The Unz Review - Mobile
A Collection of Interesting, Important, and Controversial Perspectives Largely Excluded from the American Mainstream Media
 iSteve BlogTeasers
Why Were the Polls Wrong?

Statistics whiz Andrew Gelman considers various theories.

The polls weren’t all that wrong, but just enough in the key states. Trump was running a cheapskate campaign, so he didn’t try to notch better national vote totals by appealing to California, Texas, or New York. In the battleground states where he concentrated his effort, he did strikingly well.

The level of vilification directed toward the Republican candidate by the national media was unprecedented, even more than in 1980 when the results also came as a surprise.

Moreover, the amount of political violence in America over the last twelve months was very high by recent historical standards, with perhaps 95% of it coming from the anti-Trump half of the spectrum (and more of it coming tonight).

I was at a dinner party in one of the more conservative parts of Southern California awhile ago, the San Gabriel Valley suburb of Sierra Madre. One guest went on a long rant about how Trump appealed to stupid people, unlike us here at the table. Another guest tossed in witty asides that the anti-Trump ranter took as support, but when carefully analyzed clearly revealed a subversive pro-Trump stance.

Then I went to another dinner party the next week in liberal Sherman Oaks where the exact same thing happened: a long politically correct rant subtly subverted by another guest’s witty but ambiguous wisecracks.

I had never met the wisecracking guest, a 40-something doctor, before. When the topic of South Korea came up, he mentioned that he had spent some time there due to “an excess of patriotism.” I eventually figured out from his self-deprecating jokes that when he’d graduated from high school in the late Reagan Era, he’d enlisted in the Marines.

My guess is that Donald Trump is President-Elect because enough witty people in the suburbs of Detroit, Milwaukee, Philadelphia, Cleveland, and Miami held their tongues until they got into the privacy of the voting booth.

 
Email This Page to Someone

 Remember My Information



=>
Commenters to Ignore...to FollowEndorsed Only
[]
  1. Another guest tossed in witty asides that the anti-Trump ranter took as support, but when carefully analyzed clearly revealed a subversive pro-Trump stance.

    Then I went to another dinner party the next week in liberal Sherman Oaks where the exact same thing happened: a long politically correct rant subtly subverted by another guest’s witty but ambiguous wisecracks.

    What were the witty remarks that the two guests made?

    Read More
    • Replies: @Jenner Ickham Errican
    I imagine one of the “other guests” dropped this obliquely revealing remark:

    “I, myself, prefer a vintage 2016 Natty Light.”

    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
    AgreeDisagreeLOLTroll
    These buttons register your public Agreement, Disagreement, Troll, or LOL with the selected comment. They are only available to recent, frequent commenters who have saved their Name+Email using the 'Remember My Information' checkbox, and may also only be used once per hour.
    Sharing Comment via Twitter
    http://www.unz.com/isteve/why-were-the-polls-wrong/#comment-1643809
    More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  2. The polls were wrong because no matter the big to-do made about the SCIENCE (dum dum dummm!) behind it, it has be be based on ass-pull assumptions. This time: black people will like Hilary as much as Obama. Why? Well, just because. And during the primaries it was “eh they’ll get tired of Trump real soon now”.

    You’d think that kind of thing would be very susceptible to bias, but that just proves you don’t understand SCIENCE. Now here’s Nate Tin (“Trump won’t win a single primary”) to tell you how the world works.

    Read More
  3. “The polls weren’t all that wrong, but just enough in the key states.”

    I think you’re being too generous here. The polls’ reading of the Rust Belt and the Midwest was simply awful. They were off by 5-6% in Minnesota, Wisconsin, Michigan, Ohio, and Pennsylvania. Nationally the ‘consensus’ was Clinton +4 and it ended up basically tied.

    But on the other hand, if responders aren’t telling pollsters the truth because they fear retaliation, it’s not their fault.

    Read More
    • Replies: @guest
    "if responders aren't telling pollsters the truth...it's not their fault"

    To me that's like saying it's not their fault if pollsters can't do arithmetic. Lying is a basic part of human nature. If "scientific" polls can't correct for that, what good are they?

    Maybe we oughtta attach disclaimers to them from now on: Warning! May be full of shit.
    , @boogerbently
    "Respondents" didn't lie.
    Polls weren't "wrong", They LIED.
    Agenda driven, all the way. Colluded with the Clinton camp, over sampled Dems......
  4. Mr Sailer, your own article about Polish politics has this:

    “To roughly analogize recent Polish political history for Americans, it’s as if Mitt Romney (Donald Tusk) had won two terms as president, but his plan to hand off power to Paul Ryan had suddenly been disrupted by a landslide for Donald Trump (Jarosław Kaczyński).”
    :)

    There are eerie similarities between Polish and US presidential elections. Establishment candidate Bronisław Komorowski was supposed to be reelected in 2015 because of lack of viable opposition. Even if he had killed a pregnant nun passing the pedestrian crossing while driving drunk as some of his followers quipped. Komorowski had support of most newspapers, TV stations and all reasonable, enlightened people.

    The election day came and there was no clear winner, however Komorowski was supposed to have slight but decisive advantage.

    But enough people held their tongue when asked by pollsters (there were suspicions that the polling companies were supporting Komorowski) and the next day the president-elect was announced: Andrzej Duda, from the Kaczynski’s conservative Law and Justice Party.

    Till this day all reasonable, enlightened people in Poland cannot believe what happened.

    If you hear voices in European Union about dangers to democracy in Poland – that’s the result of their unbelief. Reasonable people went for help to their friends in Brussels.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Steve Sailer
    Yeah, here's my Taki column earlier this year on Polish politics, where poor Donald Tusk is stuck being the anti-Donald Trump.

    http://takimag.com/article/diversity_vs_solidarity_steve_sailer/print#axzz4Pa4uRZjh

    , @SFG
    Yeah, but we have no twins. ;)
  5. @Bies Podkrakowski
    Mr Sailer, your own article about Polish politics has this:

    "To roughly analogize recent Polish political history for Americans, it’s as if Mitt Romney (Donald Tusk) had won two terms as president, but his plan to hand off power to Paul Ryan had suddenly been disrupted by a landslide for Donald Trump (Jarosław Kaczyński)."

    :)

    There are eerie similarities between Polish and US presidential elections. Establishment candidate Bronisław Komorowski was supposed to be reelected in 2015 because of lack of viable opposition. Even if he had killed a pregnant nun passing the pedestrian crossing while driving drunk as some of his followers quipped. Komorowski had support of most newspapers, TV stations and all reasonable, enlightened people.

    The election day came and there was no clear winner, however Komorowski was supposed to have slight but decisive advantage.

    But enough people held their tongue when asked by pollsters (there were suspicions that the polling companies were supporting Komorowski) and the next day the president-elect was announced: Andrzej Duda, from the Kaczynski's conservative Law and Justice Party.

    Till this day all reasonable, enlightened people in Poland cannot believe what happened.

    If you hear voices in European Union about dangers to democracy in Poland - that’s the result of their unbelief. Reasonable people went for help to their friends in Brussels.

    Yeah, here’s my Taki column earlier this year on Polish politics, where poor Donald Tusk is stuck being the anti-Donald Trump.

    http://takimag.com/article/diversity_vs_solidarity_steve_sailer/print#axzz4Pa4uRZjh

    Read More
  6. @Bies Podkrakowski
    Mr Sailer, your own article about Polish politics has this:

    "To roughly analogize recent Polish political history for Americans, it’s as if Mitt Romney (Donald Tusk) had won two terms as president, but his plan to hand off power to Paul Ryan had suddenly been disrupted by a landslide for Donald Trump (Jarosław Kaczyński)."

    :)

    There are eerie similarities between Polish and US presidential elections. Establishment candidate Bronisław Komorowski was supposed to be reelected in 2015 because of lack of viable opposition. Even if he had killed a pregnant nun passing the pedestrian crossing while driving drunk as some of his followers quipped. Komorowski had support of most newspapers, TV stations and all reasonable, enlightened people.

    The election day came and there was no clear winner, however Komorowski was supposed to have slight but decisive advantage.

    But enough people held their tongue when asked by pollsters (there were suspicions that the polling companies were supporting Komorowski) and the next day the president-elect was announced: Andrzej Duda, from the Kaczynski's conservative Law and Justice Party.

    Till this day all reasonable, enlightened people in Poland cannot believe what happened.

    If you hear voices in European Union about dangers to democracy in Poland - that’s the result of their unbelief. Reasonable people went for help to their friends in Brussels.

    Yeah, but we have no twins. ;)

    Read More
    • Replies: @Bies Podkrakowski
    Unfortunately, after the Smolensk presidential plane crash in April 2010 we also don't have twins.
  7. The pollsters releasing public results weren’t interested in predicting accurately, they were trying to influence the outcome and provide cover for fraud. The campaigns had accurate internal polling which showed this to be an extremely close race leaning Trump but barely.

    Read More
    • Replies: @TheJester
    The Clinton-friendly polls on the part of the MSM were an attempt at the "bandwagon effect" ... giving everyone the impression that most everyone was voting for Hillary. So, "Why not jump on the bandwagon, dummy?"

    Whenever we drove through the countryside in Pennsylvania, we saw nothing but Trump signs. Not ONE Hillary sign. The issue was whether the rural countryside could overcome the cities. It did! The other clue was the number of people at rallies: Trump = 20,000; Hillary = 150.
  8. Absolutely – the knowing and vocal anti-Trump commentary by Hillary supporters these past few months meant a lot of people who intended to vote against her would stay silent or say they planned to vote 3rd party or write someone in. My wife works in an industry in which 90% of the people in it are progressives, and anytime politics came up and she dissented from the received wisdom it would kick off a half hour struggle session. After awhile you just refuse to engage.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Lagertha
    I sensed the silence of Trump supporters last winter. You had to talk in a type of code to figure out where someone stood - strictly talking about close friends/neighbors. There was also, a dearth of lawn signs this fall - must photo the "town gadfly's" lawn signs....a wild-ass Trump supporter - he even had orange clowns! However, by last week, people defiantly put their Trump signs out...few Hillary, even if she won our state by 60%. But, yeah, my best friend (thank goodness she and I were always on the same team), and many friends have told me the difficulty of concealing their choice....and now, the vitriol of their friends and colleagues today, is unseemly. The absolute hatred for Trump voters is astonishing, particularly coming from university-educated people/newspapers. I'm glad I'm in my mid-50's, and, no longer care about other people's hate-talk, even if they are acquaintances.

    I strictly voted on the issues; both national & international. And, Clinton was not a candidate for me due to the stuff she pulled for 25 years; and chiefly, the state of the economy today. Why Democrats don't understand their own hypocrisy, by allowing the Clinton Machine to deep-six Bernie, is breathtaking. Thank goodness for Wikileaks, even though, I didn't even need it since: Clinton + Wall St. + EU + endless wars + NAFTA + purposely dividing the country with "identity politics" + hypocrisy of giving scholarships to illegal aliens + not deporting killers and rapists + Migrant Crisis + ISIS + bombs/shootings/stabbings by jihadis here+ CF + deep-sixing Bernie + CNN collusion with debates + the entire media (except Hannity, Carlson, Greta & Brett at times) against him = Epic fail. I don't feel the need to gloat, but if the opportunity comes, why not?

    And, like I said several times; having driven many times across this nation, I have seen the despair and the boarded up towns, factories locked and chained. It almost brought me to tears, yet all the convenience store owners/hotel staff/small business people were ever so kind and glad I was spending some money in their town while passing through. And, lastly, I was floored that the media, for the last 5 years, has not given a shit about the people that live between the coasts; in small cities and towns, or the fact that good jobs (5 million) have disappeared. I was disturbed by Springsteen singing in Philly on Monday night....it's as if he had forgotten the words to his own song, the River....can't see to get UTube to let me paste.

    I sensed that dragging in all these performers and Hollywood types was a sign of doom...including Obama's spending so many days on the campaign trail - that was the oddest thing of all. Smelled of desperation...or they finally figured out the tens of thousands of people who have showed up at Trump rallies was a sign. Oh my. That so many DNC people missed this, is truly breathtaking...and, they still don't get it that condescending to half the American people, or assuming there is not a significant amount of Trump supporters that are highly educated, is breathtaking. Even the newspapers are still trying to stir up contempt. They are practically calling for violence against college students who are conservative - scary stuff. If it happens, it will implicate the newspapers and TV networks. We are just one day away from Trump supporting students to get shot or beat-up.

  9. Yup. No one in my family or friends’ circle thought Trump had the remotest chance of winning. They are going through a severe reality check right now.

    Read More
  10. They were rigged to suppress the Trump vote. Ask Richard Baris who called the race right. Trump campaign knew they would win MI and PA, so did Clinton in the last two weeks when they campaigned there. Only surprise WI.

    Read More
  11. I wonder what the vote count might look like if I, and many other Trump supporters, had not been afraid to publicly support Trump. Even now, I haven’t dared let on to anyone aside from close friends that I filled in the bubble next to Trump’s name on the ballot. I haven’t tossed in many witty asides, finding myself lacking both opportunity and wit. Will it ever be safe for Trump supporters to go public?

    Read More
    • Replies: @SteveRogers42
    It will be as safe as we make it. No more, no less.
  12. I’ve gotten to the point that I don’t discuss politics with anyone on the left. They take it too personally. Most are incapable of having a rational, dispassionate discussion of issues. It’s a religion to them and if you argue with their dogma you’re an infidel who should be cast out or–some will actually say this–killed.

    I had an electrician fixing a light at my house a few weeks ago. He brought up the election, saying non-committal things like, “How about this election, eh? What a couple of losers. Looks like whatever way it goes we’re screwed, right?”

    Suspecting where he was coming from, I said, “I’m going to be happy to vote for Trump.”

    He burst out with, “I’M SO GLAD YOU SAID THAT!” and launched into a five-minute rant about how much he hates Hillary, the Democrats, and our immigration policy. So I had met one of those shy Trump supporters.

    I have other friends and professional associates with whom I would never discuss politics. I would never mention on facebook that I support Trump, because there might be repercussions to my livelihood. Meanwhile, leftists don’t hesitate to say the most vile extreme and things.

    Read More
    • Agree: jimbojones
    • Replies: @BB753
    Will all the closeted Trumpists break free after his inauguration? Wait and see. The left still owns almost everything.
    , @Mr. Anon
    "Meanwhile, leftists don’t hesitate to say the most vile extreme and things."

    I've noticed that leftists, especially leftist women, especially young leftist women, will often discuss their political views as if no other views were even possible. It is as if they are ignorant of the fact that at least 1/3 to 1/2 of the electorate are to the right of them.
    , @Jim Don Bob
    And liberals burst out with their anti-Trump rants truly believing that everyone agrees with them. A woman I know said yesterday, "I can't believe that horrible man won. I hope they impeach him soon!" I said nothing, but gloated silently.

    DJT may yet disappoint me, but the anguish his election has brought to the libs is delicious. I feel like getting a T-shirt that says, "I voted for Trump. F**k You".
    , @Flinders Petrie
    Liberals seemingly haven't realized that a large portion of educated, intelligent Americans figured out that rational public conversations were not possible throughout this election cycle, because it was perfectly acceptable to shout down any Trump supporter with the most vile of insults. Witness Robert Di Nero's verbal abuse of Arnold Schwarzenegger and refusal to take a picture with him, because Arnold wouldn't disavow Trump on the spot.

    In such confrontational circumstances, it's impossible to defend yourself with a discussion of the issues. Best case: you make a witty diversion and brush it off.

    The left had monopolized hate, and promptly projected it onto everyone falling out of line.

    I get the feeling there were a lot of people who duly noted this public bullying, kept their mouths shut, and voted for change.
    , @Forbes
    Politics have come to resemble team sports and their fanatical cheerleaders--there's little to be gained by a discussion of the matter, whichever team they are rooting for.
    , @Lagertha
    In our area, the trades folks are really upset with illegals cutting into their livelihood. Even one of my neighbors suggested a contractor that would be so much cheaper (he uses illegals). All the trades people pay a ridiculous amount of taxes for their "small business." They all retire to Florida...so, FLA may not ever turn blue, after all :) There's another new group for you to track, Steve....Rust Belt & N.E. electricians, HVAC, carpenters, plumbers, roofers.
    , @SteveRogers42
    This here:

    https://resurgencemedia.net/2016/06/06/more-fools-debating-the-left/
  13. Marines have a tradition of humor and scatology fed by long nights of guard duty and long days of hurry up and wait. Today is the 241st birthday of the Corps. Semper Fi.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Whoever

    Today is the 241st birthday of the Corps. Semper Fi.
     
    Or yesterday for those stationed on the other side of the date line. (^_^)
  14. Anon says:     Show CommentNext New Comment

    A few things:

    1) How can pollsters accurately measure enthusiasm (actual likelihood to vote)? But in a change year and with Trump’s crowds…..

    2) Trump voters understandably dislike the media. Many Trump voters probably refused to speak with the pollster, conflating him/er with the media. Surely this affected results

    3) Voters tell the pollster what they want to hear to be socially accepted

    - Steven J.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Muse
    I refuse to answer any and all polls. They are the enemy. Never forget it. It allows them to allocate scarce resources more efficiently in elections. I believe others are doing this and this helps to make polls inaccurate.

    I try to avoid anything in the blogosphere that might be used by third parties to infer who I am , or what my political leanings are. No doubt the internet company and the NSA have that information on the servers in Utah, if they really want to come after anyone. Privacy laws need to be reformed to adjust to the new threats to individuals' privacy and freedom due to new technology. I would like to see this as part of the GOP agenda. I believe this is a concern of the big companies like twitter, Facebook etc. More robust privacy laws threaten their business models. This is why they supported the Left.

    During the election, I had mail forwarded to me from a deceased relative because I was an executor of an estate. The person was a staunch progressive from Florida. You would not believe the crap that came in the mail from the left. It was very insightful about their methods and assumptions. I even had democratic operatives showing up in my extremely conservative neighborhood to gauge my opinions, to get me to vote and to get donations. Their targeting of individual voters was very precise and persistent. They drove up to my house talked to me and then left the neighborhood after I told them I did not discuss my political affiliations or beliefs. There was no parallel effort from the right. It was damn creepy.
  15. @Harry Baldwin
    I've gotten to the point that I don't discuss politics with anyone on the left. They take it too personally. Most are incapable of having a rational, dispassionate discussion of issues. It's a religion to them and if you argue with their dogma you're an infidel who should be cast out or--some will actually say this--killed.

    I had an electrician fixing a light at my house a few weeks ago. He brought up the election, saying non-committal things like, "How about this election, eh? What a couple of losers. Looks like whatever way it goes we're screwed, right?"

    Suspecting where he was coming from, I said, "I'm going to be happy to vote for Trump."

    He burst out with, "I'M SO GLAD YOU SAID THAT!" and launched into a five-minute rant about how much he hates Hillary, the Democrats, and our immigration policy. So I had met one of those shy Trump supporters.

    I have other friends and professional associates with whom I would never discuss politics. I would never mention on facebook that I support Trump, because there might be repercussions to my livelihood. Meanwhile, leftists don't hesitate to say the most vile extreme and things.

    Will all the closeted Trumpists break free after his inauguration? Wait and see. The left still owns almost everything.

    Read More
  16. anonymous says:     Show CommentNext New Comment

    Face it, the Clintonistas have been running a reign of terror where pro-Trump people have been intimidated into silence even as the Clintonistas have been crowing about their support for her. It’s time to come out of the closet and tell them where to go.

    Read More
  17. The Fringes were out in full force last night. When a Fox News interviewer in NYC asked one of the lads why he took to the streets the response was a reflective “F**k you”! Another one, a young woman, was asked if she could recite one of Hillary Clinton’s accomplishments she replied “Uh…well… she gave us…like…health care?”.

    Read More
  18. I’m going to stay stumm when the wife & I go to usually a good party tomorrow. This is in Austin TX so you can imagine what would happen to me socially if it got out soon. There are women there who have volunteered to fight the good fight politically all their lives, fighting the ‘Pubs, think Molly Ivins, in TEXAS. I used to be in Lloyd Doggett’s district until the ‘Pubs gerrymanded Dist. 25
    so it skips around neighborhoods in Austin and then snakes down almost to the gulf coast.

    Read More
  19. I think we should be very skeptical of the “how did we all get it wrong” theme. Not everyone got it wrong. The traditional polls and the amplification by the MSM, in large measure, did not get their predictions “wrong” in any truthful sense. They purposely loaded those polls by oversampling Democrats hoping to suppress Republican turnout and, secondarily, confirm their own worldview. The very same MSM is trying to label its duplicity as a mistake in order to salvage what little credibility they have and to keep the uninformed just as they are.

    My guess is that Donald Trump is President-Elect because enough witty people in the suburbs of Detroit, Milwaukee, Philadelphia, Cleveland, and Miami held their tongues until they got into the privacy of the voting booth.

    I absolutely fit the description of someone who is in a suburb of Detroit who held his tongue until I got into the voting booth. As far as being witty, I sure like to think that….

    Read More
  20. @Harry Baldwin
    I've gotten to the point that I don't discuss politics with anyone on the left. They take it too personally. Most are incapable of having a rational, dispassionate discussion of issues. It's a religion to them and if you argue with their dogma you're an infidel who should be cast out or--some will actually say this--killed.

    I had an electrician fixing a light at my house a few weeks ago. He brought up the election, saying non-committal things like, "How about this election, eh? What a couple of losers. Looks like whatever way it goes we're screwed, right?"

    Suspecting where he was coming from, I said, "I'm going to be happy to vote for Trump."

    He burst out with, "I'M SO GLAD YOU SAID THAT!" and launched into a five-minute rant about how much he hates Hillary, the Democrats, and our immigration policy. So I had met one of those shy Trump supporters.

    I have other friends and professional associates with whom I would never discuss politics. I would never mention on facebook that I support Trump, because there might be repercussions to my livelihood. Meanwhile, leftists don't hesitate to say the most vile extreme and things.

    “Meanwhile, leftists don’t hesitate to say the most vile extreme and things.”

    I’ve noticed that leftists, especially leftist women, especially young leftist women, will often discuss their political views as if no other views were even possible. It is as if they are ignorant of the fact that at least 1/3 to 1/2 of the electorate are to the right of them.

    Read More
    • Agree: Jim Don Bob
    • Replies: @anon

    I’ve noticed that leftists, especially leftist women, especially young leftist women, will often discuss their political views as if no other views were even possible. It is as if they are ignorant of the fact that at least 1/3 to 1/2 of the electorate are to the right of them.
     
    Hypnotized by TV - they are the most suggestible segment of the population
  21. Come on, what about the polls that were giving Hillary +4, +7, and even +14 at some point in October? These polls were intentionally rigged to demoralize and discourage Trump supporters. This was a normal psy-op. But now the media want us to believe that the reason polls were wrong is because Trump supporters sabotaged the polls by being untruthful, that there was a clandestine and spontaneous conspiracy of Trump supporters to fool the polls. If you are willing to believe it I have a bridge to sell.

    The false polling had only one purpose, to manipulate voters and change the outcome of the election. W/o the false polls the margin of Trump win would be higher.

    Something changed in the last week of October. Some media began to adjust and started giving less hostile to Trump supporters coverage (NPR Oct. 27) and critical of Hillary discussions (Joe and Mika Oct.27). And then came Comey on Friday, Oct. 28 signaling to everybody that the jig was up. The message was: get on with the program, Trump will win, adjust poll result to reflect this outcome, so you retain remnants of your credibility. And this is what started to happen. Some diehards still hoped that they would be able to steal the election so they fought to the very end.

    Read More
    • Replies: @utu
    It seems that I am the only one here who believes that the polls were rigged on purpose.
  22. @Harry Baldwin
    I've gotten to the point that I don't discuss politics with anyone on the left. They take it too personally. Most are incapable of having a rational, dispassionate discussion of issues. It's a religion to them and if you argue with their dogma you're an infidel who should be cast out or--some will actually say this--killed.

    I had an electrician fixing a light at my house a few weeks ago. He brought up the election, saying non-committal things like, "How about this election, eh? What a couple of losers. Looks like whatever way it goes we're screwed, right?"

    Suspecting where he was coming from, I said, "I'm going to be happy to vote for Trump."

    He burst out with, "I'M SO GLAD YOU SAID THAT!" and launched into a five-minute rant about how much he hates Hillary, the Democrats, and our immigration policy. So I had met one of those shy Trump supporters.

    I have other friends and professional associates with whom I would never discuss politics. I would never mention on facebook that I support Trump, because there might be repercussions to my livelihood. Meanwhile, leftists don't hesitate to say the most vile extreme and things.

    And liberals burst out with their anti-Trump rants truly believing that everyone agrees with them. A woman I know said yesterday, “I can’t believe that horrible man won. I hope they impeach him soon!” I said nothing, but gloated silently.

    DJT may yet disappoint me, but the anguish his election has brought to the libs is delicious. I feel like getting a T-shirt that says, “I voted for Trump. F**k You”.

    Read More
  23. The polls only failed in some sense. In another sense, the polls did exactly what they were supposed to do. There are intrinsic limitations to polls. One is that the statistical theory behind polling requires samples that are sufficiently random; and such are hard to achieve. Another limitation is that people lie or keep mum – for obvious reasons.

    The polls didn’t fail. The ones who failed were the silly and petty people whose job it was to interpret the polls. It was clear after the Brexit that modern polls underestimate the popularity of positions that run contrary to the accepted wisdom of the self-anointed liberal class. Nate Silver (among others), to his credit, realized that – but many (most?) others didn’t.

    Read More
  24. @Harry Baldwin
    I've gotten to the point that I don't discuss politics with anyone on the left. They take it too personally. Most are incapable of having a rational, dispassionate discussion of issues. It's a religion to them and if you argue with their dogma you're an infidel who should be cast out or--some will actually say this--killed.

    I had an electrician fixing a light at my house a few weeks ago. He brought up the election, saying non-committal things like, "How about this election, eh? What a couple of losers. Looks like whatever way it goes we're screwed, right?"

    Suspecting where he was coming from, I said, "I'm going to be happy to vote for Trump."

    He burst out with, "I'M SO GLAD YOU SAID THAT!" and launched into a five-minute rant about how much he hates Hillary, the Democrats, and our immigration policy. So I had met one of those shy Trump supporters.

    I have other friends and professional associates with whom I would never discuss politics. I would never mention on facebook that I support Trump, because there might be repercussions to my livelihood. Meanwhile, leftists don't hesitate to say the most vile extreme and things.

    Liberals seemingly haven’t realized that a large portion of educated, intelligent Americans figured out that rational public conversations were not possible throughout this election cycle, because it was perfectly acceptable to shout down any Trump supporter with the most vile of insults. Witness Robert Di Nero’s verbal abuse of Arnold Schwarzenegger and refusal to take a picture with him, because Arnold wouldn’t disavow Trump on the spot.

    In such confrontational circumstances, it’s impossible to defend yourself with a discussion of the issues. Best case: you make a witty diversion and brush it off.

    The left had monopolized hate, and promptly projected it onto everyone falling out of line.

    I get the feeling there were a lot of people who duly noted this public bullying, kept their mouths shut, and voted for change.

    Read More
  25. This is a particularly interesting question Steve. I see Gelman downplays the idea that Trump supporters simply kept their mouths shut, but this seems extremely plausible to me.

    So, I have to ask myself, why do I find this so plausible? In part, I think that I have been doing very much the same thing. I ended up not voting for either of the major candidates, but I considered Trump, and I would not have admitted it to a pollster. I live in a blue island in a red state, so the social disapproval is likely greater here than in other places, but I think the social disapproval is still real even in rural places with lots of Scots-Irish. The reason I think that is I feel it myself. I avoided Trump for much the same reasons that Ross Douthat has articulated: he is just too crass and opportunistic. I certainly hope it will turn out for the best, I just have my doubts.

    Thus, I find it extremely plausible that voters like myself probably wouldn’t like to talk about supporting, or considering Trump. Of course, that is just my experience.

    Read More
    • Replies: @keypusher
    I was a very shy Trump voter, given that I live in an island so blue it's almost black (Manhattan) in a blue state. I was so shy I barely admitted it to myself. I was considering voting third party but on election day I woke up and thought, I want the Democrats to lose, and there is only one candidate who has a chance of making that happen.

    I certainly wouldn't tell any friend or acquaintance who I was voting for. Don't know if I would have told a pollster or not. Gelman would point out though, that Trump didn't outperform in blue states where the shy Trump voter thesis should have been borne out most strongly.

    Of course, given where I live it made no difference who I voted for.
    , @Anon
    "I ended up not voting for either of the major candidates, but I considered Trump, and I would not have admitted it to a pollster."

    Gary Johnson?
    , @Lagertha
    agree with you on some points. My husband also felt that Trump is too much of an opportunist/crass/just plain weird, and didn't vote for him, and things like the birther stuff really bugged him. We both understood our reasons, and respected each others decision. Now, given a chance to say "I told you so," would be tempting for my husband, but he is not vindictive. He is exceedingly rational, and does not want Trump to fail now that he is the president. Neither one of us has ever wanted our President to fail once elected.
    , @NOTA
    I can add a data point here. As I commented here many times, I wasn't (and still am not) a Trump supporter. Howeve, I found myself getting a lot of pushback (some quite angry), in conversations at work when I agreed Trump would be a bad president, but didn't agree he was the next Hitler or that his supporters were all racist knuckle-draggers or whatever else. Simply saying "No, I don't see any reason to think he's anti-Semetic or particularly hates gays" would trigger a fair bit of anger.

    I don't know how this relates to talking to pollsters, though. I wonder how many people were not 100% certain, themselves, which way they were voting until they got into the voting booth.

    , @SteveRogers42
    Egg McMuffin?
  26. So glad you mentioned closeted Trump supporters living in occupied/progressive territory. We live downtown in a prime East Coast city that’s been ruled by liberals for generations; it’s a one-party state. Liberal republicans aren’t even permitted. Giuliani and Bloomberg are viewed as tools of the fascist oligarchy. We’re Christian, gun-toting, right-wing nuts living (somewhat in the political closet) in an East Coast Portlandia.

    At the same time, we’re very happy and love our city. There’s a reason why people flock to cities. Over the past 20 years there’s been a yuge urban renaissance throughout the country. Super bars, restaurants, music, art, fun people etc., all right at your door step–and in case you think places beside liberal, big cities have this, believe me they don’t. Just walk or bike a few minutes to the best of everything. (Urban) composting is almost mandatory, while cars are passé. Yeah, private school tuition and prepping for the Ivy League rat race are a pain, but a small price to pay for our children’s inclusion in the reigning oligarchy. It reminds me of that Gore Vidal line about “if people knew how much fun and well the true upper class lived, there would be riots in the street”–paraphrased of course

    Almost all our friends and neighbors assume we’re right thinking SWPL types and we’ve done little to dissuade them from this thought. Not that we lie or deny our right-wing thought-crimes, but we just don’t mention politics and our friends, for the most part, don’t either. Our church going is the only tip-off that might raise a question, but people assume we go to a liberal protestant church, when in fact it’s Evangelical. Their suspicions are further assuaged by our otherwise complete SWPL lifestyle: biking, vegans (part-time), Ivy grads, NPR/NYT/Economist/Pacifica/ArtForum references (“I haven’t read Whitehead’s new novel, heard it’s great, but I did read his Zone One book a few years ago”), contemporary art interests (“Peyton and Curran are over, Fischer is much better”), seeing indie bands in people’s basements/backyards, dressing as Bansky murals for Halloween, pushing udon noodles (has to have the gochujang) on our kids, etc.

    Of course, there has been lots of Trump angst among our right-thinking friends over the last few months and I can make fun of him too; he’s an eminently satirical character (the short fingered vulgarian). However, like your dinner party guests our Trump jokes and comments never hit his political ideas. “That Trump guy is right, we should build a wall, look at all the crystal meth. manufacturing jobs that have fled to Mexico. We need to protect American crystal meth. manufacturing jobs!” Plus, as so may urban progressives really loved Bernie Sanders and are still upset at Hillary for giving him the shaft, our anti-Hillary talk (she’s corrupt and a tool of Wall Street) comes off as pro-Bernie speech that they would say themselves. All in all, we do love our neighbors and friends, so why let political differences get in the way. Yes, some of the more hard-core leftists might not be so kind if we discussed our politics so as not to offend them we don’t and they (unintentionally not offending us), for the most part, don’t either.

    So we’re those same dinner party guests–just at different dinner parties. There are a lot more of such guests in Paulinekaelville than one might htink.

    Read More
    • Replies: @anon
    Sam as in Samantha?

    Not trying to dox, that just struck me as an extremely feminine musing, and I'd associated Sam w/ male.

  27. It was a turnout election. Here in OC, Hillary! did something no Dem had done since FDR. Carry the county. On the strength of White professional women and non-Whites. Other places, it was Blue Collar White men turning out in far greater numbers than before.

    There is still a lot of danger for Trump Republicans — next time the Dems will nominate a charismatic Black dude again, and a younger woman as his running mate; one prettier and less nasty than Hillary!

    Trump only carried White women with college by 53%. That’s not going to cut it next time as Whites shrink; he needs that up to 70% while not losing White men.

    A naked racial appeal to goodies; “White Affirmative Action” is in order I think. Why shouldn’t White women get free stuff for voting Republican? Particularly if that’s achieved by deporting foreigners?

    Read More
  28. The refusal and non-response rates for these surveys have increased steadily over time and have now reached ridiculous levels. There is no way to these are probability samples, i.e., samples which allow valid computations of the standard error/sampling error because every population element has a computable, non-zero probability of selection. Furthermore, sizable refusal and non-response rates increase the likelihood of sample bias. Given that the polls are are part of the prog establishment I maintain that it is certain they bias towards over-estimating support for prog/lefty politicians and causes. Right leaning persons are strongly motivated to not cooperate with polling organizations.

    Read More
  29. The Witty Dinner Party Guest demographic did it! This is good news for Marine Le Pen… France probably has even more Witty Dinner Party Guests than Detroit (proportionally).

    Read More
  30. Anon says:     Show CommentNext New Comment

    Too many were too wrong too many times for them to have been mistakes. They were rigged.

    Read More
  31. @Benjamin I. Espen
    This is a particularly interesting question Steve. I see Gelman downplays the idea that Trump supporters simply kept their mouths shut, but this seems extremely plausible to me.

    So, I have to ask myself, why do I find this so plausible? In part, I think that I have been doing very much the same thing. I ended up not voting for either of the major candidates, but I considered Trump, and I would not have admitted it to a pollster. I live in a blue island in a red state, so the social disapproval is likely greater here than in other places, but I think the social disapproval is still real even in rural places with lots of Scots-Irish. The reason I think that is I feel it myself. I avoided Trump for much the same reasons that Ross Douthat has articulated: he is just too crass and opportunistic. I certainly hope it will turn out for the best, I just have my doubts.

    Thus, I find it extremely plausible that voters like myself probably wouldn't like to talk about supporting, or considering Trump. Of course, that is just my experience.

    I was a very shy Trump voter, given that I live in an island so blue it’s almost black (Manhattan) in a blue state. I was so shy I barely admitted it to myself. I was considering voting third party but on election day I woke up and thought, I want the Democrats to lose, and there is only one candidate who has a chance of making that happen.

    I certainly wouldn’t tell any friend or acquaintance who I was voting for. Don’t know if I would have told a pollster or not. Gelman would point out though, that Trump didn’t outperform in blue states where the shy Trump voter thesis should have been borne out most strongly.

    Of course, given where I live it made no difference who I voted for.

    Read More
  32. Anon says:     Show CommentNext New Comment
    @Benjamin I. Espen
    This is a particularly interesting question Steve. I see Gelman downplays the idea that Trump supporters simply kept their mouths shut, but this seems extremely plausible to me.

    So, I have to ask myself, why do I find this so plausible? In part, I think that I have been doing very much the same thing. I ended up not voting for either of the major candidates, but I considered Trump, and I would not have admitted it to a pollster. I live in a blue island in a red state, so the social disapproval is likely greater here than in other places, but I think the social disapproval is still real even in rural places with lots of Scots-Irish. The reason I think that is I feel it myself. I avoided Trump for much the same reasons that Ross Douthat has articulated: he is just too crass and opportunistic. I certainly hope it will turn out for the best, I just have my doubts.

    Thus, I find it extremely plausible that voters like myself probably wouldn't like to talk about supporting, or considering Trump. Of course, that is just my experience.

    “I ended up not voting for either of the major candidates, but I considered Trump, and I would not have admitted it to a pollster.”

    Gary Johnson?

    Read More
  33. @Harry Baldwin
    I've gotten to the point that I don't discuss politics with anyone on the left. They take it too personally. Most are incapable of having a rational, dispassionate discussion of issues. It's a religion to them and if you argue with their dogma you're an infidel who should be cast out or--some will actually say this--killed.

    I had an electrician fixing a light at my house a few weeks ago. He brought up the election, saying non-committal things like, "How about this election, eh? What a couple of losers. Looks like whatever way it goes we're screwed, right?"

    Suspecting where he was coming from, I said, "I'm going to be happy to vote for Trump."

    He burst out with, "I'M SO GLAD YOU SAID THAT!" and launched into a five-minute rant about how much he hates Hillary, the Democrats, and our immigration policy. So I had met one of those shy Trump supporters.

    I have other friends and professional associates with whom I would never discuss politics. I would never mention on facebook that I support Trump, because there might be repercussions to my livelihood. Meanwhile, leftists don't hesitate to say the most vile extreme and things.

    Politics have come to resemble team sports and their fanatical cheerleaders–there’s little to be gained by a discussion of the matter, whichever team they are rooting for.

    Read More
  34. @Arclight
    Absolutely - the knowing and vocal anti-Trump commentary by Hillary supporters these past few months meant a lot of people who intended to vote against her would stay silent or say they planned to vote 3rd party or write someone in. My wife works in an industry in which 90% of the people in it are progressives, and anytime politics came up and she dissented from the received wisdom it would kick off a half hour struggle session. After awhile you just refuse to engage.

    I sensed the silence of Trump supporters last winter. You had to talk in a type of code to figure out where someone stood – strictly talking about close friends/neighbors. There was also, a dearth of lawn signs this fall – must photo the “town gadfly’s” lawn signs….a wild-ass Trump supporter – he even had orange clowns! However, by last week, people defiantly put their Trump signs out…few Hillary, even if she won our state by 60%. But, yeah, my best friend (thank goodness she and I were always on the same team), and many friends have told me the difficulty of concealing their choice….and now, the vitriol of their friends and colleagues today, is unseemly. The absolute hatred for Trump voters is astonishing, particularly coming from university-educated people/newspapers. I’m glad I’m in my mid-50′s, and, no longer care about other people’s hate-talk, even if they are acquaintances.

    I strictly voted on the issues; both national & international. And, Clinton was not a candidate for me due to the stuff she pulled for 25 years; and chiefly, the state of the economy today. Why Democrats don’t understand their own hypocrisy, by allowing the Clinton Machine to deep-six Bernie, is breathtaking. Thank goodness for Wikileaks, even though, I didn’t even need it since: Clinton + Wall St. + EU + endless wars + NAFTA + purposely dividing the country with “identity politics” + hypocrisy of giving scholarships to illegal aliens + not deporting killers and rapists + Migrant Crisis + ISIS + bombs/shootings/stabbings by jihadis here+ CF + deep-sixing Bernie + CNN collusion with debates + the entire media (except Hannity, Carlson, Greta & Brett at times) against him = Epic fail. I don’t feel the need to gloat, but if the opportunity comes, why not?

    And, like I said several times; having driven many times across this nation, I have seen the despair and the boarded up towns, factories locked and chained. It almost brought me to tears, yet all the convenience store owners/hotel staff/small business people were ever so kind and glad I was spending some money in their town while passing through. And, lastly, I was floored that the media, for the last 5 years, has not given a shit about the people that live between the coasts; in small cities and towns, or the fact that good jobs (5 million) have disappeared. I was disturbed by Springsteen singing in Philly on Monday night….it’s as if he had forgotten the words to his own song, the River….can’t see to get UTube to let me paste.

    I sensed that dragging in all these performers and Hollywood types was a sign of doom…including Obama’s spending so many days on the campaign trail – that was the oddest thing of all. Smelled of desperation…or they finally figured out the tens of thousands of people who have showed up at Trump rallies was a sign. Oh my. That so many DNC people missed this, is truly breathtaking…and, they still don’t get it that condescending to half the American people, or assuming there is not a significant amount of Trump supporters that are highly educated, is breathtaking. Even the newspapers are still trying to stir up contempt. They are practically calling for violence against college students who are conservative – scary stuff. If it happens, it will implicate the newspapers and TV networks. We are just one day away from Trump supporting students to get shot or beat-up.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Steve from Detroit
    I have long thought the 25 year old Bruce Springsteen wouldn't even recognize the 67 year old Bruce Springsteen.

    He is one of my favorite artists and I will always cherish his early (and even "intermediate") music. With that said, boy am I tired of what he has become. Blue collar champion to bathroom monitor.
  35. @Benjamin I. Espen
    This is a particularly interesting question Steve. I see Gelman downplays the idea that Trump supporters simply kept their mouths shut, but this seems extremely plausible to me.

    So, I have to ask myself, why do I find this so plausible? In part, I think that I have been doing very much the same thing. I ended up not voting for either of the major candidates, but I considered Trump, and I would not have admitted it to a pollster. I live in a blue island in a red state, so the social disapproval is likely greater here than in other places, but I think the social disapproval is still real even in rural places with lots of Scots-Irish. The reason I think that is I feel it myself. I avoided Trump for much the same reasons that Ross Douthat has articulated: he is just too crass and opportunistic. I certainly hope it will turn out for the best, I just have my doubts.

    Thus, I find it extremely plausible that voters like myself probably wouldn't like to talk about supporting, or considering Trump. Of course, that is just my experience.

    agree with you on some points. My husband also felt that Trump is too much of an opportunist/crass/just plain weird, and didn’t vote for him, and things like the birther stuff really bugged him. We both understood our reasons, and respected each others decision. Now, given a chance to say “I told you so,” would be tempting for my husband, but he is not vindictive. He is exceedingly rational, and does not want Trump to fail now that he is the president. Neither one of us has ever wanted our President to fail once elected.

    Read More
  36. @Harry Baldwin
    I've gotten to the point that I don't discuss politics with anyone on the left. They take it too personally. Most are incapable of having a rational, dispassionate discussion of issues. It's a religion to them and if you argue with their dogma you're an infidel who should be cast out or--some will actually say this--killed.

    I had an electrician fixing a light at my house a few weeks ago. He brought up the election, saying non-committal things like, "How about this election, eh? What a couple of losers. Looks like whatever way it goes we're screwed, right?"

    Suspecting where he was coming from, I said, "I'm going to be happy to vote for Trump."

    He burst out with, "I'M SO GLAD YOU SAID THAT!" and launched into a five-minute rant about how much he hates Hillary, the Democrats, and our immigration policy. So I had met one of those shy Trump supporters.

    I have other friends and professional associates with whom I would never discuss politics. I would never mention on facebook that I support Trump, because there might be repercussions to my livelihood. Meanwhile, leftists don't hesitate to say the most vile extreme and things.

    In our area, the trades folks are really upset with illegals cutting into their livelihood. Even one of my neighbors suggested a contractor that would be so much cheaper (he uses illegals). All the trades people pay a ridiculous amount of taxes for their “small business.” They all retire to Florida…so, FLA may not ever turn blue, after all :) There’s another new group for you to track, Steve….Rust Belt & N.E. electricians, HVAC, carpenters, plumbers, roofers.

    Read More
  37. In my personal experience in New Jersey, most Trump voters in wealthier areas didn’t advertise that fact, whereas the exurbs and rural areas had signs up everywhere. I like it when your observations validate my personal experiences!

    Read More
  38. @Lagertha
    agree with you on some points. My husband also felt that Trump is too much of an opportunist/crass/just plain weird, and didn't vote for him, and things like the birther stuff really bugged him. We both understood our reasons, and respected each others decision. Now, given a chance to say "I told you so," would be tempting for my husband, but he is not vindictive. He is exceedingly rational, and does not want Trump to fail now that he is the president. Neither one of us has ever wanted our President to fail once elected.

    Do you have a sister?

    Read More
    • Replies: @Marty
    Her sister might have a high notch count, and your face would fall off.
  39. @Amasius
    "The polls weren’t all that wrong, but just enough in the key states."

    I think you're being too generous here. The polls' reading of the Rust Belt and the Midwest was simply awful. They were off by 5-6% in Minnesota, Wisconsin, Michigan, Ohio, and Pennsylvania. Nationally the 'consensus' was Clinton +4 and it ended up basically tied.

    But on the other hand, if responders aren't telling pollsters the truth because they fear retaliation, it's not their fault.

    “if responders aren’t telling pollsters the truth…it’s not their fault”

    To me that’s like saying it’s not their fault if pollsters can’t do arithmetic. Lying is a basic part of human nature. If “scientific” polls can’t correct for that, what good are they?

    Maybe we oughtta attach disclaimers to them from now on: Warning! May be full of shit.

    Read More
  40. anon says:     Show CommentNext New Comment

    The polls weren’t all that wrong, but just enough in the key states.

    Don’t let them get away with this lie.

    Juts like Brexit the polls were wildly wrong (Clinton ahead by 12 points) until the last few days.

    They were rigged as a demoralization psyop to keep the monster vote from turning out and then they were gradually unrigged in the last week to maintain future credibility.

    Read More
  41. @Opinionator
    Another guest tossed in witty asides that the anti-Trump ranter took as support, but when carefully analyzed clearly revealed a subversive pro-Trump stance.

    Then I went to another dinner party the next week in liberal Sherman Oaks where the exact same thing happened: a long politically correct rant subtly subverted by another guest’s witty but ambiguous wisecracks.


    What were the witty remarks that the two guests made?

    I imagine one of the “other guests” dropped this obliquely revealing remark:

    “I, myself, prefer a vintage 2016 Natty Light.”

    Read More
  42. Another guest tossed in witty asides that the anti-Trump ranter took as support, but when carefully analyzed clearly revealed a subversive pro-Trump stance…

    …a long politically correct rant subtly subverted by another guest’s witty but ambiguous wisecracks.

    I used this strategy all the time at Mensa events, particularly small, intimate lunches. The lefties always assume if you’re smart, you’re left. How wrong they are. We rightists just have better manners!

    At one lunch, a gentle but opinionated old-guard “liberal” went on and on about how he loved to shop at Costco, because they were so progressive. I told him (also gently) that I boycotted the place after they persuaded a California city to tear down a church with eminent domain to expand a parking lot. He was miffed (at me, not Costco), and stormed off in a huff.

    The only vocal rightists in Mensa used to be the libertarians. They’re still as vocal, but post-Cold War, not so rightist anymore. Conservatives, and reactionaries like me, prefer to socialize and drink instead.

    Read More
  43. Steve, i think you ‘re on solid ground on this interpretation. Last week, Breitbart published a story on a study of voters that showed when the sample of voters that had been interviewed by phone was resurveyed in person or by robocall, that Trump’s support among college educated voters increased by 7%. This undercount alone would increase Trumps overall support by 2% over poll totals.

    Read More
  44. Why were the pollsters so wrong so often, lately?

    In Germany, in France (Le Pen), in GB (Brexit) and now in the USA?
    1) Reason one – the one Steve Sailer points out above – they were decided, but kept their mouth shut.

    2) But I could imagine something slightly diffrent going on, too. Many people/ voters might rest undicided – until they do get into the voting booth – they’re black holes not only to the pollsters, but to themselves as well.

    The bigger the MSM-frenzy about the consequences of the unwanted votes, the more so – the more people might start to feel that it’s not wise to expose themselves to the obviously strong powers of the status quo – not even in their own mind/ and or fantasy.
    The way out indeed is the secrecy of the voting booth in such situations too. There you find the protection, that you otherwise lack.

    If this was right, it could be quite a task to prove or to show it – make it more plausible than it might sound already. You would have to show that being undecided means in some situations to be in favour of an anti-mainstream-position. It would make sense to look out for situations in which the mainstream is overrepresented in the media. And the publicised fear of non-mainstram positions would be clearly over the top.

    3) Could be that the whole thing is interesting besides the strategic thoughts about media and power.

    Because it is deeply wired in the human consciousness to run with the pack. If the need to run against the pack appears on the horizon, it might well be that lots of poeple feel uneasy just for this reason alone – and turn their consciousness off to get rid of the upcoming fear.

    (This might be the junction, where people, who lean towards conspiracy theories, tend to choose the wrong turn. And the reason why conspiracy theories are so attractive at the same time. Those conspiracy theories, that appear in such situations a n d for no other reason, could simply be read as indicators, that people sense (lots of) social stress.

    Read More
    • Replies: @The Last Real Calvinist

    Many people/ voters might rest undecided – until they do get into the voting booth – they’re black holes not only to the pollsters, but to themselves as well.

     

    This is a very thoughtful and encouraging comment. You're suggesting that there many be a substantial number of people who, when asked finally to make a choice and act on it, i.e. vote, reject 'the pack' and its Narrative and actually think for themselves. I really do hope this is the case in not just the USA, but in the rest of the West as well.

    Looking in from the outside (I'm an American, but have lived in Hong Kong for many years), the USA/many other western countries seem to be staggering on a dream state that should have ended years, if not decades, ago. They've been through an entire century that witnessed one Marxist and cultural-Marxist scheme after another trying to envisage and enforce utopia. All of those schemes ended in war and ruin, but still, led by a fanatical and relentless Leftist vanguard, western countries push onward, to the point of inviting, promoting, and even paying for their self-extinction.

    And yet as the pack rushes toward the cliff, it's no longer a pack if its members dare to disobey. Let's hope and pray that more and more are willing to turn and break away.

  45. @Anon
    "I ended up not voting for either of the major candidates, but I considered Trump, and I would not have admitted it to a pollster."

    Gary Johnson?

    Joel Kotlikoff. I find libertarians weird.

    Read More
  46. Anon says:     Show CommentNext New Comment

    My guess is that Donald Trump is President-Elect because enough witty people in the suburbs of Detroit, Milwaukee, Philadelphia, Cleveland, and Miami held their tongues until they got into the privacy of the voting booth.

    Guilty as charged!

    Read More
  47. @Spmoore8
    Marines have a tradition of humor and scatology fed by long nights of guard duty and long days of hurry up and wait. Today is the 241st birthday of the Corps. Semper Fi.

    Today is the 241st birthday of the Corps. Semper Fi.

    Or yesterday for those stationed on the other side of the date line. (^_^)

    Read More
  48. I think it can partly be explained by personality: the types of people who don’t answer polls correlate to the types of “independent” voters more likely to vote Trump.

    Not once have I answered a voluntary poll or survey, nor have I ever stopped when some annoying busybody tries to run my ear off about their pet campaign on the street. I’m sure I’m not alone.

    In short, polls are simply not perfectly representative.

    Read More
  49. @Amasius
    "The polls weren’t all that wrong, but just enough in the key states."

    I think you're being too generous here. The polls' reading of the Rust Belt and the Midwest was simply awful. They were off by 5-6% in Minnesota, Wisconsin, Michigan, Ohio, and Pennsylvania. Nationally the 'consensus' was Clinton +4 and it ended up basically tied.

    But on the other hand, if responders aren't telling pollsters the truth because they fear retaliation, it's not their fault.

    “Respondents” didn’t lie.
    Polls weren’t “wrong”, They LIED.
    Agenda driven, all the way. Colluded with the Clinton camp, over sampled Dems……

    Read More
  50. Another guest tossed in witty asides that the anti-Trump ranter took as support, but when carefully analyzed clearly revealed a subversive pro-Trump stance.

    Then I went to another dinner party the next week in liberal Sherman Oaks where the exact same thing happened: a long politically correct rant subtly subverted by another guest’s witty but ambiguous wisecracks.

    I don’t know if my remarks ever qualify as truly witty, but I do know how to give evasive non-answers to political questions.

    I live in a suburb of Miami that has a large concentration* of Jews, so I know a lot of highly-verbal, aggressively-argumentative folks who absolutely can’t stand Trump. I’m well-practiced in the art of obfuscation and selective mutism.

    And there have been occasions where I’ve outright lied, for the sake of preserving relationships that are in some way valuable or lucrative to me. There’s no sense in arguing Trump’s merits with people who have never voted for a Republican in their entire lives.

    (Last week, as I was walking down the sidewalk in the downtown area, a weird youngish white guy stopped me and said in a snarling voice, “I bet you’re voting for Trump.” This surprised me, as I was not wearing or doing anything that would indicate my political beliefs. Taken aback, I snapped, “I’m not telling you that,” and then kept on walking.)

    When someone who I can’t afford to piss off asks, “How could this happen?”, my stock response is, “Who would have thought that Trump could be elected president? It’s unbelievable, isn’t it?”

    SWPL/SJW: “Absolutely! It’s profoundly disturbing! It shakes me to my core!”

    Me: “It shakes our system to its core. It’s a complete repudiation of the values held by our society.” (The system I’m talking about is the Cathedral – the Establishment. And PC multiculti worship is, indeed, a value held dear by mainstream American society in 2016. So I’m not lying, except by omission.)

    SWPL/SJW: “Yes! Trump has no respect for our values!”

    Me: “No, none whatsoever.” (Again, I’m not lying – I don’t think Trump has any respect for the values of folks who believe the U.S. should be a dumping ground for the dregs of the Third World.)

    I half-nod a lot and try to make it through conversations without making any firm statements in either direction.

    The good thing about rabid Democrats is that they tend to rant uncontrollably, so if you make ambiguously-supportive noises, they don’t bother asking you about the particulars of your beliefs. All you have to do is hold your tongue.

    *I typed this without even thinking about the potential connotations. Freudian slip?

    Read More
  51. @Anon
    A few things:

    1) How can pollsters accurately measure enthusiasm (actual likelihood to vote)? But in a change year and with Trump's crowds.....

    2) Trump voters understandably dislike the media. Many Trump voters probably refused to speak with the pollster, conflating him/er with the media. Surely this affected results

    3) Voters tell the pollster what they want to hear to be socially accepted

    - Steven J.

    I refuse to answer any and all polls. They are the enemy. Never forget it. It allows them to allocate scarce resources more efficiently in elections. I believe others are doing this and this helps to make polls inaccurate.

    I try to avoid anything in the blogosphere that might be used by third parties to infer who I am , or what my political leanings are. No doubt the internet company and the NSA have that information on the servers in Utah, if they really want to come after anyone. Privacy laws need to be reformed to adjust to the new threats to individuals’ privacy and freedom due to new technology. I would like to see this as part of the GOP agenda. I believe this is a concern of the big companies like twitter, Facebook etc. More robust privacy laws threaten their business models. This is why they supported the Left.

    During the election, I had mail forwarded to me from a deceased relative because I was an executor of an estate. The person was a staunch progressive from Florida. You would not believe the crap that came in the mail from the left. It was very insightful about their methods and assumptions. I even had democratic operatives showing up in my extremely conservative neighborhood to gauge my opinions, to get me to vote and to get donations. Their targeting of individual voters was very precise and persistent. They drove up to my house talked to me and then left the neighborhood after I told them I did not discuss my political affiliations or beliefs. There was no parallel effort from the right. It was damn creepy.

    Read More
  52. I said at the begining that black men got the vote before white women. No one gave Obama a chance against her either. Ferraro, Hillary, Palin and Hillary again. None dare say what the problem was although it was clear when Bernie Saunders, towering over Clinton like a giant during their debate , told her ‘Do you mind , I’m speaking. Saunders is hardly a master of masculine self assertion, unlike Trump (the Muhammad Ali of body language in that he wins despite doing things every expert advises against, eg shrugging). Only Hilary could have been beaten by Trump, or Obama. That’s one reason for misleading polling.

    My guess is that Donald Trump is President-Elect because enough witty people in the suburbs of Detroit, Milwaukee, Philadelphia, Cleveland, and Miami held their tongues until they got into the privacy of the voting booth.

    Why vote at all, let alone differently in secret? Aa moments thought tells a rational person that their vote cannot make the slightest difference to the outcome, while people can esily pick up Trump vibes (fror example

    I hold the entire Republican Party responsible for enabling and supporting this bastard and inflicting this (inter-)national danger on all of us. And (though I am usually not as partisan as many of my friends) I am going to do my small part to punish the entire Party. I’ve even researched the backgrounds of those up for non-partisan offices such as hospital and soil quality boards to look for subtle traces of Trumpism, …

    Be they ever so witty, the logical thing for people in good jobs is to not talk politics at all; that would be taking needless risk.

    In a discussion about suicide bombers’ motives, John Gray pointed out

    Much of what human beings do isn’t the result of a calculation of con­sequences, but more an expression of their sense of identity. Philosophers describe this as expressive rationality, an idea they use to explain why voting in circumstances where you know your vote can make no practical difference can still be in accordance with reason

    The person who has been the most prescient is the rust belt denizen Michael Moore, and he made the prediction in words that make the connection to suicide bombing forcefully apparent

    He is saying the things to people who are hurting. It’s why every beaten down, forgotten, nameless stiff who used to be part of what was called the middle class loves Trump.

    He is the human Molotov Cocktail they’ve been waiting for. The human hand grenade they can legally throw at the system which stole their lives from them. On November 8, the dispossessed will walk into the voting booth, be handed a ballot, close the curtain and take that lever and put a big fucking ‘X’ in the box by the name of the man who has threatened to up-end and overturn the very system that has ruined their lives: Donald J Trump.

    https://www.indy100.com/article/michael-moore-donald-trump-president-predicted-7383441

    Read More
  53. I never get invited to these cool dinner parties.

    1) I get boozed up too early and lose my composure.

    2) I have no wit or restraint. I would have let the anti-Trump guest have it with a double barrel of pro-Trump rhetoric and facts, after which some nice lady would intervene and change the subject.

    Read More
  54. @27 year old
    The pollsters releasing public results weren't interested in predicting accurately, they were trying to influence the outcome and provide cover for fraud. The campaigns had accurate internal polling which showed this to be an extremely close race leaning Trump but barely.

    The Clinton-friendly polls on the part of the MSM were an attempt at the “bandwagon effect” … giving everyone the impression that most everyone was voting for Hillary. So, “Why not jump on the bandwagon, dummy?”

    Whenever we drove through the countryside in Pennsylvania, we saw nothing but Trump signs. Not ONE Hillary sign. The issue was whether the rural countryside could overcome the cities. It did! The other clue was the number of people at rallies: Trump = 20,000; Hillary = 150.

    Read More
  55. My guess is that Donald Trump is President-Elect because enough witty people in the suburbs of Detroit, Milwaukee, Philadelphia, Cleveland, and Miami held their tongues until they got into the privacy of the voting booth.

    All the more reason we need ringers for those monsters of restraint and probity! Such racism, using higher intelligence and language skills to dissent from the Master Racial Narrative!

    We’ve been talking about this strategically, tactically, and generally tersely among my posse (some of which is geographically elsewhere) back to late 2015.

    Some went so far as to get on Dem causes and lists, like MoveOn, to receive phone, internet, or mail polls.

    The idea was to apply Schwarzenegger’s First Axiom.

    That refers to the ’80s documentary “Pumping Iron,” in which someone asks Awnood what his formula for winning is, and what he tells other competitors when they ask for his input. He replied, “I geev to dem bad advices.”

    When polling and media research and all that jazz were my field, and that involved policymaking/analysis, I constantly cautioned my colleagues not to mistake our constructions of reality, and people’s constructed responses to it, for reality. Of course the entire profession was mired in a dreamscape to begin with.

    In my view this election was a referendum on reality as lived and experienced by so many people, and how it differs from the dreamscape and has since the 1960s. There are still tens of millions of people wailing for Mommy to keep projecting onto the back wall of the cave…and I think we should indulge them amply.

    Read More
  56. I don’t know about the witty people in Detroit suburbs but the working class in some areas sure lost their nerve.
    Brother In law (retired auto worker) mentioned that he was a rare one to have a Trump sign on lawn. After election many signs appeared on other’s lawns.

    What do you make of that?

    This is the first election lawn signs weren’t prevalent in my neighborhood. Even for Democrats.

    Read More
  57. There’s exist a John Podesta Wikileaks email with a memo on how to rig polls.

    The polls, Clinton +9-14 even as most people had begun early voting, were a psyop designed to motivate undecided voters who like to vote for winners and depress Trump turnout. Only the last few polls moved close to reality to preserve future credibility.

    Also rigged polls provided cover for sleazy Democrat moves like allowing Puerto Rican’s to vote by mail in Florida, and/or busing Mexicans across the border to vote in Nevada.

    Read More
  58. @utu
    Come on, what about the polls that were giving Hillary +4, +7, and even +14 at some point in October? These polls were intentionally rigged to demoralize and discourage Trump supporters. This was a normal psy-op. But now the media want us to believe that the reason polls were wrong is because Trump supporters sabotaged the polls by being untruthful, that there was a clandestine and spontaneous conspiracy of Trump supporters to fool the polls. If you are willing to believe it I have a bridge to sell.

    The false polling had only one purpose, to manipulate voters and change the outcome of the election. W/o the false polls the margin of Trump win would be higher.

    Something changed in the last week of October. Some media began to adjust and started giving less hostile to Trump supporters coverage (NPR Oct. 27) and critical of Hillary discussions (Joe and Mika Oct.27). And then came Comey on Friday, Oct. 28 signaling to everybody that the jig was up. The message was: get on with the program, Trump will win, adjust poll result to reflect this outcome, so you retain remnants of your credibility. And this is what started to happen. Some diehards still hoped that they would be able to steal the election so they fought to the very end.

    It seems that I am the only one here who believes that the polls were rigged on purpose.

    Read More
    • Replies: @gcochran
    Lots of people believe it, but it's crap, in my opinion. And believing crap gets in the way of actually understanding what's going on.
    , @NOTA
    I do not believe the major polling outfits or aggregators like Sam Wang or 538 intentionally rigged their polls. I wouldn't be surprised if there were some pollsters trying for that effect, but as best I can tell, the major pollsters and aggregators are trying as hard as they can to get their predictions right, and are putting their names and reputations out there for the world to judge.

    There is a lot that can go wrong with predicting an election with polling. This link talks about 538,s forecasting method, which I suspect is overly complex and massively overfitted given the small amount of actual data available, but it also gives you some notion of how many moving parts there are in their forecast. But even a single poll combines sampling, deciding who is a likely voter, and then basically building a model of the voters by groups (race, sex, party affiliation, etc.) and using that plus a model of what groups will show up at the polls to make a prediction. And every year, the number of people who even can be sampled by phone goes down (lots of people have gotten rid of their landline phones; others have wired phones but never answer them), and all kinds of other stuff changes, too.
    , @Anon7
    You're not the only one.

    Polls showing HRC with a nice comfortable lead were preferentially shown on Big Media, which was outrageously anti-Trump. This allowed the polling companies to benefit from associating their brands with the media brands, increasing their value. It also increases their name recognition (these companies do more than just predict elections, you know; they're trolling for clients).

    They all tightened up their numbers just before the election, so they could look like they knew what they were doing on election night.

    "Rigged."
  59. I was at a dinner party like that, and I heard several long, deranged, anti-Trump rants, but unlike Steve’s more restrained guests, I could not hold my tongue. The other guests assumed I was left wing for no reason except their version of someone on the right is a meth addict fifth grade drop out in KKK robes.

    And I just ripped into their rudeness, their assumption that everyone supported Hillary, their willingness to insult Trump voters but inability to take any criticism of Hillary and threw in Hillary’s enabling of rape, just for good measure. My wife wanted to kill me but I could not take it.

    We lost those “friends”. I guess I should have made a joke about how great Hillary was and how we got all those cheap gardeners too.

    Nah.

    Tuesday made it all worthwhile.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Lagertha
    haha! good for you...I'm still struggling with my Hillary-crazed friends (only some, thank goodness) though smacking them would be quite fun - avoidance is more my game. Here's a thought, not that I ever believe it is worth going back in time: the biggest mistake Obama made (vis -a-vis his legacy) was making Hillary Sec of State. Could never understand his logic about that choice.
  60. anon says:     Show CommentNext New Comment
    @Mr. Anon
    "Meanwhile, leftists don’t hesitate to say the most vile extreme and things."

    I've noticed that leftists, especially leftist women, especially young leftist women, will often discuss their political views as if no other views were even possible. It is as if they are ignorant of the fact that at least 1/3 to 1/2 of the electorate are to the right of them.

    I’ve noticed that leftists, especially leftist women, especially young leftist women, will often discuss their political views as if no other views were even possible. It is as if they are ignorant of the fact that at least 1/3 to 1/2 of the electorate are to the right of them.

    Hypnotized by TV – they are the most suggestible segment of the population

    Read More
    • Replies: @Mr. Anon
    "Hypnotized by TV – they are the most suggestible segment of the population."

    I have noticed it even among the green, progressive "kill your TV" sort of young women.

    But, otherwise, Yes, I agree with you.
  61. The polls were only wrong if you assume they were intended to accurately reflect the opinions of those polled. If you posit the polls were yet another in the quiver of arrows to blunt and supress as much support for Trump as possible, then the Polls were spot-on.

    I was the witty commenter in a number of venues in Western Europe and the UK over Spring and Summer, but the Ladbrokes wager ticket (7 to 1) that I showed one group made it clear that I was one of the deplorables. This same group had heard me predict Brexit passage the day before the referendum (8 to 1), so they were not so dismissive of Trump once I laid out the cards for him and against the war criminal and further laid out my bona fides as an American who as been more than 300 miles inland.

    As I said to one pro-remain Londoner on the eve of the referendum, “You don’t spend much time outside the M-25, do you?” (A: “No.”)

    Read More
  62. My guess is that Donald Trump is President-Elect because enough witty people in the suburbs of Detroit, Milwaukee, Philadelphia, Cleveland, and Miami held their tongues until they got into the privacy of the voting booth.

    I still tone it down a bit when I’m around my college professor wife, who voted for Hillary. She knows I’m happy, though. I’m no fan of Alex Jones, but I was listening to one of his post election rants (I’m wanting everyone’s perspective on the election) and it bugged her.

    I guess I should come clean on another item…a couple of weeks ago I was telling you all “I told you so” because we would’ve been sitting better with Ted Cruz in the general, despite some of his immigration shortcomings. I was wrong. I didn’t believe Trump could win…but I did pray for it. ;)

    Read More
  63. Anon says:     Show CommentNext New Comment

    This guy predicted the electoral vote outcome within 1% using a rational “shy Trump voter” correction to the 538 projections.

    http://foolishdoings.blogspot.com/2016/11/how-i-predicted-election_9.html?m=1

    Read More
  64. @Lagertha
    I sensed the silence of Trump supporters last winter. You had to talk in a type of code to figure out where someone stood - strictly talking about close friends/neighbors. There was also, a dearth of lawn signs this fall - must photo the "town gadfly's" lawn signs....a wild-ass Trump supporter - he even had orange clowns! However, by last week, people defiantly put their Trump signs out...few Hillary, even if she won our state by 60%. But, yeah, my best friend (thank goodness she and I were always on the same team), and many friends have told me the difficulty of concealing their choice....and now, the vitriol of their friends and colleagues today, is unseemly. The absolute hatred for Trump voters is astonishing, particularly coming from university-educated people/newspapers. I'm glad I'm in my mid-50's, and, no longer care about other people's hate-talk, even if they are acquaintances.

    I strictly voted on the issues; both national & international. And, Clinton was not a candidate for me due to the stuff she pulled for 25 years; and chiefly, the state of the economy today. Why Democrats don't understand their own hypocrisy, by allowing the Clinton Machine to deep-six Bernie, is breathtaking. Thank goodness for Wikileaks, even though, I didn't even need it since: Clinton + Wall St. + EU + endless wars + NAFTA + purposely dividing the country with "identity politics" + hypocrisy of giving scholarships to illegal aliens + not deporting killers and rapists + Migrant Crisis + ISIS + bombs/shootings/stabbings by jihadis here+ CF + deep-sixing Bernie + CNN collusion with debates + the entire media (except Hannity, Carlson, Greta & Brett at times) against him = Epic fail. I don't feel the need to gloat, but if the opportunity comes, why not?

    And, like I said several times; having driven many times across this nation, I have seen the despair and the boarded up towns, factories locked and chained. It almost brought me to tears, yet all the convenience store owners/hotel staff/small business people were ever so kind and glad I was spending some money in their town while passing through. And, lastly, I was floored that the media, for the last 5 years, has not given a shit about the people that live between the coasts; in small cities and towns, or the fact that good jobs (5 million) have disappeared. I was disturbed by Springsteen singing in Philly on Monday night....it's as if he had forgotten the words to his own song, the River....can't see to get UTube to let me paste.

    I sensed that dragging in all these performers and Hollywood types was a sign of doom...including Obama's spending so many days on the campaign trail - that was the oddest thing of all. Smelled of desperation...or they finally figured out the tens of thousands of people who have showed up at Trump rallies was a sign. Oh my. That so many DNC people missed this, is truly breathtaking...and, they still don't get it that condescending to half the American people, or assuming there is not a significant amount of Trump supporters that are highly educated, is breathtaking. Even the newspapers are still trying to stir up contempt. They are practically calling for violence against college students who are conservative - scary stuff. If it happens, it will implicate the newspapers and TV networks. We are just one day away from Trump supporting students to get shot or beat-up.

    I have long thought the 25 year old Bruce Springsteen wouldn’t even recognize the 67 year old Bruce Springsteen.

    He is one of my favorite artists and I will always cherish his early (and even “intermediate”) music. With that said, boy am I tired of what he has become. Blue collar champion to bathroom monitor.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Lagertha
    I know. So sad. He was my first concert at 13, in New Jersey. But, coming from a country that fought the Communists in WW1 & WW2, money corrupts, or money makes you lose your worries as we say in the North Country. Springsteen forgot his roots....this is so depressing for me, like you, to know this is a fact. https://youtu.be/zHnZP2FmLCc
  65. @utu
    It seems that I am the only one here who believes that the polls were rigged on purpose.

    Lots of people believe it, but it’s crap, in my opinion. And believing crap gets in the way of actually understanding what’s going on.

    Read More
    • Replies: @utu
    You think it's crap because it is undoable? Polls cannot be rigged?

    It's easier to rig polls than election results.

    , @Peripatetic commenter
    I can think of several things that might have caused their polls to miss what was going on:

    1. Some people who intended to vote for Trump simply lied
    2. Intentional sampling bias
    3. Unintentional sampling bias
    4. Assuming that this time around would be much like the last couple of times around and they could ignore angry whites

    I would be interested in knowing what went on.
    , @Hippopotamusdrome
    You can even hear it from the horse's mouth how the rig the polls:


    SPREAD THIS: Shock WikiLeaks Email PROVES How Team Hillary Is Rigging the Polls
    ... "I also want to get your Atlas folks to recommend oversamples for our polling before we start in February. By market, regions, etc. I want to get this all compiled into one set of recommendations so we can maximize what we get out of our media polling,”
    ...
    For Arizona, in a section titled “Research, microtargeting & polling projects,” it advises that the campaign encourage the media to “Over-sample Hispanics,” “Use Spanish language interviewing. (Monolingual Spanish-speaking voters are among the lowest turnout Democratic targets)” and “Over-sample the Native American population.”
    ...
    “Consider modeling independents to discern how many of them are strong Republican, strong Democrat, or swing. Statewide Democrats since 2002 have carried the independent vote, but the margins have been too narrow. It will be critical to move independents 12 to 15 points to bring the Democrats closer to 65% and 66%.”
    ...
    for Florida, they recommended to “Consistently monitor the sample to ensure it is not too old, and that it has enough African American and Hispanic voters to reflect the state,” and that, “On Independents: Tampa and Orlando are better persuasion targets than north or south Florida (check your polls before concluding this). If there are budget questions or oversamples, make sure that Tampa and Orlando are included first.”

     

  66. @cwhatfuture
    I was at a dinner party like that, and I heard several long, deranged, anti-Trump rants, but unlike Steve's more restrained guests, I could not hold my tongue. The other guests assumed I was left wing for no reason except their version of someone on the right is a meth addict fifth grade drop out in KKK robes.

    And I just ripped into their rudeness, their assumption that everyone supported Hillary, their willingness to insult Trump voters but inability to take any criticism of Hillary and threw in Hillary's enabling of rape, just for good measure. My wife wanted to kill me but I could not take it.

    We lost those "friends". I guess I should have made a joke about how great Hillary was and how we got all those cheap gardeners too.

    Nah.

    Tuesday made it all worthwhile.

    haha! good for you…I’m still struggling with my Hillary-crazed friends (only some, thank goodness) though smacking them would be quite fun – avoidance is more my game. Here’s a thought, not that I ever believe it is worth going back in time: the biggest mistake Obama made (vis -a-vis his legacy) was making Hillary Sec of State. Could never understand his logic about that choice.

    Read More
    • Replies: @cwhatfuture

    the biggest mistake Obama made (vis -a-vis his legacy) was making Hillary Sec of State. Could never understand his logic about that choice.
     
    Pure arrogance, I assume.
    Lincoln named his Republican rivals to his cabinet and Obama considered himself the Second Coming of Lincoln in those days. His speech announcing his candidacy was a complete Lincoln rip-off. So he just did what Lincoln did. Lincoln named Seward. Obama named Hillary. That is my guess anyway.

    All that matters is that it helped give the democrats the worst candidate possible. So whatever the reason, Hallelujah.
    , @Old fogey
    I always assumed that he named her Sec of State to keep her from "outing" him about his birth certificate and how he managed to move up the educational ladder so easily.
  67. And as far as dinner parties, does beer and pizza count at someone’s house?

    Read More
  68. @Benjamin I. Espen
    This is a particularly interesting question Steve. I see Gelman downplays the idea that Trump supporters simply kept their mouths shut, but this seems extremely plausible to me.

    So, I have to ask myself, why do I find this so plausible? In part, I think that I have been doing very much the same thing. I ended up not voting for either of the major candidates, but I considered Trump, and I would not have admitted it to a pollster. I live in a blue island in a red state, so the social disapproval is likely greater here than in other places, but I think the social disapproval is still real even in rural places with lots of Scots-Irish. The reason I think that is I feel it myself. I avoided Trump for much the same reasons that Ross Douthat has articulated: he is just too crass and opportunistic. I certainly hope it will turn out for the best, I just have my doubts.

    Thus, I find it extremely plausible that voters like myself probably wouldn't like to talk about supporting, or considering Trump. Of course, that is just my experience.

    I can add a data point here. As I commented here many times, I wasn’t (and still am not) a Trump supporter. Howeve, I found myself getting a lot of pushback (some quite angry), in conversations at work when I agreed Trump would be a bad president, but didn’t agree he was the next Hitler or that his supporters were all racist knuckle-draggers or whatever else. Simply saying “No, I don’t see any reason to think he’s anti-Semetic or particularly hates gays” would trigger a fair bit of anger.

    I don’t know how this relates to talking to pollsters, though. I wonder how many people were not 100% certain, themselves, which way they were voting until they got into the voting booth.

    Read More
  69. @gcochran
    Lots of people believe it, but it's crap, in my opinion. And believing crap gets in the way of actually understanding what's going on.

    You think it’s crap because it is undoable? Polls cannot be rigged?

    It’s easier to rig polls than election results.

    Read More
  70. Come on, what about the polls that were giving Hillary +4, +7, and even +14 at some point in October? These polls were intentionally rigged to demoralize and discourage Trump supporters. This was a normal psy-op.

    The media really ****ed themselves on this score (deskewing in the final days of the campaign, I mean), with their 24/7 carpet nuking campaign against Trump. They want to claim that this story or that story narrowed the race in Trump’s favor, which makes no ****ing sense at all in light of said carpet nuking. If negative press (per se) mattered that much, Trump would have gotten 5% of the vote.

    next time the Dems will nominate a charismatic Black dude again

    Lots of slow learners on this site. Kind of trippy. You might be the king:

    The Math: Trump 2016 Would’ve Beaten Obama 2012.

    Read More
    • Replies: @guest
    To be fair, that was 2012 Obama. Would Trump beat '08 Obama? Any new Blackocrat nominee will be fresh and unburdened by travesties like Obamacare.

    Plus, next time they'll go with someone really black, like Wesley Snipes.
  71. Lots of people believe it, but it’s crap, in my opinion. And believing crap gets in the way of actually understanding what’s going on.

    I’m more in the “pollsters really lacked any motivation to check their math this time around” camp.

    Read More
  72. @gcochran
    Lots of people believe it, but it's crap, in my opinion. And believing crap gets in the way of actually understanding what's going on.

    I can think of several things that might have caused their polls to miss what was going on:

    1. Some people who intended to vote for Trump simply lied
    2. Intentional sampling bias
    3. Unintentional sampling bias
    4. Assuming that this time around would be much like the last couple of times around and they could ignore angry whites

    I would be interested in knowing what went on.

    Read More
    • Replies: @what would ernest borgnine do 2016
    Another Hint to build on your 4 - many people who design and work on polls do not intend to design and work on polls for the rest of their lives.
    These are not disinterested Gussie Fink-Nottles [[with a love for the truth about newts and a not very comical (unusually for Wodehouse, who although he has a dark side it is generally not a large part of his oeuvre) but very admirable fear of storing newts in bathtubs.]]
    "Building a resume for the right people " are seven words that answer much of the variables included in the question "Why were the Polls Wrong".
    Andrew Gelman, by the way, often ventures out into unknown areas that have not been previously blessed with his statistical insights: after his ventures into these (one might think) random areas, he finds that most of the time his beliefs about the superiority of his circa 2016 liberal Ivy League prejudices are reinforced. What are the odds that his beliefs are reinforced most of the time??? Even given his unmistakable level of talent....
    , @Lagertha
    It was cultural suicide in the USA, Sept-Nov. to say that you were voting for Trump. Major, duh.
    Think about it: Snowden warned us how our very click leaves a footprint. With, me at least, being a nobody who cares about dogs, cats, cows, horses, sharks, whales, pigs, the whole lotta Noah's Ark living things, is not interesting to the watchers.
  73. @utu
    It seems that I am the only one here who believes that the polls were rigged on purpose.

    I do not believe the major polling outfits or aggregators like Sam Wang or 538 intentionally rigged their polls. I wouldn’t be surprised if there were some pollsters trying for that effect, but as best I can tell, the major pollsters and aggregators are trying as hard as they can to get their predictions right, and are putting their names and reputations out there for the world to judge.

    There is a lot that can go wrong with predicting an election with polling. This link talks about 538,s forecasting method, which I suspect is overly complex and massively overfitted given the small amount of actual data available, but it also gives you some notion of how many moving parts there are in their forecast. But even a single poll combines sampling, deciding who is a likely voter, and then basically building a model of the voters by groups (race, sex, party affiliation, etc.) and using that plus a model of what groups will show up at the polls to make a prediction. And every year, the number of people who even can be sampled by phone goes down (lots of people have gotten rid of their landline phones; others have wired phones but never answer them), and all kinds of other stuff changes, too.

    Read More
    • Replies: @utu
    The same raw polling data can produce vastly different results depending on what assumptions about weighting the data to eliminate biases are used. There is plenty of room to do it at various stages.
    , @anon

    but as best I can tell, the major pollsters and aggregators are trying as hard as they can to get their predictions right, and are putting their names and reputations out there for the world to judge.
     
    To preserve their reputation they only need to be close at the end.

    But leave the general argument aside and just pick one example: the ABC Clinton+12 poll that they pushed with the "coasting" narrative when she was sick and couldn't campaign.

    Rigged or not?
  74. @NOTA
    I do not believe the major polling outfits or aggregators like Sam Wang or 538 intentionally rigged their polls. I wouldn't be surprised if there were some pollsters trying for that effect, but as best I can tell, the major pollsters and aggregators are trying as hard as they can to get their predictions right, and are putting their names and reputations out there for the world to judge.

    There is a lot that can go wrong with predicting an election with polling. This link talks about 538,s forecasting method, which I suspect is overly complex and massively overfitted given the small amount of actual data available, but it also gives you some notion of how many moving parts there are in their forecast. But even a single poll combines sampling, deciding who is a likely voter, and then basically building a model of the voters by groups (race, sex, party affiliation, etc.) and using that plus a model of what groups will show up at the polls to make a prediction. And every year, the number of people who even can be sampled by phone goes down (lots of people have gotten rid of their landline phones; others have wired phones but never answer them), and all kinds of other stuff changes, too.

    The same raw polling data can produce vastly different results depending on what assumptions about weighting the data to eliminate biases are used. There is plenty of room to do it at various stages.

    Read More
  75. @Svigor

    Come on, what about the polls that were giving Hillary +4, +7, and even +14 at some point in October? These polls were intentionally rigged to demoralize and discourage Trump supporters. This was a normal psy-op.
     
    The media really ****ed themselves on this score (deskewing in the final days of the campaign, I mean), with their 24/7 carpet nuking campaign against Trump. They want to claim that this story or that story narrowed the race in Trump's favor, which makes no ****ing sense at all in light of said carpet nuking. If negative press (per se) mattered that much, Trump would have gotten 5% of the vote.

    next time the Dems will nominate a charismatic Black dude again
     
    Lots of slow learners on this site. Kind of trippy. You might be the king:

    The Math: Trump 2016 Would’ve Beaten Obama 2012.

    To be fair, that was 2012 Obama. Would Trump beat ’08 Obama? Any new Blackocrat nominee will be fresh and unburdened by travesties like Obamacare.

    Plus, next time they’ll go with someone really black, like Wesley Snipes.

    Read More
  76. @Dieter Kief
    Why were the pollsters so wrong so often, lately?

    In Germany, in France (Le Pen), in GB (Brexit) and now in the USA?
    1) Reason one - the one Steve Sailer points out above - they were decided, but kept their mouth shut.

    2) But I could imagine something slightly diffrent going on, too. Many people/ voters might rest undicided - until they do get into the voting booth - they're black holes not only to the pollsters, but to themselves as well.

    The bigger the MSM-frenzy about the consequences of the unwanted votes, the more so - the more people might start to feel that it's not wise to expose themselves to the obviously strong powers of the status quo - not even in their own mind/ and or fantasy.
    The way out indeed is the secrecy of the voting booth in such situations too. There you find the protection, that you otherwise lack.

    If this was right, it could be quite a task to prove or to show it - make it more plausible than it might sound already. You would have to show that being undecided means in some situations to be in favour of an anti-mainstream-position. It would make sense to look out for situations in which the mainstream is overrepresented in the media. And the publicised fear of non-mainstram positions would be clearly over the top.

    3) Could be that the whole thing is interesting besides the strategic thoughts about media and power.

    Because it is deeply wired in the human consciousness to run with the pack. If the need to run against the pack appears on the horizon, it might well be that lots of poeple feel uneasy just for this reason alone - and turn their consciousness off to get rid of the upcoming fear.

    (This might be the junction, where people, who lean towards conspiracy theories, tend to choose the wrong turn. And the reason why conspiracy theories are so attractive at the same time. Those conspiracy theories, that appear in such situations a n d for no other reason, could simply be read as indicators, that people sense (lots of) social stress.

    Many people/ voters might rest undecided – until they do get into the voting booth – they’re black holes not only to the pollsters, but to themselves as well.

    This is a very thoughtful and encouraging comment. You’re suggesting that there many be a substantial number of people who, when asked finally to make a choice and act on it, i.e. vote, reject ‘the pack’ and its Narrative and actually think for themselves. I really do hope this is the case in not just the USA, but in the rest of the West as well.

    Looking in from the outside (I’m an American, but have lived in Hong Kong for many years), the USA/many other western countries seem to be staggering on a dream state that should have ended years, if not decades, ago. They’ve been through an entire century that witnessed one Marxist and cultural-Marxist scheme after another trying to envisage and enforce utopia. All of those schemes ended in war and ruin, but still, led by a fanatical and relentless Leftist vanguard, western countries push onward, to the point of inviting, promoting, and even paying for their self-extinction.

    And yet as the pack rushes toward the cliff, it’s no longer a pack if its members dare to disobey. Let’s hope and pray that more and more are willing to turn and break away.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Dieter Kief
    Excuse me for being a little late, my mind doesn't work exactly on schedule sometimes.

    But I want to add one little thing - the very fact, that people don't talk to pollsters in a meanigful way might already indict, that somehting important is going on.

    Thers's another aspect. If people don't talk, it might be, that they do so in order to protect their secrets.

    In the first case, the silence would be a defensive one - for fear of the social pressure - - of the pack...

    In the second case, the silence would be a more private one - for fear of the confusion, that arises, as soon as pou talk openly.

    Those are all aspects of the spirit, so to speak, and therefor subtle - and fragile - at their core.

    Final thought: Society is no children's playground at all.

    As is the public shpere in general.

  77. anonymous says:     Show CommentNext New Comment

    Amen, Brother.

    As a proud “deplorable” from Macomb County, might I modestly suggest that the late great George Frederic Handel predicted this?

    “The Trump(et) Shall Sound” as theme music?

    Begin at the 36 second mark:

    http://www.bing.com/videos/search?q=the+trumpet+shall+sound+messiah&view=detail&mid=0C0573253AB66D6023A20C0573253AB66D6023A2&FORM=VIRE

    Read More
  78. @Lagertha
    haha! good for you...I'm still struggling with my Hillary-crazed friends (only some, thank goodness) though smacking them would be quite fun - avoidance is more my game. Here's a thought, not that I ever believe it is worth going back in time: the biggest mistake Obama made (vis -a-vis his legacy) was making Hillary Sec of State. Could never understand his logic about that choice.

    the biggest mistake Obama made (vis -a-vis his legacy) was making Hillary Sec of State. Could never understand his logic about that choice.

    Pure arrogance, I assume.
    Lincoln named his Republican rivals to his cabinet and Obama considered himself the Second Coming of Lincoln in those days. His speech announcing his candidacy was a complete Lincoln rip-off. So he just did what Lincoln did. Lincoln named Seward. Obama named Hillary. That is my guess anyway.

    All that matters is that it helped give the democrats the worst candidate possible. So whatever the reason, Hallelujah.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Jim Don Bob
    The old adage says, "Better to have her in the tent pissing out, rather than outside the tent pissing in."

    BHO didn't anticipate that she and Bill would turn State into their personal ATM. I have thought for years that both of then are grifters, but the scale and brazenness of their corruption is truly staggering.
    , @Lagertha
    gotcha, you betcha...whatever! I am happy.
  79. anon says:     Show CommentNext New Comment
    @NOTA
    I do not believe the major polling outfits or aggregators like Sam Wang or 538 intentionally rigged their polls. I wouldn't be surprised if there were some pollsters trying for that effect, but as best I can tell, the major pollsters and aggregators are trying as hard as they can to get their predictions right, and are putting their names and reputations out there for the world to judge.

    There is a lot that can go wrong with predicting an election with polling. This link talks about 538,s forecasting method, which I suspect is overly complex and massively overfitted given the small amount of actual data available, but it also gives you some notion of how many moving parts there are in their forecast. But even a single poll combines sampling, deciding who is a likely voter, and then basically building a model of the voters by groups (race, sex, party affiliation, etc.) and using that plus a model of what groups will show up at the polls to make a prediction. And every year, the number of people who even can be sampled by phone goes down (lots of people have gotten rid of their landline phones; others have wired phones but never answer them), and all kinds of other stuff changes, too.

    but as best I can tell, the major pollsters and aggregators are trying as hard as they can to get their predictions right, and are putting their names and reputations out there for the world to judge.

    To preserve their reputation they only need to be close at the end.

    But leave the general argument aside and just pick one example: the ABC Clinton+12 poll that they pushed with the “coasting” narrative when she was sick and couldn’t campaign.

    Rigged or not?

    Read More
  80. @gcochran
    Lots of people believe it, but it's crap, in my opinion. And believing crap gets in the way of actually understanding what's going on.

    You can even hear it from the horse’s mouth how the rig the polls:

    SPREAD THIS: Shock WikiLeaks Email PROVES How Team Hillary Is Rigging the Polls
    … “I also want to get your Atlas folks to recommend oversamples for our polling before we start in February. By market, regions, etc. I want to get this all compiled into one set of recommendations so we can maximize what we get out of our media polling,”

    For Arizona, in a section titled “Research, microtargeting & polling projects,” it advises that the campaign encourage the media to “Over-sample Hispanics,” “Use Spanish language interviewing. (Monolingual Spanish-speaking voters are among the lowest turnout Democratic targets)” and “Over-sample the Native American population.”

    “Consider modeling independents to discern how many of them are strong Republican, strong Democrat, or swing. Statewide Democrats since 2002 have carried the independent vote, but the margins have been too narrow. It will be critical to move independents 12 to 15 points to bring the Democrats closer to 65% and 66%.”

    for Florida, they recommended to “Consistently monitor the sample to ensure it is not too old, and that it has enough African American and Hispanic voters to reflect the state,” and that, “On Independents: Tampa and Orlando are better persuasion targets than north or south Florida (check your polls before concluding this). If there are budget questions or oversamples, make sure that Tampa and Orlando are included first.”

    Read More
  81. @Hippopotamusdrome
    You can even hear it from the horse's mouth how the rig the polls:


    SPREAD THIS: Shock WikiLeaks Email PROVES How Team Hillary Is Rigging the Polls
    ... "I also want to get your Atlas folks to recommend oversamples for our polling before we start in February. By market, regions, etc. I want to get this all compiled into one set of recommendations so we can maximize what we get out of our media polling,”
    ...
    For Arizona, in a section titled “Research, microtargeting & polling projects,” it advises that the campaign encourage the media to “Over-sample Hispanics,” “Use Spanish language interviewing. (Monolingual Spanish-speaking voters are among the lowest turnout Democratic targets)” and “Over-sample the Native American population.”
    ...
    “Consider modeling independents to discern how many of them are strong Republican, strong Democrat, or swing. Statewide Democrats since 2002 have carried the independent vote, but the margins have been too narrow. It will be critical to move independents 12 to 15 points to bring the Democrats closer to 65% and 66%.”
    ...
    for Florida, they recommended to “Consistently monitor the sample to ensure it is not too old, and that it has enough African American and Hispanic voters to reflect the state,” and that, “On Independents: Tampa and Orlando are better persuasion targets than north or south Florida (check your polls before concluding this). If there are budget questions or oversamples, make sure that Tampa and Orlando are included first.”

     

    I don’t get it.

    Read More
  82. @Matt Stevens
    I wonder what the vote count might look like if I, and many other Trump supporters, had not been afraid to publicly support Trump. Even now, I haven't dared let on to anyone aside from close friends that I filled in the bubble next to Trump's name on the ballot. I haven't tossed in many witty asides, finding myself lacking both opportunity and wit. Will it ever be safe for Trump supporters to go public?

    It will be as safe as we make it. No more, no less.

    Read More
  83. @utu
    It seems that I am the only one here who believes that the polls were rigged on purpose.

    You’re not the only one.

    Polls showing HRC with a nice comfortable lead were preferentially shown on Big Media, which was outrageously anti-Trump. This allowed the polling companies to benefit from associating their brands with the media brands, increasing their value. It also increases their name recognition (these companies do more than just predict elections, you know; they’re trolling for clients).

    They all tightened up their numbers just before the election, so they could look like they knew what they were doing on election night.

    “Rigged.”

    Read More
    • Replies: @utu
    I like you explanation of the financial motive for the polling companies to do the rigging. The tightening up of the polls started after WSJ article on wife on #2 man in FBI:

    “The trigger mechanism did not originate from FBI Director James Comey’s letter per se. It was the Wall Street Journal, mouthpiece of the US financial establishment, which revealed the fraud and bribery scheme: The wife of the Number Two Man at the FBI Andrew McCabe had received a large sum of money from Hillary Clinton, via the Governor of Virginia.

    The timing of this decision less than two weeks before the elections was crucial. But it was ultimately the WSJ (and those behind the release of the report on the Clinton-McCabe fraud) who determined the course of events.” (Michel Chossudovsky, Nov. 1)
  84. @Harry Baldwin
    I've gotten to the point that I don't discuss politics with anyone on the left. They take it too personally. Most are incapable of having a rational, dispassionate discussion of issues. It's a religion to them and if you argue with their dogma you're an infidel who should be cast out or--some will actually say this--killed.

    I had an electrician fixing a light at my house a few weeks ago. He brought up the election, saying non-committal things like, "How about this election, eh? What a couple of losers. Looks like whatever way it goes we're screwed, right?"

    Suspecting where he was coming from, I said, "I'm going to be happy to vote for Trump."

    He burst out with, "I'M SO GLAD YOU SAID THAT!" and launched into a five-minute rant about how much he hates Hillary, the Democrats, and our immigration policy. So I had met one of those shy Trump supporters.

    I have other friends and professional associates with whom I would never discuss politics. I would never mention on facebook that I support Trump, because there might be repercussions to my livelihood. Meanwhile, leftists don't hesitate to say the most vile extreme and things.
    Read More
  85. @Benjamin I. Espen
    This is a particularly interesting question Steve. I see Gelman downplays the idea that Trump supporters simply kept their mouths shut, but this seems extremely plausible to me.

    So, I have to ask myself, why do I find this so plausible? In part, I think that I have been doing very much the same thing. I ended up not voting for either of the major candidates, but I considered Trump, and I would not have admitted it to a pollster. I live in a blue island in a red state, so the social disapproval is likely greater here than in other places, but I think the social disapproval is still real even in rural places with lots of Scots-Irish. The reason I think that is I feel it myself. I avoided Trump for much the same reasons that Ross Douthat has articulated: he is just too crass and opportunistic. I certainly hope it will turn out for the best, I just have my doubts.

    Thus, I find it extremely plausible that voters like myself probably wouldn't like to talk about supporting, or considering Trump. Of course, that is just my experience.

    Egg McMuffin?

    Read More
  86. @cwhatfuture

    the biggest mistake Obama made (vis -a-vis his legacy) was making Hillary Sec of State. Could never understand his logic about that choice.
     
    Pure arrogance, I assume.
    Lincoln named his Republican rivals to his cabinet and Obama considered himself the Second Coming of Lincoln in those days. His speech announcing his candidacy was a complete Lincoln rip-off. So he just did what Lincoln did. Lincoln named Seward. Obama named Hillary. That is my guess anyway.

    All that matters is that it helped give the democrats the worst candidate possible. So whatever the reason, Hallelujah.

    The old adage says, “Better to have her in the tent pissing out, rather than outside the tent pissing in.”

    BHO didn’t anticipate that she and Bill would turn State into their personal ATM. I have thought for years that both of then are grifters, but the scale and brazenness of their corruption is truly staggering.

    Read More
  87. @cwhatfuture

    the biggest mistake Obama made (vis -a-vis his legacy) was making Hillary Sec of State. Could never understand his logic about that choice.
     
    Pure arrogance, I assume.
    Lincoln named his Republican rivals to his cabinet and Obama considered himself the Second Coming of Lincoln in those days. His speech announcing his candidacy was a complete Lincoln rip-off. So he just did what Lincoln did. Lincoln named Seward. Obama named Hillary. That is my guess anyway.

    All that matters is that it helped give the democrats the worst candidate possible. So whatever the reason, Hallelujah.

    gotcha, you betcha…whatever! I am happy.

    Read More
  88. That piece has been updated; Hussein 2012 edges out Trump 2016. But as I wrote in another thread:

    K, so, Hussein 2012 takes Ohio by about 60k votes, and Pennsylvania by about 78k. Assuming Trump does a proper job with his first term, improved ground game, improved Republican loyalty, and incumbent advantage should be givens. I’d stack that up against the next Great Black Hype with no First Black Hype badge, any day.

    To be fair, that was 2012 Obama. Would Trump beat ’08 Obama? Any new Blackocrat nominee will be fresh and unburdened by travesties like Obamacare.

    Plus, next time they’ll go with someone really black, like Wesley Snipes.

    1. Really black is a minus. Lower IQ, less articulate, more threatening-looking, more alien features.
    2. Fresh isn’t fresh any more. There’s only one First Great Black Hype, and that ship has sailed. Next one is necessarily far less interesting.
    3. Husseins don’t grow on trees, even if you toss out the “really black” requirement.
    4. The First Great Black Hype was a disappointment.

    Read More
  89. @Steve from Detroit
    I have long thought the 25 year old Bruce Springsteen wouldn't even recognize the 67 year old Bruce Springsteen.

    He is one of my favorite artists and I will always cherish his early (and even "intermediate") music. With that said, boy am I tired of what he has become. Blue collar champion to bathroom monitor.

    I know. So sad. He was my first concert at 13, in New Jersey. But, coming from a country that fought the Communists in WW1 & WW2, money corrupts, or money makes you lose your worries as we say in the North Country. Springsteen forgot his roots….this is so depressing for me, like you, to know this is a fact. https://youtu.be/zHnZP2FmLCc

    Read More
  90. Anon says:     Show CommentNext New Comment
    @Benjamin I. Espen
    Joel Kotlikoff. I find libertarians weird.

    “Joel Kotlikoff”

    Speaking of weird….

    Read More
    • Replies: @Benjamin I. Espen
    Well, he is an economist, so he strikes me as typical of the breed.
  91. @Peripatetic commenter
    I can think of several things that might have caused their polls to miss what was going on:

    1. Some people who intended to vote for Trump simply lied
    2. Intentional sampling bias
    3. Unintentional sampling bias
    4. Assuming that this time around would be much like the last couple of times around and they could ignore angry whites

    I would be interested in knowing what went on.

    Another Hint to build on your 4 – many people who design and work on polls do not intend to design and work on polls for the rest of their lives.
    These are not disinterested Gussie Fink-Nottles [[with a love for the truth about newts and a not very comical (unusually for Wodehouse, who although he has a dark side it is generally not a large part of his oeuvre) but very admirable fear of storing newts in bathtubs.]]
    “Building a resume for the right people ” are seven words that answer much of the variables included in the question “Why were the Polls Wrong”.
    Andrew Gelman, by the way, often ventures out into unknown areas that have not been previously blessed with his statistical insights: after his ventures into these (one might think) random areas, he finds that most of the time his beliefs about the superiority of his circa 2016 liberal Ivy League prejudices are reinforced. What are the odds that his beliefs are reinforced most of the time??? Even given his unmistakable level of talent….

    Read More
    • Replies: @middle aged vet
    Gussie Fink-Nottle has been compared to Boris Johnson (wrongly in my opinion).
    And Ken Livingstone, whoever that is.
    Right Ho Jeeves has a good Gussie Fink-Nottle speech.
    Bertie could have done worse than Madeleine Basset.
    Actually, newts really are fascinating - anyone who has met several thousand of them over the "course of ten thousand hours" can readily see their individual personalities and predilections and virtues and self-indulgent forms of laziness.
    The ten thousand hour mark as a guarantee of expertise is ridiculous (just read Asimov on an off day) but we are not angels and there is some truth to the assertion that we can, given enough time, eventually understand things that are more and more complicated.
    Even Karl Popper, who had no idea of who the best writers of his time were, thought that the more we learn in the far future the more the border of what remains to be learned will show itself as even more proceeding away.
    Like big beautiful constellations over the dark sky south of Bali, setting over the ocean as we watch.
    todas las dias son días buenas quando in su corazón hay amor. Philippians 1 rings the changes on this nicely.
  92. @Peripatetic commenter
    I can think of several things that might have caused their polls to miss what was going on:

    1. Some people who intended to vote for Trump simply lied
    2. Intentional sampling bias
    3. Unintentional sampling bias
    4. Assuming that this time around would be much like the last couple of times around and they could ignore angry whites

    I would be interested in knowing what went on.

    It was cultural suicide in the USA, Sept-Nov. to say that you were voting for Trump. Major, duh.
    Think about it: Snowden warned us how our very click leaves a footprint. With, me at least, being a nobody who cares about dogs, cats, cows, horses, sharks, whales, pigs, the whole lotta Noah’s Ark living things, is not interesting to the watchers.

    Read More
  93. @anon

    I’ve noticed that leftists, especially leftist women, especially young leftist women, will often discuss their political views as if no other views were even possible. It is as if they are ignorant of the fact that at least 1/3 to 1/2 of the electorate are to the right of them.
     
    Hypnotized by TV - they are the most suggestible segment of the population

    “Hypnotized by TV – they are the most suggestible segment of the population.”

    I have noticed it even among the green, progressive “kill your TV” sort of young women.

    But, otherwise, Yes, I agree with you.

    Read More
  94. @what would ernest borgnine do 2016
    Another Hint to build on your 4 - many people who design and work on polls do not intend to design and work on polls for the rest of their lives.
    These are not disinterested Gussie Fink-Nottles [[with a love for the truth about newts and a not very comical (unusually for Wodehouse, who although he has a dark side it is generally not a large part of his oeuvre) but very admirable fear of storing newts in bathtubs.]]
    "Building a resume for the right people " are seven words that answer much of the variables included in the question "Why were the Polls Wrong".
    Andrew Gelman, by the way, often ventures out into unknown areas that have not been previously blessed with his statistical insights: after his ventures into these (one might think) random areas, he finds that most of the time his beliefs about the superiority of his circa 2016 liberal Ivy League prejudices are reinforced. What are the odds that his beliefs are reinforced most of the time??? Even given his unmistakable level of talent....

    Gussie Fink-Nottle has been compared to Boris Johnson (wrongly in my opinion).
    And Ken Livingstone, whoever that is.
    Right Ho Jeeves has a good Gussie Fink-Nottle speech.
    Bertie could have done worse than Madeleine Basset.
    Actually, newts really are fascinating – anyone who has met several thousand of them over the “course of ten thousand hours” can readily see their individual personalities and predilections and virtues and self-indulgent forms of laziness.
    The ten thousand hour mark as a guarantee of expertise is ridiculous (just read Asimov on an off day) but we are not angels and there is some truth to the assertion that we can, given enough time, eventually understand things that are more and more complicated.
    Even Karl Popper, who had no idea of who the best writers of his time were, thought that the more we learn in the far future the more the border of what remains to be learned will show itself as even more proceeding away.
    Like big beautiful constellations over the dark sky south of Bali, setting over the ocean as we watch.
    todas las dias son días buenas quando in su corazón hay amor. Philippians 1 rings the changes on this nicely.

    Read More
    • Replies: @middle aged vet
    "The wish to pray is a prayer in itself. God can ask of us no more than that." Bernanos.
  95. @middle aged vet
    Gussie Fink-Nottle has been compared to Boris Johnson (wrongly in my opinion).
    And Ken Livingstone, whoever that is.
    Right Ho Jeeves has a good Gussie Fink-Nottle speech.
    Bertie could have done worse than Madeleine Basset.
    Actually, newts really are fascinating - anyone who has met several thousand of them over the "course of ten thousand hours" can readily see their individual personalities and predilections and virtues and self-indulgent forms of laziness.
    The ten thousand hour mark as a guarantee of expertise is ridiculous (just read Asimov on an off day) but we are not angels and there is some truth to the assertion that we can, given enough time, eventually understand things that are more and more complicated.
    Even Karl Popper, who had no idea of who the best writers of his time were, thought that the more we learn in the far future the more the border of what remains to be learned will show itself as even more proceeding away.
    Like big beautiful constellations over the dark sky south of Bali, setting over the ocean as we watch.
    todas las dias son días buenas quando in su corazón hay amor. Philippians 1 rings the changes on this nicely.

    “The wish to pray is a prayer in itself. God can ask of us no more than that.” Bernanos.

    Read More
  96. I was chatting politics all summer with a Venezuelan hottie and and cute African American girl who work in the office where I work out… I always put CNN on while lifting… They ranted about Trump but I ended up going out with the Venezuelan a few times (same exact accent as Machado, which always had me laughing).

    Day before election we were all chatting again and they were much more reasonable… as I continued to talk they realized I had been for Trump the whole time… and they were actually fine about it. It shocked them but they like me. They told me to come back Wednesday to take my lumps… haven’t been in yet during office hours but tomorrow… ;-)

    Read More
    • Replies: @Lagertha
    You rock. exhale. be a "southern man" (polite/defer/complimentary/thoughtful for any cars parked far away and all...umbrella at hand/rain, etc.) Make sure you signal that you are available; but she must also be available. Life is short - don't waste your time with someone who has deep-seated anger/still attached to old boyfriend...or, is just plain suffering from a personality disorder. Ask them # 1 of Lagertha's Rules of 3; "tell me about your parents; how are your parents?"
    if there is any negativity: pay the bill, say thank you for a great night; walk away, big league.
    , @5371
    Conquistador mindset ))
  97. @Anon7
    You're not the only one.

    Polls showing HRC with a nice comfortable lead were preferentially shown on Big Media, which was outrageously anti-Trump. This allowed the polling companies to benefit from associating their brands with the media brands, increasing their value. It also increases their name recognition (these companies do more than just predict elections, you know; they're trolling for clients).

    They all tightened up their numbers just before the election, so they could look like they knew what they were doing on election night.

    "Rigged."

    I like you explanation of the financial motive for the polling companies to do the rigging. The tightening up of the polls started after WSJ article on wife on #2 man in FBI:

    “The trigger mechanism did not originate from FBI Director James Comey’s letter per se. It was the Wall Street Journal, mouthpiece of the US financial establishment, which revealed the fraud and bribery scheme: The wife of the Number Two Man at the FBI Andrew McCabe had received a large sum of money from Hillary Clinton, via the Governor of Virginia.

    The timing of this decision less than two weeks before the elections was crucial. But it was ultimately the WSJ (and those behind the release of the report on the Clinton-McCabe fraud) who determined the course of events.” (Michel Chossudovsky, Nov. 1)

    Read More
  98. @Lagertha
    haha! good for you...I'm still struggling with my Hillary-crazed friends (only some, thank goodness) though smacking them would be quite fun - avoidance is more my game. Here's a thought, not that I ever believe it is worth going back in time: the biggest mistake Obama made (vis -a-vis his legacy) was making Hillary Sec of State. Could never understand his logic about that choice.

    I always assumed that he named her Sec of State to keep her from “outing” him about his birth certificate and how he managed to move up the educational ladder so easily.

    Read More
  99. @Je Suis Charlie Martel
    I was chatting politics all summer with a Venezuelan hottie and and cute African American girl who work in the office where I work out... I always put CNN on while lifting... They ranted about Trump but I ended up going out with the Venezuelan a few times (same exact accent as Machado, which always had me laughing).

    Day before election we were all chatting again and they were much more reasonable... as I continued to talk they realized I had been for Trump the whole time... and they were actually fine about it. It shocked them but they like me. They told me to come back Wednesday to take my lumps... haven't been in yet during office hours but tomorrow... ;-)

    You rock. exhale. be a “southern man” (polite/defer/complimentary/thoughtful for any cars parked far away and all…umbrella at hand/rain, etc.) Make sure you signal that you are available; but she must also be available. Life is short – don’t waste your time with someone who has deep-seated anger/still attached to old boyfriend…or, is just plain suffering from a personality disorder. Ask them # 1 of Lagertha’s Rules of 3; “tell me about your parents; how are your parents?”
    if there is any negativity: pay the bill, say thank you for a great night; walk away, big league.

    Read More
  100. @Je Suis Charlie Martel
    I was chatting politics all summer with a Venezuelan hottie and and cute African American girl who work in the office where I work out... I always put CNN on while lifting... They ranted about Trump but I ended up going out with the Venezuelan a few times (same exact accent as Machado, which always had me laughing).

    Day before election we were all chatting again and they were much more reasonable... as I continued to talk they realized I had been for Trump the whole time... and they were actually fine about it. It shocked them but they like me. They told me to come back Wednesday to take my lumps... haven't been in yet during office hours but tomorrow... ;-)

    Conquistador mindset ))

    Read More
  101. @SFG
    Yeah, but we have no twins. ;)

    Unfortunately, after the Smolensk presidential plane crash in April 2010 we also don’t have twins.

    Read More
  102. What I’d like to know is how Steve gets himself invited to fancy dinner parties full of fancy liberals. Don’t any of them have Internet connections?

    Read More
    • Replies: @Dieter Kief
    Internet connections, right, but, big But - Steve Sailer is invisible to most people, most likely not only because he thinks, but because he writes his elaborate thoughts down too.

    Simple explanation would be: He accompanied his wife - "This is my husband Steve" - "Oh nice to meet you, Steve"... and then he talks sports - - and relaxes while having a thorough look at what's going on. Behaviour like this is said to be quite healthy.

  103. @jb
    What I'd like to know is how Steve gets himself invited to fancy dinner parties full of fancy liberals. Don't any of them have Internet connections?

    Internet connections, right, but, big But – Steve Sailer is invisible to most people, most likely not only because he thinks, but because he writes his elaborate thoughts down too.

    Simple explanation would be: He accompanied his wife – “This is my husband Steve” – “Oh nice to meet you, Steve”… and then he talks sports – – and relaxes while having a thorough look at what’s going on. Behaviour like this is said to be quite healthy.

    Read More
  104. @Anon
    "Joel Kotlikoff"

    Speaking of weird....

    Well, he is an economist, so he strikes me as typical of the breed.

    Read More
  105. anon says:     Show CommentNext New Comment
    @Sam Lowry
    So glad you mentioned closeted Trump supporters living in occupied/progressive territory. We live downtown in a prime East Coast city that's been ruled by liberals for generations; it's a one-party state. Liberal republicans aren't even permitted. Giuliani and Bloomberg are viewed as tools of the fascist oligarchy. We're Christian, gun-toting, right-wing nuts living (somewhat in the political closet) in an East Coast Portlandia.

    At the same time, we're very happy and love our city. There's a reason why people flock to cities. Over the past 20 years there's been a yuge urban renaissance throughout the country. Super bars, restaurants, music, art, fun people etc., all right at your door step--and in case you think places beside liberal, big cities have this, believe me they don't. Just walk or bike a few minutes to the best of everything. (Urban) composting is almost mandatory, while cars are passé. Yeah, private school tuition and prepping for the Ivy League rat race are a pain, but a small price to pay for our children's inclusion in the reigning oligarchy. It reminds me of that Gore Vidal line about "if people knew how much fun and well the true upper class lived, there would be riots in the street"--paraphrased of course

    Almost all our friends and neighbors assume we're right thinking SWPL types and we've done little to dissuade them from this thought. Not that we lie or deny our right-wing thought-crimes, but we just don't mention politics and our friends, for the most part, don't either. Our church going is the only tip-off that might raise a question, but people assume we go to a liberal protestant church, when in fact it's Evangelical. Their suspicions are further assuaged by our otherwise complete SWPL lifestyle: biking, vegans (part-time), Ivy grads, NPR/NYT/Economist/Pacifica/ArtForum references ("I haven't read Whitehead's new novel, heard it's great, but I did read his Zone One book a few years ago"), contemporary art interests ("Peyton and Curran are over, Fischer is much better"), seeing indie bands in people's basements/backyards, dressing as Bansky murals for Halloween, pushing udon noodles (has to have the gochujang) on our kids, etc.

    Of course, there has been lots of Trump angst among our right-thinking friends over the last few months and I can make fun of him too; he's an eminently satirical character (the short fingered vulgarian). However, like your dinner party guests our Trump jokes and comments never hit his political ideas. "That Trump guy is right, we should build a wall, look at all the crystal meth. manufacturing jobs that have fled to Mexico. We need to protect American crystal meth. manufacturing jobs!" Plus, as so may urban progressives really loved Bernie Sanders and are still upset at Hillary for giving him the shaft, our anti-Hillary talk (she's corrupt and a tool of Wall Street) comes off as pro-Bernie speech that they would say themselves. All in all, we do love our neighbors and friends, so why let political differences get in the way. Yes, some of the more hard-core leftists might not be so kind if we discussed our politics so as not to offend them we don't and they (unintentionally not offending us), for the most part, don't either.

    So we're those same dinner party guests--just at different dinner parties. There are a lot more of such guests in Paulinekaelville than one might htink.

    Sam as in Samantha?

    Not trying to dox, that just struck me as an extremely feminine musing, and I’d associated Sam w/ male.

    Read More
  106. I always assumed that he named her Sec of State to keep her from “outing” him about his birth certificate and how he managed to move up the educational ladder so easily.

    Or some other dirt, yes. And tent-pissing-out, as previously mentioned. And because he figured it was good for the party (and thus his legacy) to help position her for 2016. He had good reason to feel expansive and magnanimous at the time, before the hammer dropped in subsequent elections.

    Read More
  107. @The Last Real Calvinist

    Many people/ voters might rest undecided – until they do get into the voting booth – they’re black holes not only to the pollsters, but to themselves as well.

     

    This is a very thoughtful and encouraging comment. You're suggesting that there many be a substantial number of people who, when asked finally to make a choice and act on it, i.e. vote, reject 'the pack' and its Narrative and actually think for themselves. I really do hope this is the case in not just the USA, but in the rest of the West as well.

    Looking in from the outside (I'm an American, but have lived in Hong Kong for many years), the USA/many other western countries seem to be staggering on a dream state that should have ended years, if not decades, ago. They've been through an entire century that witnessed one Marxist and cultural-Marxist scheme after another trying to envisage and enforce utopia. All of those schemes ended in war and ruin, but still, led by a fanatical and relentless Leftist vanguard, western countries push onward, to the point of inviting, promoting, and even paying for their self-extinction.

    And yet as the pack rushes toward the cliff, it's no longer a pack if its members dare to disobey. Let's hope and pray that more and more are willing to turn and break away.

    Excuse me for being a little late, my mind doesn’t work exactly on schedule sometimes.

    But I want to add one little thing – the very fact, that people don’t talk to pollsters in a meanigful way might already indict, that somehting important is going on.

    Thers’s another aspect. If people don’t talk, it might be, that they do so in order to protect their secrets.

    In the first case, the silence would be a defensive one – for fear of the social pressure – – of the pack…

    In the second case, the silence would be a more private one – for fear of the confusion, that arises, as soon as pou talk openly.

    Those are all aspects of the spirit, so to speak, and therefor subtle – and fragile – at their core.

    Final thought: Society is no children’s playground at all.

    As is the public shpere in general.

    Read More
  108. […] they’d encounter. I learned more about the mood of America from occasionally skimming the comments on Sailer’s blog than I ever did from reading the National Post‘s editorial page – but, primed by the […]

    Read More
  109. @Lagertha
    You rock. exhale. be a "southern man" (polite/defer/complimentary/thoughtful for any cars parked far away and all...umbrella at hand/rain, etc.) Make sure you signal that you are available; but she must also be available. Life is short - don't waste your time with someone who has deep-seated anger/still attached to old boyfriend...or, is just plain suffering from a personality disorder. Ask them # 1 of Lagertha's Rules of 3; "tell me about your parents; how are your parents?"
    if there is any negativity: pay the bill, say thank you for a great night; walk away, big league.

    Sounds good! Thanks!

    Read More

Comments are closed.

PastClassics
The major media overlooked Communist spies and Madoff’s fraud. What are they missing today?
The evidence is clear — but often ignored
Which superpower is more threatened by its “extractive elites”?
What Was John McCain's True Wartime Record in Vietnam?
The “war hero” candidate buried information about POWs left behind in Vietnam.