding and how these principles may be understood to further enjoyment of ‘ the blessings of liberty ’ and to promote our striving ‘ to form a more perfect union.
” In other words , says Kurtz , “ the 1776 Commission , likely to be populated by some of America ’ s finest @ @ @ @ @ @ @ report on the meaning of the Founding , on how American history can be understood as a struggle to realize our founding principles , and on how best to teach all this to the rising generation.
” But President Trump ’ s order doesn ’ t entail imposing his vision of patriotic education on the nation .
Instead , he calls on local communities to reassert control over the curriculum .
Isn ’ t it great to have a president who views America with pride , who is willing , unabashedly , to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ contest the views of radicals seeking to enlist an all-too-complicit education establishment in tearing America down ?
If Joe Biden wins the election , we won ’ t have such a president .
What will happen to the 1776 Commission if Biden wins ?
Would he abolish it ?
That would take nerve .
I think it ’ s more likely that Biden would place left-wing historians on the commission .
They would either control the commission and issue a very different kind of report or else throw the commission into a deadlock @ @ @ @ @ @ @ This is another reason why President Trump deserves the support of conservatives , moderates , and old-fashioned , patriotic liberals .

This afternoon, President Trump signed an “Executive Order Establishing the President’s Advisory 1776 Commission.” The order marks an important step in Trump’s efforts to foster patriotic education.
Stanley Kurtz says of the Order:
The text is longer and more substantive than typical presidential EOs. It offers sharp criticisms of current educational trends, a definition and explanation of patriotic education, as well as a vision for how to realize it. Following Trump’s remarks at the White House Conference on American History, the president was criticized by some on the left both for favoring a simplistic view of patriotism and for trying to force a curriculum on schools in violation of local control. This EO refutes both criticisms. Trump’s EO does offer strong criticisms of “polemics grounded in poor scholarship” that vilify “our Founders and our founding.” The president evidently has Howard Zinn and the 1619 Project in mind. “Despite the virtues and accomplishments of this Nation, many students are now taught in school to hate their own country, and to believe that the men and women who built it were not heroes, but rather villains,” the EO continues. The order rakes this approach over the coals for a time, then says, “Failing to identify, challenge, and correct this distorted perspective could fray and ultimately erase the bonds that knit our country and culture together.”
Race, of course, is the jumping off for leftists who want America’s students to hold negative views about America. The Executive Order seeks to counter this mode of indoctrination:
[T]he EO highlights a legacy too often ignored: “our country’s valiant and successful effort to shake off the curse of slavery and to use the lessons of that struggle to guide our work toward equal rights for all citizens in the present.”. . . Trump’s EO. . .emphasizes our shared striving: “Viewing America as an irredeemably and systemically racist country cannot account for the extraordinary role of the great heroes of the American movement against slavery and for civil rights — a great moral endeavor that, from Abraham Lincoln to Martin Luther King, Jr., was marked by religious fellowship, good will, generosity of heart, and emphasis on our shared principles, and an inclusive vision for the future.”
The EO’s focus, though, is on America’s true founding:
Throughout, Trump’s EO emphasizes the principles of America’s founding as the key to our history — above all God-given natural rights. The EO warns: “Without our common faith in the equal right of every individual American to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness, authoritarian visions of government and society could become increasingly alluring alternatives to self-government based on the consent of the people.” The rise of an anti-free-speech American radicalism on campus and beyond makes this principled warning all too timely. “Thus,” the EO continues, “it is necessary to provide America’s young people access to what is genuinely inspiring and unifying in our history, as well as to the lessons imparted by the American experience of overcoming great national challenges.” An “informed and honest patriotism is essential for a successful republic,” this part of the EO concludes.
Trump’s EO empowers the 1776 Commission to produce and publicly disseminate a report within a year. That report shall discuss “the core principles of the American founding and how these principles may be understood to further enjoyment of ‘the blessings of liberty’ and to promote our striving ‘to form a more perfect union.” In other words, says Kurtz, “the 1776 Commission, likely to be populated by some of America’s finest historians and scholars, will produce a report on the meaning of the Founding, on how American history can be understood as a struggle to realize our founding principles, and on how best to teach all this to the rising generation.”
But President Trump’s order doesn’t entail imposing his vision of patriotic education on the nation. Instead, he calls on local communities to reassert control over the curriculum.
Isn’t it great to have a president who views America with pride, who is willing, unabashedly, to defend our founding, and who will contest the views of radicals seeking to enlist an all-too-complicit education establishment in tearing America down? If Joe Biden wins the election, we won’t have such a president.
What will happen to the 1776 Commission if Biden wins? Would he abolish it? That would take nerve.
I think it’s more likely that Biden would place left-wing historians on the commission. They would either control the commission and issue a very different kind of report or else throw the commission into a deadlock from which no report would emerge.
This is another reason why President Trump deserves the support of conservatives, moderates, and old-fashioned, patriotic liberals.


powerlineblog--2020-11-03--Terrorist attack in Vienna

Terrorist attack in Vienna

CNN reports that gunmen with automatic weapons opened fire at six locations in central Vienna this evening .
They killed at least one person ( now at least two ) and injured 15 .
One of the gunmen has been shot dead by the police , but others remain at large .
When I was in Vienna last year , I spent an enjoyable hour or two with one of our readers .
He sends me this report .
You ’ ve heard by now the bad news from here .
The shootings took place not too far from where @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Schottentor , the shootings were not far from Schottenring , “ around the bend ” from where you were , so to speak .
At any rate in the first district , near the Canal . )
To me the only surprise is that we lasted as long as we did without an attack like this .
As I write here on my balcony , a helicopter is circling nearby .
Sirens are almost constant , almost five hours after it began .
Clearly they do not have all suspects accounted for , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ over here near me every once in a while .
A police cruiser just went down our street below me with lights , no siren , while the helicopter was at one of its nearest points .
I saw the beginnings of the police response while picking up food at 8pm nearby .
They were racing down our district ’ s ( Landstrasse ) biggest street .
Even an unmarked , which is a rare site here .
At that point I thought nothing of it .
In addition to the police ’ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ that the Jagdkommando , the military elite special operations unit , is standing by .
Regular soldiers have also been assigned some normal police duties such as guarding embassies , in order to free up the police officers this evening .
We ’ re wondering if [ my daughter ] will have school tomorrow .
Meanwhile we ’ ve just entered our second COVID lockdown , as of 48 minutes ago .
In the last week we ’ ve had the following : * A church in Vienna was stormed by 20 to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ scene by kicking the pews and yelling , you guessed it , Allahu Akbar .
* An Afghan made a scene at St Stephen ’ s Cathedral and was arrested .
* A nun riding on public transportation in Graz was suddenly hit in the head by a young man who then jumped out and ran off .
The perpetrator , an Afghan , was eventually arrested .
And now tonight .
All this after a few weeks of news from France , plus the aggressive reaction of Muslim leaders like Erdogan .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ near Vienna ’ s main synagogue , Seitenstettengasse Temple .
When we visited this temple , there were two or three armed and formidable looking police officers standing guard outside .
( There was also good security at the main Jewish museum in Vienna , not far from the Hofburg Palace . )
However , this attack apparently was directed at people walking the streets and sitting in cafes near the synagogue , not against the synagogue and worshipers .
I ’ ll try to keep track of this developing , and all-too-familiar @ @ @ @

CNN reports that gunmen with automatic weapons opened fire at six locations in central Vienna this evening. They killed at least one person (now at least two) and injured 15. One of the gunmen has been shot dead by the police, but others remain at large.
When I was in Vienna last year, I spent an enjoyable hour or two with one of our readers. He sends me this report.
You’ve heard by now the bad news from here. The shootings took place not too far from where you stayed. (You stayed near Schottentor, the shootings were not far from Schottenring, “around the bend” from where you were, so to speak. At any rate in the first district, near the Canal.)
To me the only surprise is that we lasted as long as we did without an attack like this.
As I write here on my balcony, a helicopter is circling nearby. Sirens are almost constant, almost five hours after it began. Clearly they do not have all suspects accounted for, and it feels like the search comes over here near me every once in a while. A police cruiser just went down our street below me with lights, no siren, while the helicopter was at one of its nearest points.
I saw the beginnings of the police response while picking up food at 8pm nearby. They were racing down our district’s (Landstrasse) biggest street. Even an unmarked, which is a rare site here. At that point I thought nothing of it.
In addition to the police’s elite units, there are reports that the Jagdkommando, the military elite special operations unit, is standing by. Regular soldiers have also been assigned some normal police duties such as guarding embassies, in order to free up the police officers this evening.
We’re wondering if [my daughter] will have school tomorrow.
Meanwhile we’ve just entered our second COVID lockdown, as of 48 minutes ago.
In the last week we’ve had the following:
* A church in Vienna was stormed by 20 to 30 “youths” who made a scene by kicking the pews and yelling, you guessed it, Allahu Akbar.
* An Afghan made a scene at St Stephen’s Cathedral and was arrested.
* A nun riding on public transportation in Graz was suddenly hit in the head by a young man who then jumped out and ran off. The perpetrator, an Afghan, was eventually arrested.
And now tonight. All this after a few weeks of news from France, plus the aggressive reaction of Muslim leaders like Erdogan.
According to CNN, the attacks began near Vienna’s main synagogue, Seitenstettengasse Temple. When we visited this temple, there were two or three armed and formidable looking police officers standing guard outside. (There was also good security at the main Jewish museum in Vienna, not far from the Hofburg Palace.) However, this attack apparently was directed at people walking the streets and sitting in cafes near the synagogue, not against the synagogue and worshipers.
I’ll try to keep track of this developing, and all-too-familiar, tragic story.


powerlineblog--2020-11-05--Coronavirus in one state (122)

Coronavirus in one state (122)

To maintain I am keeping at this series despite the low level of interest in the immediate aftermath of the election .
The political impact of the epidemic is visible in our election results .
To take one prominent example , Republicans picked up a congressional seat in the Seventh District , where Michelle Fischbach knocked off Democrat Agriculture Committee Chairman Collin Peterson after his 15 terms in Congress .
The Seventh District includes western Minnesota in the huge area that borders the Dakotas excepting only the southwestern corner of the state .
It ’ s a big rural district @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the ongoing partisan realignment — he has survived a few previous close calls — but resentment of one-man rule runs high in rural Minnesota .
This time around , Peterson attracted only 40 percent of the vote .
Fischbach crushed him .
Republican First District Rep. Jim Hagedorn has been a subject of controversy in the Minnesota media , yet he appears to have held on seat in his second go-round with Democrat Dan Feehan .
The First District is the one formerly held by Tim Walz before he left it to run @ @ @ @ @ @ @ votes the first time around in 2018 .
This time around he has widened the margin to 11,000 votes .
( The New York Times shows 92 percent of the vote counted .
Other outlets show 100 percent .
The AP has not yet called the race . )
Republicans also appear to have held their narrow majority in the state senate and picked up as many as six seats in the state house , although still short of the majority necessary to end the era of one-man rule .
Ongoing partisan realignment @ @ @ @ @ @ @ seen in these results as well , just not quite enough to end it .
Walz has to be comforted by the DFL ’ s utter domination of Minnesota in the statewide results .
The Twin Cities metropolitan area is now his reliable base of support .
It ’ s going to take more than riot , ruin , and and misrule to turn us away from the Democrats .
The authorities attributed 30 new deaths to the COVID-19 epidemic yesterday .
Twenty-six of the 30 decedents were in their 80 ’ s @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the thirty decedents were residents of long-term care facilities and one of a congregate care setting .
Yet not a single question at yesterday ’ s press briefing ( poor quality audio below ) addressed the long-term care setting .
Hospitalizations are up .
Although the reporters are working overtime to sow panic on this score , Commissioner Malcolm projected calm .
She ’ s saving the panic for the growth in new cases ( i.e.
, positive tests ) .
It appears that the disease is spreading as a result of transmission @ @ @ @

In order to maintain continuity I am keeping at this series despite my own low level of interest in the immediate aftermath of the election. The political impact of the epidemic is visible in our election results. To take one prominent example, Republicans picked up a congressional seat in the Seventh District, where Michelle Fischbach knocked off incumbent Democrat Agriculture Committee Chairman Collin Peterson after his 15 terms in Congress.
The Seventh District includes western Minnesota in the huge area that borders the Dakotas excepting only the southwestern corner of the state. It’s a big rural district. Peterson’s defeat mostly reflects the the ongoing partisan realignment — he has survived a few previous close calls — but resentment of one-man rule runs high in rural Minnesota. This time around, Peterson attracted only 40 percent of the vote. Fischbach crushed him.
Republican First District Rep. Jim Hagedorn has been a subject of controversy in the Minnesota media, yet he appears to have held on seat in his second go-round with Democrat Dan Feehan. The First District is the one formerly held by Tim Walz before he left it to run for governor. Hagedorn won by 1,500 votes the first time around in 2018. This time around he has widened the margin to 11,000 votes. (The New York Times shows 92 percent of the vote counted. Other outlets show 100 percent. The AP has not yet called the race.)
Republicans also appear to have held their narrow majority in the state senate and picked up as many as six seats in the state house, although still short of the majority necessary to end the era of one-man rule. Ongoing partisan realignment and resentment of one-man rule can be seen in these results as well, just not quite enough to end it.
Walz has to be comforted by the DFL’s utter domination of Minnesota in the statewide results. The Twin Cities metropolitan area is now his reliable base of support. It’s going to take more than riot, ruin, and and misrule to turn us away from the Democrats.
The authorities attributed 30 new deaths to the COVID-19 epidemic yesterday. Twenty-six of the 30 decedents were in their 80’s and 90’s. Nineteen of the thirty decedents were residents of long-term care facilities and one of a congregate care setting. Yet not a single question at yesterday’s press briefing (poor quality audio below) addressed the long-term care setting.
Hospitalizations are up. Although the reporters are working overtime to sow panic on this score, Commissioner Malcolm projected calm. She’s saving the panic for the growth in new cases (i.e., positive tests). It appears that the disease is spreading as a result of transmission by the asymptomatic.


Dude—Where’s My Landslide?

Let ’ s remember what Democrats and the media ( but I repeat myself ) expected : Heh .
This is one reason why if we could measure GNH ( Gross National Happiness ) among left and right just now , we ’ d find conservatives are pretty happy .
As of this moment , the final results are almost a no-lose election for conservatives .
If Biden hangs on to win ( still not certain this will happen ) , Democrats will have elected a lame duck .
With the GOP keeping the Senate and improving in the House @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ahead , and as I always point out , gridlock is the next best thing to constitutional government .
Kiss goodbye court packing , ending the filibuster , the Green New Deal , big income tax hikes , a massive blue state bail out ( though I suspect McConnell will give them something ) , and statehood for DC and Puerto Rico .
Then look ahead to the midterms in 2022 , when the GOP can realistically hope to retake the House .
Realignments are generally built around concrete ideas and specific policy @ @ @ @ @ @ @ a referendum on Trump , rather than an affirmative endorsement of Biden and his agenda .
That dynamic already cut against Biden claiming a strong positive mandate .
He needed a crushing rejection of Trump to strengthen his case .
.
.
But Democrats may fail to realize widespread predictions of re-taking the chamber .
That would mean whoever prevails in the presidential race , Mitch McConnell might remain in charge of the upper chamber , retaining his role as arguably the most consequential politician in Washington .
In that case Biden would @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to come into office without control of Congress , another dynamic that would weaken claims of a mandate .
.
.
[ T ] his is not the scenario many Democrats hoped and prepared for .
They wanted a landslide that ended before midnight on Election Day , one that unambiguously crushed Trump and Trumpism , swept in a Democratic Senate , and showed a large majority for the Biden agenda .
Needless to say , the left is not taking this well .
And Nancy may be in trouble in the House @ @ @ @ @ @ @ dispiriting showing at the polls Tuesday , two moderate House Democrats say they and other centrists are privately discussing a plan that was unthinkable just 24 hours earlier : throwing their support behind a challenger to Speaker Nancy Pelosi ( D-Calif. ) .
The two Democrats told The Hill on Wednesday that they were reaching out to their colleagues about backing one of Pelosi ’ s top lieutenants , House Democratic Caucus Chairman Hakeem Jeffries ( N.Y. ) , for Speaker in the next Congress .
Never mind the “ moderates.
” What @ @ @ @ @ @ @

Let’s remember what Democrats and the media (but I repeat myself) expected:
Heh. This is one reason why if we could measure GNH (Gross National Happiness) among left and right just now, we’d find conservatives are pretty happy. As of this moment, the final results are almost a no-lose election for conservatives. If Biden hangs on to win (still not certain this will happen), Democrats will have elected a lame duck. With the GOP keeping the Senate and improving in the House, we have four years of gridlock ahead, and as I always point out, gridlock is the next best thing to constitutional government. Kiss goodbye court packing, ending the filibuster, the Green New Deal, big income tax hikes, a massive blue state bail out (though I suspect McConnell will give them something), and statehood for DC and Puerto Rico. Then look ahead to the midterms in 2022, when the GOP can realistically hope to retake the House.
Realignments are generally built around concrete ideas and specific policy platforms. But this campaign was always a referendum on Trump, rather than an affirmative endorsement of Biden and his agenda. That dynamic already cut against Biden claiming a strong positive mandate. He needed a crushing rejection of Trump to strengthen his case. . . But Democrats may fail to realize widespread predictions of re-taking the chamber. That would mean whoever prevails in the presidential race, Mitch McConnell might remain in charge of the upper chamber, retaining his role as arguably the most consequential politician in Washington. In that case Biden would be the first president in 32 years to come into office without control of Congress, another dynamic that would weaken claims of a mandate. . . [T]his is not the scenario many Democrats hoped and prepared for. They wanted a landslide that ended before midnight on Election Day, one that unambiguously crushed Trump and Trumpism, swept in a Democratic Senate, and showed a large majority for the Biden agenda.
Needless to say, the left is not taking this well.
Nice grammar, Strib.
And Nancy may be in trouble in the House:
Stung by their party’s dispiriting showing at the polls Tuesday, two moderate House Democrats say they and other centrists are privately discussing a plan that was unthinkable just 24 hours earlier: throwing their support behind a challenger to Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.). The two Democrats told The Hill on Wednesday that they were reaching out to their colleagues about backing one of Pelosi’s top lieutenants, House Democratic Caucus Chairman Hakeem Jeffries (N.Y.), for Speaker in the next Congress.
Never mind the “moderates.” What will “The Squad” want?


powerlineblog--2020-11-05--Massive Voter Fraud In Wisconsin?

Massive Voter Fraud In Wisconsin?

News outlets tell us that President Trump underperformed in key midwestern states , compared with 2016 .
But that isn ’ t exactly true .
Take Wisconsin : four years ago , Trump carried the state with 1,405,284 votes .
This year , with 99 % of the vote tabulated , Trump had 1,610,007 votes , more than 200,000 more votes than he received four years ago .
Yet , we are told , he lost the state to the inept Joe Biden .
That seems unlikely .
There were 3,684,726 registered voters in Wisconsin going into Election day .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ 3,240,549 .
That would give Wisconsin a turnout of 88 % .
According to Ballotpedia , no American state in the period 2002-2018 has ever achieved a turnout rate of 80 % or higher .
For purposes of comparison , in 2016 Wisconsin had a 67 percent turnout rate .
If you are credulous , you can believe that 21 % more Wisconsinites voted this year , compared with the red-hot election of four years ago , and 248,000 more Wisconsinites turned out to vote for the charismatic Joe Biden this year than @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
I think those numbers are almost certainly false , the result of ballot manipulation .
The Gateway Pundit has more on this issue .
It says that seven Democratic wards in Milwaukee reported more votes than registered voters , while 90 Milwaukee wards reported turnouts of more than 90 % .
Altogether , the City of Milwaukee reported a “ record turnout of 84 percent.
” That includes , of course , registered voters who have died , moved elsewhere , and so on .
Some of those Biden votes , according @ @ @ @ @ @ @ it links to , showed up suddenly in the middle of the night .
Funny how that happens .
Gateway produces this chart , which I have NOT verified , showing a sudden infusion of Biden votes when no one was watching : I have not had time to delve deeply enough into the Wisconsin numbers to say definitively that voter fraud occurred there on a large scale .
I will say this , however : one of two things is true .
The first is that Wisconsin experienced a voter turnout that @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ever come close to in the modern era , on behalf of the worst candidate nominated in the modern era .
The second is that the Democrats used voter fraud on a massive scale to stake a claim to Wisconsin ’ s electoral votes .

News outlets tell us that President Trump underperformed in key midwestern states, compared with 2016. But that isn’t exactly true. Take Wisconsin: four years ago, Trump carried the state with 1,405,284 votes. This year, with 99% of the vote tabulated, Trump had 1,610,007 votes, more than 200,000 more votes than he received four years ago. Yet, we are told, he lost the state to the inept Joe Biden.
That seems unlikely. There were 3,684,726 registered voters in Wisconsin going into Election day. The total votes recorded in Wisconsin were 3,240,549. That would give Wisconsin a turnout of 88%. [UPDATE: The current vote total is 3,297,420, which would yield a turnout of over 89%. However, Wisconsin permits same-day registration, so the number of such registrations would bring that percentage down somewhat.] According to Ballotpedia, no American state in the period 2002-2018 has ever achieved a turnout rate of 80% or higher. [UPDATE: These are turnout numbers expressed as percentage of eligible voters, not registered voters, so the percentages are not directly comparable.] For purposes of comparison, in 2016 Wisconsin had a 67 percent turnout rate. [UPDATE: Wisconsin tabulates turnout as a percentage of the estimated voting-age population, so these numbers would be lower than the percentages of registered voters.] If you are credulous, you can believe that 21% more Wisconsinites voted this year, compared with the red-hot election of four years ago, and 248,000 more Wisconsinites turned out to vote for the charismatic Joe Biden this year than voted for Hillary Clinton four years ago. I think those numbers are almost certainly false, the result of ballot manipulation.
The Gateway Pundit has more on this issue. It says that seven Democratic wards in Milwaukee reported more votes than registered voters, while 90 Milwaukee wards reported turnouts of more than 90%. Altogether, the City of Milwaukee reported a “record turnout of 84 percent.” That includes, of course, registered voters who have died, moved elsewhere, and so on.
Some of those Biden votes, according to the Gateway Pundit and the sources it links to, showed up suddenly in the middle of the night. Funny how that happens. Gateway produces this chart, which I have NOT verified, showing a sudden infusion of Biden votes when no one was watching:
I have not had time to delve deeply enough into the Wisconsin numbers to say definitively that voter fraud occurred there on a large scale. I will say this, however: one of two things is true. The first is that Wisconsin experienced a voter turnout that neither it nor any other state has ever come close to in the modern era, on behalf of the worst candidate nominated in the modern era. The second is that the Democrats used voter fraud on a massive scale to stake a claim to Wisconsin’s electoral votes.
STEVE adds: Here’s the historical data for Wisconsin turnout—
UPDATE: Several readers have written to say that the comparison in this post is inapt because it contrasts turnout among eligible voters in one data set, to turnout among registered voters in the other. When I have time later in the day I will figure out whether this is correct and, if appropriate, adjust the numbers. However, any such adjustment will not alter the basic point: given that President Trump received more than 200,000 more votes in 2020 than in 2016, Joe Biden’s alleged victory implies an implausible level of turnout (not to mention a level of enthusiasm for Biden that was apparent nowhere on the ground), some of which came from plainly inaccurate vote totals in Milwaukee.
FURTHER UPDATE: A reader writes:
If you pull up “Presidential General Election Turnout 2012-2016 County and Municipality.xlsx” what you find is that Wisconsin uses estimated voting age population (rather than registered voters) for its turnout denominator. In 2012, there were 3,080,628 votes out of 4,378,741 estimated age appropriate voters, for a 70.35% turnout. 2016 dropped to around 2,965,685 votes, with a higher 4,463,565 estimated age population, for 66.44% turnout. The “Voter Turnout Partisan-NonPartisan Through August 2020.xlsx” suggests that there are now 4,536,417 estimated age population voters. … Published reports show 1,630,542 votes for Biden, 1,610,007 for Trump, and third party candidates having 38,414, 5,253 and 5,205. That’s a total of 3,289,421. That voter turnout, using the same benchmarks, would be 72.5%.
The updated vote number cited above, 3,297,420, yields a turnout percentage (based on voting-age adults, not registered voters) of 73%. Milwaukee County reports a turnout of 84% of registered voters (Wisconsin confuses matters by going back and forth between turnout numbers using registered voters and using voting age adults). That number, updated this afternoon, presumably includes same-day registrants.
No doubt we will learn more about ballot integrity in Milwaukee and other states in the weeks to come, including, one hopes, an explanation of the apparent midnight dump of 100% Biden votes that occurred in several states, including Wisconsin.


powerlineblog--2020-11-05--Investigate the Bidens.  Then, investigate them some more.

It looks like Joe Biden will be our the next president , but that Republicans will hold the Senate .
If so , Senate Republicans will have the power to investigate ( but probably not to stop most of Biden ’ s judicial nominees from being confirmed because Sens .
Collins and Murkowski will vote to confirm nearly all of them ; Mitch McConnell can gum up the works , though ) .
Senate Republicans should use their investigative power to examine the Biden family ’ s financial dealings with China , Ukraine , and maybe other foreign nations .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
He appears to have been the front man for his father .
Recall that email ( or was it a text ) from Hunter saying that “ his chairman ” didn ’ t like a particular deal with China .
That Hunter ’ s “ chairman ” was Joe is confirmed in another message .
It ’ s important to know whether Joe Biden enriched himself through his family ’ s dealings with China , our main adversary in the world .
There is substantial evidence that he did , or tried @ @ @ @ @ @ @ be doing its duty if it failed to probe this serious matter .
In a separate matter , there are reports that the FBI is investigating Hunter Biden in connection with money laundering .
If so , this puts Joe in a difficult position .
Surely , his Attorney General won ’ t be dumb enough to appoint a special council to take over the FBI ’ s investigation .
But will he or she kill the investigation ?
If so , the Senate should investigate that decision .
If not , the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ as part of its oversight duty .
If the DOJ resists that oversight , the Senate should investigate the resistance .

It looks like Joe Biden will be our the next president, but that Republicans will hold the Senate. If so, Senate Republicans will have the power to investigate (but probably not to stop most of Biden’s judicial nominees from being confirmed because Sens. Collins and Murkowski will vote to confirm nearly all of them; Mitch McConnell can gum up the works, though).
Senate Republicans should use their investigative power to examine the Biden family’s financial dealings with China, Ukraine, and maybe other foreign nations. It’s not about Hunter Biden. He appears to have been the front man for his father. Recall that email (or was it a text) from Hunter saying that “his chairman” didn’t like a particular deal with China. That Hunter’s “chairman” was Joe is confirmed in another message.
It’s important to know whether Joe Biden enriched himself through his family’s dealings with China, our main adversary in the world. There is substantial evidence that he did, or tried to. The Senate wouldn’t be doing its duty if it failed to probe this serious matter.
In a separate matter, there are reports that the FBI is investigating Hunter Biden in connection with money laundering. If so, this puts Joe in a difficult position. Surely, his Attorney General won’t be dumb enough to appoint a special counsel to take over the FBI’s investigation. But will he or she kill the investigation?
If so, the Senate should investigate that decision. If not, the Senate should keep tabs on the investigation as part of its oversight duty. If the DOJ resists that oversight, the Senate should investigate the resistance.


powerlineblog--2020-11-04--How did Trump perform in key jurisdictions compared to other Repubs?

How does President Trump ’ s vote compare with Republican Senate candidates in the key states ?
Here is the breakdown ( numbers from Politico except where otherwise indicated ) : In Georgia , Sen. Perdue is winning 50.6 percent of the vote compared to 50.2. percent for Trump .
Perdue is at +3.5 , Trump at +1.6 .
In North Carolina , Sen. Tillis is winning 48.7 percent compared to 50.1 for Trump .
But Tillis is at +1.8 , Trump at +1.4 .
In Michigan , John James has 49.2 percent and is currently at +0.2 .
Trump @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
In Minnesota , Jason Lewis has 43.5 percent of the vote and trails the incumbent Senator by 5.3 points .
Trump has 45.4 percent and trails Biden by 7.2 points .
Trump lost Maine , though he did pick up 1 electoral vote .
Susan Collins carried the state .
Trump is faring better than Martha McSally in Arizona .
McSally is at 47.4 percent , 5.2 points down .
Trump is at 47.6 and trails by 3.4 .
McSally , though , is a weak candidate , as she demonstrated in @ @ @ @ @ @ @ slightly .
He won by 53.2 to 45.0 .
She won 51.8 to 45.2 .
Trump clearly outperformed the Republican Senate candidates in Kansas and Montana .
But these are very red states and neither Senate race was close .
Then there ’ s Nebraska ’ s second congressional district on which the outcome of the election conceivably could turn .
Republican Donald Bacon won it pretty comfortably , 50.9 to 46.2 .
Trump lost it , reportedly by about 6 points .

How does President Trump’s vote compare with Republican Senate candidates in the key states? Here is the breakdown (numbers from Politico except where otherwise indicated):
In Georgia, Sen. Perdue is winning 50.6 percent of the vote compared to 50.2. percent for Trump. Perdue is at +3.5, Trump at +1.6.
In North Carolina, Sen. Tillis is winning 48.7 percent compared to 50.1 for Trump. But Tillis is at +1.8, Trump at +1.4.
In Michigan, John James has 49.2 percent and is currently at +0.2. Trump has 48.6 percent and is at -1.3.
In Minnesota, Jason Lewis has 43.5 percent of the vote and trails the incumbent Senator by 5.3 points. Trump has 45.4 percent and trails Biden by 7.2 points.
Trump lost Maine, though he did pick up 1 electoral vote. Susan Collins carried the state.
Trump is faring better than Martha McSally in Arizona. McSally is at 47.4 percent, 5.2 points down. Trump is at 47.6 and trails by 3.4. McSally, though, is a weak candidate, as she demonstrated in 2018.
Trump also outperformed Joni Ernst slightly. He won by 53.2 to 45.0. She won 51.8 to 45.2.
Trump clearly outperformed the Republican Senate candidates in Kansas and Montana. But these are very red states and neither Senate race was close.
Then there’s Nebraska’s second congressional district on which the outcome of the election conceivably could turn. Republican Donald Bacon won it pretty comfortably, 50.9 to 46.2. Trump lost it, reportedly by about 6 points.


powerlineblog--2020-11-06--Looking on the Bright Side

Looking on the Bright Side

As we sift through the results of this year ’ s election , there are lots of bright spots–holding the Senate , gaining seats ( potentially a lot of seats ) in the House , holding all state legislative assemblies .
Another bright spot is that President Trump took 93 % of the Republican vote , up from 90 % in 2016 .
This far-left site headlines : “ Lincoln Project ‘ Epically Failed , ’ Say Progressives as Trump Wins Bigger Share of Republican Voters Than in 2016.
” The Lincoln Project–perhaps the most egregiously mis-named group since the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to draw out “ Biden Republicans.
” However : “ When polls during the summer showed that the strategy wasn ’ t working , ” noted the Daily Poster early Wednesday morning , “ galaxy brain Rahm Emanuel defended it to a national televised audience , insisting that 2020 would be ‘ the year of the Biden Republican . '
” *** Sociologist Alex Vitale pointed out Wednesday morning on social media : “ Turns out there were no ‘ Biden Republicans . '
” Heh .
It couldn ’ t happen to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Project , described by Commie Dreams as “ the anti-Trump cash cow for veteran Republican consultants.
” Via InstaPundit .
STEVE adds : Has it occurred to anyone on the left that the Lincoln Project was actually a false flag operation from the beginning , intended to soak up millions of liberal dollars that might have been more productively spent on important races .
Like the Kentucky and South Carolina Senate races .
Nah .
Republicans could never be that devious .
Could they ?

As we sift through the results of this year’s election, there are lots of bright spots–holding the Senate, gaining seats (potentially a lot of seats) in the House, holding all state legislative assemblies. Another bright spot is that President Trump took 93% of the Republican vote, up from 90% in 2016. This far-left site headlines: “Lincoln Project ‘Epically Failed,’ Say Progressives as Trump Wins Bigger Share of Republican Voters Than in 2016.”
The Lincoln Project–perhaps the most egregiously mis-named group since the Lincoln Brigade of the Spanish Civil War–sought to draw out “Biden Republicans.” However:
“When polls during the summer showed that the strategy wasn’t working,” noted the Daily Poster early Wednesday morning, “galaxy brain Rahm Emanuel defended it to a national televised audience, insisting that 2020 would be ‘the year of the Biden Republican.'”
***
Sociologist Alex Vitale pointed out Wednesday morning on social media: “Turns out there were no ‘Biden Republicans.'”
Heh. It couldn’t happen to a more deserving group than the Lincoln Project, described by Commie Dreams as “the anti-Trump cash cow for veteran Republican consultants.” Via InstaPundit.
STEVE adds: Has it occurred to anyone on the left that the Lincoln Project was actually a false flag operation from the beginning, intended to soak up millions of liberal dollars that might have been more productively spent on important races. Like the Kentucky and South Carolina Senate races. Nah. Republicans could never be that devious. Could they?
Anyway, mission accomplished!


powerlineblog--2020-11-05--When the Dem Color Wheel Derails

When the Dem Color Wheel Derails

Just imagine how much angst there was in the New York Times newsroom when they wrote this headline , let alone the copy that followed in the body of the story : Even as urban and suburban areas moved in large numbers toward Democrats , many Hispanic voters in the south abruptly exited the Democratic coalition .
.
.
The Rio Grande Valley shifted decisively toward Mr. Trump , as heavily Hispanic areas along the border with Mexico , including Hidalgo , home to McAllen , delivered enough votes to help cancel the impact of white voters in urban and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ t taking this well at all .
Take Charles Blow , a Times op-ed columnist .
Yesterday he offered his first pass with a Tweet and a demented column : A larger percentage of every racial minority voted for Trump this year than in 2016 .
Among Blacks and Hispanics , this percentage grew among both men and women , although men were more likely to vote for Trump than women .
.
.
This one pushed me back on my heels : the percentage of L.G.B.T .
people voting for Trump doubled @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to 28 percent .
In Georgia the number was 33 percent .
.
.
All of this to me points to the power of the white patriarchy and the coattail it has of those who depend on it or aspire to it .
It reaches across gender and sexual orientation and even race .
Trump ’ s brash , privileged chest trumping and alpha-male dismissiveness and in-your-face rudeness are aspirational to some men and appealing to some women .
Some people who have historically been oppressed will stand with the oppressors , and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Ann Althouse points to a splendid comment on Blow ’ s column on the Times website that has received 1,500 upvotes : “ Could we maybe just accept that identity politics isn ’ t an effective political strategy ?
And could Democrats just stop with it , like now ?
I ’ m a black woman who votes Democratic consistently , not once did I hear a Democratic candidate in this election cycle speak directly to my concerns and needs as a black woman .
.
.
But by all means , continue @ @ @ @ @ @ @ should vote Democrat because I am a black woman .
I understand that representation matters but identity politics as a complete political strategy is infantilizing and condescending and it needs to stop.
” More to come .
.
.

Just imagine how much angst there was in the New York Times newsroom when they wrote this headline, let alone the copy that followed in the body of the story:
Even as urban and suburban areas moved in large numbers toward Democrats, many Hispanic voters in the south abruptly exited the Democratic coalition. . . The Rio Grande Valley shifted decisively toward Mr. Trump, as heavily Hispanic areas along the border with Mexico, including Hidalgo, home to McAllen, delivered enough votes to help cancel the impact of white voters in urban and suburban areas.
The left isn’t taking this well at all. Take Charles Blow, a Times op-ed columnist. Yesterday he offered his first pass with a Tweet and a demented column:
A larger percentage of every racial minority voted for Trump this year than in 2016. Among Blacks and Hispanics, this percentage grew among both men and women, although men were more likely to vote for Trump than women. . . This one pushed me back on my heels: the percentage of L.G.B.T. people voting for Trump doubled from 2016, moving from 14 percent to 28 percent. In Georgia the number was 33 percent. . . All of this to me points to the power of the white patriarchy and the coattail it has of those who depend on it or aspire to it. It reaches across gender and sexual orientation and even race. Trump’s brash, privileged chest trumping and alpha-male dismissiveness and in-your-face rudeness are aspirational to some men and appealing to some women. Some people who have historically been oppressed will stand with the oppressors, and will aspire to power by proximity.
Ann Althouse points to a splendid comment on Blow’s column on the Times website that has received 1,500 upvotes:
“Could we maybe just accept that identity politics isn’t an effective political strategy? And could Democrats just stop with it, like now? I’m a black woman who votes Democratic consistently, not once did I hear a Democratic candidate in this election cycle speak directly to my concerns and needs as a black woman. . . But by all means, continue to patronize and tell me that I should vote Democrat because I am a black woman. I understand that representation matters but identity politics as a complete political strategy is infantilizing and condescending and it needs to stop.”
More to come. . .


powerlineblog--2020-11-05--Dems Form Circular Firing Squad

Dems Form Circular Firing Squad

Most pre-election forecasts were certain that Republicans would lose ground in the House of Representatives , but as of this moment , it is not impossible that Republicans might take the House right now .
They elected a record number of GOP women candidates .
( Incidentally , Republicans did well in state legislative races around the country , and didn ’ t lose control of a single chamber . )
The GOP has gained about 10 House seats so far , and is currently leading in about 20-25 more .
( I ’ m not keeping up with the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ . )
Not all of these leads are expected to hold up , but Speaker Pelosi is going to have a very slim majority come January , and may even face a leadership challenge .
Today Washington Post congressional reporter Erica Werner listened in on a conference call of Democratic House members , and members of the Dem caucus are upset .
Rep. Spanberger of Virginia , who barely held on , is among the less-than-fully-gruntled : There does not seem to be much introspection going on yet among Democrats , though I @ @ @ @ @ @ @ war erupting on the left over identity politics , just as soon as I pop my next barrel of popcorn .
More typical of what Democrats are doing right now is expressed in this Politico headline of a John Harris story : Here is an uncomfortable reality for [ Democrats ] .
.
.
Trump is on track to grow his popular vote total by millions of people , not one of whom could have been under any illusions about what they were voting for .
Unlike 2016 , there is no way @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of democracy , or an illegitimate manipulation of democracy .
His support was a robust expression of democracy .
.
.
More discomfort : This was a bravura political achievement .
.
.
Yeah , but for Democrats blaming the voters is so much more satisfying .

Most pre-election forecasts were certain that Republicans would lose ground in the House of Representatives, but as of this moment, it is not impossible that Republicans might take the House right now. They elected a record number of GOP women candidates. (Incidentally, Republicans did well in state legislative races around the country, and didn’t lose control of a single chamber.)
The GOP has gained about 10 House seats so far, and is currently leading in about 20-25 more. (I’m not keeping up with the moment-by-moment counts in any of these races.) Not all of these leads are expected to hold up, but Speaker Pelosi is going to have a very slim majority come January, and may even face a leadership challenge.
Today Washington Post congressional reporter Erica Werner listened in on a conference call of Democratic House members, and members of the Dem caucus are upset. Rep. Spanberger of Virginia, who barely held on, is among the less-than-fully-gruntled:
But I thought “democracy dies in darkness,” Rep. Huffman?
There does not seem to be much introspection going on yet among Democrats, though I’ll write separately about the civil war erupting on the left over identity politics, just as soon as I pop my next barrel of popcorn. More typical of what Democrats are doing right now is expressed in this Politico headline of a John Harris story:
Here is an uncomfortable reality for [Democrats] . . . Trump is on track to grow his popular vote total by millions of people, not one of whom could have been under any illusions about what they were voting for. Unlike 2016, there is no way to dismiss this as a flukish accident of democracy, or an illegitimate manipulation of democracy. His support was a robust expression of democracy. . . More discomfort: This was a bravura political achievement. . .
Yeah, but for Democrats blaming the voters is so much more satisfying.


powerlineblog--2020-11-05--Why shouldn’t conservatives be enraged by Biden’s win?

Four years ago , liberal heads exploded when Donald Trump was elected president .
At colleges across America , students needed counseling and teddy bears to cope with their grief .
Trump ’ s inauguration sparked protests , some of them violent .
If the election of a nasty , dishonest conservative outsider by slim margins in key states caused grief and rage in 2016 , why shouldn ’ t the election of a nasty , dishonest liberal establishment hack by slim margins in key states , and in a race fraught with the possibility of fraud , cause rage @ @ @ @ @ @ @ this year ?
One big difference from four years ago is that the GOP will probably control the Senate .
The 2016 election left Democrats on the outs in both chambers of Congress .
But the president exercises enormous power even when his party doesn ’ t control the Senate .
He runs foreign policy and can direct important aspects of domestic policy through fiat .
He can populate the executive branch with leftists who will undo the good , conservative work of Trump ’ s appointees and create new left-liberal mischief on @ @ @ @ @ @ @ expect the Senate to obstruct the confirmation of many of these nominees , as the Dems did after 2016 , even though they lacked a Senate majority .
( This will be subject of an upcoming post . )
But eventually , Biden ’ s left-liberals will take control , through recess appointments , if necessary .
And because the permanent bureaucracy is dominated by left-liberals , it ’ s less important for a Democratic president to put his nominees in place than it is for a Republican .
All in all , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ be enraged by Biden ’ s victory .
If we are less angry than the left was four years ago , it ’ s because we ’ re more stable emotionally .
Personally , I ’ m not enraged .
I won ’ t be unless it becomes clear that the election was stolen .
Most of the candidates I ’ ve voted for in presidential elections since I came of age have lost .
Life goes on .
As long as the ground rules don ’ t change , we can always @ @ @ @ @ @ @ The Democrats wanted to change the ground rules ( e.g.
, court packing and ending the filibuster ) , but won ’ t be able to change them [ note , though , that they seem already to have changed them on the crucial matter of election procedures ] .
That ’ s the main significance of Republicans winning the Senate ( assuming they do ) .
Though not enraged by Biden ’ s victory , I ’ m offended by it — offended that this mediocre man will become the president of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ been exactly 100 years since Americans chose anyone even arguably as mediocre as Biden for our highest office .
And at least Warren Harding had a distinguished vice president .
Biden has Kamala Harris .
Nor was Harding in a state of mental decline .
The ascendency of Joe Biden to the presidency is an unmistakable sign of our national decline .
That ’ s cause for sadness , though maybe not intense anger .

Four years ago, liberal heads exploded when Donald Trump was elected president. At colleges across America, students needed counseling and teddy bears to cope with their grief. Trump’s inauguration sparked protests, some of them violent.
If the election of a nasty, dishonest conservative outsider by slim margins in key states caused grief and rage in 2016, why shouldn’t the election of a nasty, dishonest liberal establishment hack by slim margins in key states , and in a race fraught with the possibility of fraud, cause rage among those who voted for President Trump this year?
One big difference from four years ago is that the GOP will probably control the Senate. The 2016 election left Democrats on the outs in both chambers of Congress.
But the president exercises enormous power even when his party doesn’t control the Senate. He runs foreign policy and can direct important aspects of domestic policy through fiat. He can populate the executive branch with leftists who will undo the good, conservative work of Trump’s appointees and create new left-liberal mischief on a large scale.
I hope and expect the Senate to obstruct the confirmation of many of these nominees, as the Dems did after 2016, even though they lacked a Senate majority. (This will be subject of an upcoming post.) But eventually, Biden’s left-liberals will take control, through recess appointments, if necessary. And because the permanent bureaucracy is dominated by left-liberals, it’s less important for a Democratic president to put his nominees in place than it is for a Republican.
All in all, then, conservatives have good reason to be enraged by Biden’s victory. If we are less angry than the left was four years ago, it’s because we’re more stable emotionally.
Personally, I’m not enraged. I won’t be unless it becomes clear that the election was stolen.
Most of the candidates I’ve voted for in presidential elections since I came of age have lost. Life goes on. As long as the ground rules don’t change, we can always look forward to the next election.
The Democrats wanted to change the ground rules (e.g., court packing and ending the filibuster), but won’t be able to change them [note, though, that they seem already to have changed them on the crucial matter of election procedures]. That’s the main significance of Republicans winning the Senate (assuming they do).
Though not enraged by Biden’s victory, I’m offended by it — offended that this mediocre man will become the president of our great country.
It’s been exactly 100 years since Americans chose anyone even arguably as mediocre as Biden for our highest office. And at least Warren Harding had a distinguished vice president. Biden has Kamala Harris. Nor was Harding in a state of mental decline.
The ascendency of Joe Biden to the presidency is an unmistakable sign of our national decline. That’s cause for sadness, though maybe not intense anger.


powerlineblog--2020-11-05--The state of play in Georgia

The state of play in Georgia

Last week , I wrote about what to expect from the election in Georgia .
I based my post largely on the analysis of a Power Line reader from Georgia , an insider with extensive experience observing and participating in Georgia politics .
He alerted me to the prospect of two Senate runoff races in Georgia .
He also predicted that Joe Biden would narrowly carry Georgia , but that Sen. Perdue would ultimately be reelected .
The outcomes in Georgia are up in the air , but my reader-correspondent ’ s calls look pretty good right now .
Today @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Playing out exactly as I feared : Two runoffs likely ( Perdue campaign believes this is the result ) and Biden ekes out GA by 5k votes by my rough math .
We are aware of shenanigans in some Counties and the State Party and Trump Campaign have filed lawsuits .
Early take on runoff : If Biden wins and control of Senate is in the balance , advantage motivated Republicans who are also growing increasingly suspicious of voter fraud .
Anger and fear are strong motivators .
Loeffler ’ s husband owns @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Stock Exchange ) so she will self fund to a large extent , but early estimates are this becomes a $ 750m race , which dilutes her personal spend .
We are about to see something unprecedented .
I should add that , although Perdue looks like coming up short of 50 percent , he will have a plurality of the vote .
The third party candidate whose candidacy will cause the runoff is a libertarian , not a leftist .
In the other race — the “ jungle primary ” — the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of the vote , while the Democrat is at around 33 percent .
Rep. Doug Collins has strongly endorsed Sen. Loeffler .
UPDATE : My reader-correspondent just sent me these additional thoughts : Kelly Loeffler is not a naturally gifted politician , but she has grown a measurable amount since being appointed by Governor Kemp .
Her opponent , Warnock , is the pastor of Ebeneezer , and has natural charisma .
He has managed to stay above much controversy as Collins and Loeffler beat each other up in the primary .
This @ @ @ @ @ @ @ she is probably naturally inclined .
Collins has , to his credit , pledged his full support to Loeffler .
I expect Trump to make multiple visits here in the next two months .
David Perdue , former Fortune 500 CEO , draws a contrast with John Ossoff-a 33 year old documentary film maker .
Perdue is a more gifted communicator than Loeffler and will hold his own against Ossoff .

Last week, I wrote about what to expect from the election in Georgia. I based my post largely on the analysis of a Power Line reader from Georgia, an insider with extensive experience observing and participating in Georgia politics.
He alerted me to the prospect of two Senate runoff races in Georgia. He also predicted that Joe Biden would narrowly carry Georgia, but that Sen. Perdue would ultimately be reelected.
The outcomes in Georgia are up in the air, but my reader-correspondent’s calls look pretty good right now.
Today, he sent me this update:
Playing out exactly as I feared: Two runoffs likely (Perdue campaign believes this is the result) and Biden ekes out GA by 5k votes by my rough math. We are aware of shenanigans in some Counties and the State Party and Trump Campaign have filed lawsuits. Early take on runoff: If Biden wins and control of Senate is in the balance, advantage motivated Republicans who are also growing increasingly suspicious of voter fraud. Anger and fear are strong motivators. Loeffler’s husband owns ICE (owner of the New York Stock Exchange) so she will self fund to a large extent, but early estimates are this becomes a $750m race, which dilutes her personal spend. We are about to see something unprecedented.
I should add that, although Perdue looks like coming up short of 50 percent, he will have a plurality of the vote. The third party candidate whose candidacy will cause the runoff is a libertarian, not a leftist.
In the other race — the “jungle primary” — the two GOP candidates have around 46 percent of the vote, while the Democrat is at around 33 percent. Rep. Doug Collins has strongly endorsed Sen. Loeffler.
UPDATE: My reader-correspondent just sent me these additional thoughts:


powerlineblog--2020-11-06--Trump On the Election

Trump On the Election

Earlier this evening , President Trump addressed the press to talk about the state of this year ’ s election .
He was blunt and uncompromising .
Trump has been fighting for four years , and he isn ’ t going to stop fighting now .
Here is the video : There is a lot there , and I won ’ t try to unpack it all .
Just two comments : First , I might have missed an error of some kind , but as I listened to Trump it seemed to me that everything he said was true @ @ @ @ @ @ @ president that pollsters deliberately reported bad results for most of this campaign cycle .
Because of everything that has come to light in the last four years , I am much more cynical now than I was in 2016 .
Then , I assumed bad polling represented innocent errors .
Now , I think that most pollsters , especially those associated with liberal media organizations like ABC , NBC , CBS , CNN , the Washington Post , the Wall Street Journal and so on , deliberately reported absurd results in order to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ fundraising , and demoralize Republican voters .
Then in the last days before the election , when their goals had been more or less achieved , they released more realistic polls ( albeit still wrong in most cases ) and said Trump is catching up !
I think the whole thing is deliberately engineered BS , and I am glad to hear Trump say it .

Earlier this evening, President Trump addressed the press to talk about the state of this year’s election. He was blunt and uncompromising. Trump has been fighting for four years, and he isn’t going to stop fighting now. Here is the video:
There is a lot there, and I won’t try to unpack it all. Just two comments: First, I might have missed an error of some kind, but as I listened to Trump it seemed to me that everything he said was true.
Second, I agree with the president that pollsters deliberately reported bad results for most of this campaign cycle. Because of everything that has come to light in the last four years, I am much more cynical now than I was in 2016. Then, I assumed bad polling represented innocent errors. Now, I think that most pollsters, especially those associated with liberal media organizations like ABC, NBC, CBS, CNN, the Washington Post, the Wall Street Journal and so on, deliberately reported absurd results in order to encourage Democratic Party fundraising, depress Republican fundraising, and demoralize Republican voters. Then in the last days before the election, when their goals had been more or less achieved, they released more realistic polls (albeit still wrong in most cases) and said Trump is catching up! I think the whole thing is deliberately engineered BS, and I am glad to hear Trump say it.


powerlineblog--2020-11-06--Michigan Software Diverted GOP Votes to Dems

This afternoon , the Republican Party of Michigan held a press conference and alleged that a software “ glitch ” caused thousands of votes for Republican candidates to be counted for Democrats instead : The Republican Party of Michigan held a press conference Friday afternoon and revealed six thousand Republican votes were calculated for Democrats after a software glitch .
That software was used in dozens of counties around the state .
“ In Antrim County , ballots were counted for Democrats that were meant for Republicans , causing a 6000 vote swing against our candidates .
The county clerk @ @ @ @ @ @ @ software glitched and caused a miscalculation of the votes.
’ Since then , we have now discovered that 47 counties used this same software in the same capacity , ” Michigan GOP Chairwoman Laura Cox said .
Apparently 6,000 votes were switched in just one of the 47 counties that used the same software : I have no idea whether the total number of votes that can be shown to be mis-calculated due to this software problem ( assuming the claim is correct ) will be enough to affect the outcome in Michigan @ @ @ @ @ @ @ were many instances of voter fraud in this year ’ s election , as well as seemingly innocent mistakes like this one .
The problem is that there is not enough time for lawyers in the various lawsuits to investigate and prove the magnitude of the many instances of fraud and other irregularities that are known or believed to exist .

This afternoon, the Republican Party of Michigan held a press conference and alleged that a software “glitch” caused thousands of votes for Republican candidates to be counted for Democrats instead:
The Republican Party of Michigan held a press conference Friday afternoon and revealed six thousand Republican votes were calculated for Democrats after a software glitch. That software was used in dozens of counties around the state. “In Antrim County, ballots were counted for Democrats that were meant for Republicans, causing a 6000 vote swing against our candidates. The county clerk came forward and said, ‘tabulating software glitched and caused a miscalculation of the votes.’ Since then, we have now discovered that 47 counties used this same software in the same capacity,” Michigan GOP Chairwoman Laura Cox said.
Apparently 6,000 votes were switched in just one of the 47 counties that used the same software:
Michigan GOP Chair: Dozens of Michigan counties used the same software that caused 6,000 votes in one county to switch from Trump to Biden. "These counties that used this software need to closely examine their result for similar discrepancies." pic.twitter.com/ZK3uUcogNB — Trump War Room – Text TRUMP to 88022 (@TrumpWarRoom) November 6, 2020
I have no idea whether the total number of votes that can be shown to be mis-calculated due to this software problem (assuming the claim is correct) will be enough to affect the outcome in Michigan. There is no doubt that there were many instances of voter fraud in this year’s election, as well as seemingly innocent mistakes like this one. The problem is that there is not enough time for lawyers in the various lawsuits to investigate and prove the magnitude of the many instances of fraud and other irregularities that are known or believed to exist.


Glenn’s New Home

For some years now , Glenn Reynolds has been bringing a weekly dose of sanity to USA Today ’ s editorial page .
But when Glenn wrote a column about the Biden scandals a couple of weeks ago , USA Today refused to run it , consistent with the liberal doctrine that free speech is great , except when it threatens the interests of the Democratic Party .
So Glenn has terminated his relationship with USA Today and has found a new home at the New York Post , a better venue .
His first column for the Post is @ @ @ @ @ @ @ that it can ’ t stand anyone who disagrees.
” This year ’ s presidential election hasn ’ t provided the catharsis that many on the left were awaiting .
Instead of the hoped-for “ Blue Wave , ” we have a still-too-close-to-call presidential election , while Republicans picked up House seats and appear to have held on to the Senate .
One response might be self-criticism : to wonder how , after four years of single-mindedly trying to get rid of Trump and marginalize his followers , things didn ’ t go @ @ @ @ @ @ @ seem to be asking themselves variations on “ How can I live in a country where half the people supported Donald Trump ?
” According to the Campus Reform Web site , professors around America were expressing anger and claiming to feel “ genuinely unsafe , given the sheer number of people willing to vote for Trump.
” Some canceled classes for the rest of the week , apparently because of the emotional strain .
An article in The New Republic by Andrew Cohen asks : “ What do we do with all @ @ @ @ @ @ @ : “ Learn to live with them and respect your differences ” isn ’ t on the agenda . )
As a great man once said , read the whole thing .
And watch for Glenn ’ s columns in the days to come .

For some years now, Glenn Reynolds has been bringing a weekly dose of sanity to USA Today’s editorial page. But when Glenn wrote a column about the Biden scandals a couple of weeks ago, USA Today refused to run it, consistent with the liberal doctrine that free speech is great, except when it threatens the interests of the Democratic Party.
So Glenn has terminated his relationship with USA Today and has found a new home at the New York Post, a better venue. His first column for the Post is headlined “The left is again showing that it can’t stand anyone who disagrees.”
This year’s presidential election hasn’t provided the catharsis that many on the left were awaiting. Instead of the hoped-for “Blue Wave,” we have a still-too-close-to-call presidential election, while Republicans picked up House seats and appear to have held on to the Senate. One response might be self-criticism: to wonder how, after four years of single-mindedly trying to get rid of Trump and marginalize his followers, things didn’t go better. Instead, Democrats’ thinkers seem to be asking themselves variations on “How can I live in a country where half the people supported Donald Trump?” According to the Campus Reform Web site, professors around America were expressing anger and claiming to feel “genuinely unsafe, given the sheer number of people willing to vote for Trump.” Some canceled classes for the rest of the week, apparently because of the emotional strain. An article in The New Republic by Andrew Cohen asks: “What do we do with all these Trump supporters?” (Spoiler: “Learn to live with them and respect your differences” isn’t on the agenda.)
As a great man once said, read the whole thing. And watch for Glenn’s columns in the days to come.


powerlineblog--2020-11-06--On confirming (or not) Biden’s non-judicial nominees

After the 2016 election , Republicans controlled the White House , the Senate , and the House .
In theory , President Trump should have been able to have his nominees confirmed by the Senate fairly promptly .
However , Senate Democrats , despite being in the minority , managed to block the confirmation of key nominees throughout the federal bureaucracy .
For example , my friend Eric Dreiband was blocked from becoming Assistant Attorney , Civil Rights Division until November 2018 .
The same thing happened to Jeff Clark , whom Trump nominated to be Assistant Attorney General , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the nomination of Janet Dhillon as EEOC Chair languished for two years .
But Eric , Jeff , and Dhillon were fortunate compared to the Trump nominees who never even got to the floor for a vote .
For example , Diana Furchtgott-Roth , nominated in September 2017 as Assistant Secretary for Research and Technology at the Department of Transportation , was never confirmed for that position .
Senate Republicans shoulder some of the blame .
For example , Sen. Cory Gardner blocked Trump ’ s DOJ nominees for a while because he @ @ @ @ @ @ @ policy .
This bit of pandering to marijuana interests didn ’ t help Gardner retain his Senate seat , but it held back the confirmation of Eric , Jeff , and several others for some months .
However , the main blame for the snail ’ s pace at which Trump nominees were confirmed lies with the obstructionist tactics of Democrats .
Thus , the obvious question is whether Republicans should return the favor in a Biden administration .
It ’ s clear to me that , at a minimum , Senate Republicans @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to the degree that Democrats obstructed Trump ’ s .
( I discussed judicial nominees in a previous post ) .
There can ’ t be one set of procedures and practices for confirming nominees of Republican presidents and another set for confirming nominees of a Democrat .
The real question is whether , assuming Republicans keep control of the Senate , they should be more obstructionist than the Dems were during the past four years .
I think they should be .
After all , the Democrats were a minority in the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ attention , it ’ s undeniable that , had the Democrats been in the majority , they would have confirmed very few Trump nominees .
On the other hand , it would be unfair and anti-democratic to deny a president the ability to fill top level positions in federal departments and agencies with people from his party .
If the U.S. is heading down that road to dysfunction , let it be the Democrats who take us there .
Accordingly , I believe Republicans should be more obstructionist than the Democrats had the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , but less obstructionist than the Dems would have been had they possessed the power the GOP likely will have now .
What does this mean in practice ?
I think it means that Republicans should completely block radical nominees , e.g .
Elizabeth Warren and Stacy Abramas , assuming they are able to do so .
Less radical nominees should be held up the way so many of Trump ’ s nominees were , but ultimately they should receive a vote .
With a vote , they likely will be confirmed with @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Murkowski , and maybe others .
It might be argued that Senate Republicans should be more inclined to confirm the likes of Warren and Abrams than to confirm non-radicals .
The idea would be that the further left the Biden administration takes the country , the more unpopular it will become .
To me , this is an irresponsible position .
Republicans should never facilitate left-wing governance .
Nor is it clear that Joe Biden ’ s popularity depends on eschewing hard leftism .
I think it depends more on how the economy @ @ @ @ @ @ @ like public health , national security , war and peace ) .
The American economy is capable of a good run even with leftist governance , at least in the short run .
If it has one , Biden or his Democratic successor has a good chance of winning in 2024 .
So my recommendation is that the Senate GOP block radical Biden nominees and slow walk the rest of them .

After the 2016 election, Republicans controlled the White House, the Senate, and the House. In theory, President Trump should have been able to have his nominees confirmed by the Senate fairly promptly. However, Senate Democrats, despite being in the minority, managed to block the confirmation of key nominees throughout the federal bureaucracy.
For example, my friend Eric Dreiband was blocked from becoming Assistant Attorney, Civil Rights Division until November 2018. The same thing happened to Jeff Clark, whom Trump nominated to be Assistant Attorney General, Environment and Natural Resources Division. And the nomination of Janet Dhillon as EEOC Chair languished for two years.
But Eric, Jeff, and Dhillon were fortunate compared to the Trump nominees who never even got to the floor for a vote. For example, Diana Furchtgott-Roth, nominated in September 2017 as Assistant Secretary for Research and Technology at the Department of Transportation, was never confirmed for that position.
Senate Republicans shoulder some of the blame. For example, Sen. Cory Gardner blocked Trump’s DOJ nominees for a while because he was unhappy with Jeff Sessions over marijuana policy. This bit of pandering to marijuana interests didn’t help Gardner retain his Senate seat, but it held back the confirmation of Eric, Jeff, and several others for some months.
However, the main blame for the snail’s pace at which Trump nominees were confirmed lies with the obstructionist tactics of Democrats. Thus, the obvious question is whether Republicans should return the favor in a Biden administration.
It’s clear to me that, at a minimum, Senate Republicans should obstruct Biden’s non-judicial nominees to the degree that Democrats obstructed Trump’s. (I discussed judicial nominees in a previous post). There can’t be one set of procedures and practices for confirming nominees of Republican presidents and another set for confirming nominees of a Democrat.
The real question is whether, assuming Republicans keep control of the Senate, they should be more obstructionist than the Dems were during the past four years.
I think they should be. After all, the Democrats were a minority in the Senate. To anyone who was paying attention, it’s undeniable that, had the Democrats been in the majority, they would have confirmed very few Trump nominees.
On the other hand, it would be unfair and anti-democratic to deny a president the ability to fill top level positions in federal departments and agencies with people from his party. If the U.S. is heading down that road to dysfunction, let it be the Democrats who take us there.
Accordingly, I believe Republicans should be more obstructionist than the Democrats had the power to be during the Trump administration, but less obstructionist than the Dems would have been had they possessed the power the GOP likely will have now.
What does this mean in practice? I think it means that Republicans should completely block radical nominees, e.g. Elizabeth Warren and Stacy Abramas, assuming they are able to do so. Less radical nominees should be held up the way so many of Trump’s nominees were, but ultimately they should receive a vote. With a vote, they likely will be confirmed with the help of Susan Collins, Lisa Murkowski, and maybe others.
It might be argued that Senate Republicans should be more inclined to confirm the likes of Warren and Abrams than to confirm non-radicals. The idea would be that the further left the Biden administration takes the country, the more unpopular it will become.
To me, this is an irresponsible position. Republicans should never facilitate left-wing governance.
Nor is it clear that Joe Biden’s popularity depends on eschewing hard leftism. I think it depends more on how the economy performs and on other material conditions (like public health, national security, war and peace). The American economy is capable of a good run even with leftist governance, at least in the short run. If it has one, Biden or his Democratic successor has a good chance of winning in 2024.
So my recommendation is that the Senate GOP block radical Biden nominees and slow walk the rest of them.


powerlineblog--2020-11-06--Rich Baris versus garbage media

Rich Baris versus garbage media

David Rutz has compiled one of his Washington Free Beacon SUPERcuts videos ( below ) , this one taking a look back at the landslide Biden victory foreseen by the garbage media .
He notes that Republicans have gained House seats and appear poised to maintain their Senate majority , while the presidential election remains in doubt .
Numerous national polls showed Biden with a double-digit lead over President Donald Trump , but they vastly underestimated Trump support .
By contrast , Rich Baris — his site is People ’ s Pundit Daily , his Twitter feed is @ Peoples_Pundit @ @ @ @ @ @ @ or less foresaw what has come to be .
He certainly nailed the garbage of the garbage media ’ s garbage pollsters .
A reader brought Rich to our attention in a mid-October email .
The reader pointed out that Baris “ is a data journalist and professional pollster with a good show on YouTube called Inside the Numbers.
” He added : Baris really understands the mechanics of an election , polling , and forecasting the likely electorate including the idiosyncrasies of each of the battleground states….He is very critical of the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Cohn , but has the in-depth knowledge and experience to talk through the specifics of why their “ models ” are so fraught .
For example , right now he has Trump up almost 2 points in Florida and he has him back 2 points in PA , but with 16 % of voters undecided that lean towards Trump .
Watching Inside the Numbers on YouTube the week before the election , I found Baris ’ s work to be both instructive and entertaining , but he wanders around his findings .
He @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
He speaks at length and requires patience , but I think patience will be rewarded .
He was on fire in his post-election show yesterday ( video below ) .

David Rutz has compiled one of his Washington Free Beacon SUPERcuts videos (below), this one taking a look back at the landslide Biden victory foreseen by the garbage media. He notes that Republicans have gained House seats and appear poised to maintain their Senate majority, while the presidential election remains in doubt. Numerous national polls showed Biden with a double-digit lead over President Donald Trump, but they vastly underestimated Trump support.
By contrast, Rich Baris — his site is People’s Pundit Daily, his Twitter feed is @Peoples_Pundit — conducted his own polls and more or less foresaw what has come to be. He certainly nailed the garbage of the garbage media’s garbage pollsters.
A reader brought Rich to our attention in a mid-October email. The reader pointed out that Baris “is a data journalist and professional pollster with a good show on YouTube called Inside the Numbers.” He added:
Baris really understands the mechanics of an election, polling, and forecasting the likely electorate including the idiosyncrasies of each of the battleground states….He is very critical of the mainstream pollsters like Nate Silver and Nate Cohn, but has the in-depth knowledge and experience to talk through the specifics of why their “models” are so fraught. For example, right now he has Trump up almost 2 points in Florida and he has him back 2 points in PA, but with 16% of voters undecided that lean towards Trump.
Watching Inside the Numbers on YouTube the week before the election, I found Baris’s work to be both instructive and entertaining, but he wanders around his findings. He doesn’t give you the headlines. He speaks at length and requires patience, but I think patience will be rewarded. He was on fire in his post-election show yesterday (video below).