Latest / The Death Of Journalism / Episode One Hundred Ninety Two: The Change Agent

Transcript

Episode One Hundred Ninety Two: The Change Agent · The Death Of Journalism

0:00
Speaker 1: Welcome to episode number one hundred and ninety two of
0:03
Speaker 1: the Death of Journalism podcast. My name is John Sigler.
0:05
Speaker 1: I'm your host on today's show. The debate of polling
0:09
Speaker 1: credibility continues to escalate. We officially don't have a president
0:13
Speaker 1: and no one seems to care. A prominent reporter has
0:17
Speaker 1: some sort of an affair with RFK Junior, and more
0:21
Speaker 1: prove that the COVID panic was a scam. We begin
0:26
Speaker 1: this episode of the podcast, as we did our previous episode,
0:30
Speaker 1: with the escalating debate over polling credibility, which now seems
0:34
Speaker 1: to overtake almost every single election cycle, and it clearly
0:39
Speaker 1: has this one, as we are now getting close to
0:43
Speaker 1: barely over a month between now when polling and voting
0:48
Speaker 1: will be universal, and we're just about six weeks from
0:52
Speaker 1: an actual result, hopefully from this presidential debate. And in
0:57
Speaker 1: the last episode I went into great detail as to
1:00
Speaker 1: why I have a bit of a contrarian view, especially
1:03
Speaker 1: as a conservative, when it comes to the issue of
1:06
Speaker 1: mainstream polling credibility. If you haven't listened to that episode yet,
1:10
Speaker 1: I urge you to do so. My basic philosophy is
1:14
Speaker 1: no poll is excellent, no poll has it nailed. We
1:18
Speaker 1: don't know which polls are most accurate until after the
1:22
Speaker 1: election is over. But by and large, I think if
1:25
Speaker 1: you know what to look for, and if you look
1:28
Speaker 1: at all the polls and you look at trends, you
1:31
Speaker 1: can come up with a sense of where the race stands.
1:35
Speaker 1: And I don't automatically discount so called mainstream media polls
1:41
Speaker 1: simply because they're part of the mainstream news media, partly
1:44
Speaker 1: because it's not the editorial side of the media that
1:48
Speaker 1: is actually conducting the polls. In most cases they are
1:51
Speaker 1: sponsoring the polls. That's relevant, but they may have somebody
1:55
Speaker 1: in house that oversees the polls with the people that
1:58
Speaker 1: are actually conducting the poll They are not part of
2:02
Speaker 1: any sort of media reporting apparatus and are certainly not
2:07
Speaker 1: part of what you consider and I consider often to
2:11
Speaker 1: be the mainstream news media having a political agenda there
2:15
Speaker 1: does it seem to be, based upon my own experience,
2:18
Speaker 1: a good faith effort to try to get it right.
2:22
Speaker 1: It's not part of a massive conspiracy. That's my basic
2:26
Speaker 1: premise when it comes to this. And I also and
2:29
Speaker 1: I didn't mention this nearly enough, although I will do
2:32
Speaker 1: that in this episode. There's also a perverse incentive structure
2:37
Speaker 1: for the non mainstream polls, the so called conservative polls,
2:41
Speaker 1: the pro Trump polls, that I think is very very
2:45
Speaker 1: relevant into trying to determine where this race really is.
2:49
Speaker 1: So with that in mind, I want to talk about
2:51
Speaker 1: how we are seeing a growing divide right now between
2:57
Speaker 1: what's happening with the national polling and state polling. And
3:01
Speaker 1: this is something that Trump fans have been holding on to,
3:04
Speaker 1: and I think it's perfectly rational for them to do so.
3:08
Speaker 2: I have explained that I don't think that.
3:10
Speaker 1: That's necessarily the right way to go or that's not
3:14
Speaker 1: going to hold on until the election. But there is
3:17
Speaker 1: absolutely right now a massive disparity between where the national
3:22
Speaker 1: polls are, which are exceedingly pro Harris for the most part,
3:27
Speaker 1: not entirely, but for the most part, and the state poles,
3:31
Speaker 1: which you could actually argue at least as of this
3:34
Speaker 1: morning's taping, are trending slightly in Trump's direction and still
3:39
Speaker 1: show an exceedingly close race, one that Trump could easily win.
3:44
Speaker 2: So I want to go.
3:45
Speaker 1: Through this, and I'm not going to bore you with
3:48
Speaker 1: a whole lot of numbers, although there's some numbers that
3:50
Speaker 1: are pretty amazing, especially in an NBC national poll that
3:54
Speaker 1: came out over the weekend that I find to be
3:58
Speaker 1: absolutely fascinating and if true, you are really really telling
4:02
Speaker 1: about where this race stands. But I want to talk
4:04
Speaker 1: about the disparity here between the national and the state poles.
4:08
Speaker 2: First, the national polls.
4:10
Speaker 1: So that NBC poll came out over the weekend, and
4:13
Speaker 1: I have to say that if the NBC poll is accurate, it's.
4:17
Speaker 2: Just one poll.
4:19
Speaker 1: NBC's track record isn't that great. Obviously, NBC is a
4:23
Speaker 1: liberal media outleed. I understand that that means inherently Trump
4:27
Speaker 1: fans will never believe or trust anything they say, unless unless,
4:32
Speaker 1: of course, Trump is winning the poll, in which case
4:35
Speaker 1: NBC is fantastic and it's perfectly good evidence and proof
4:40
Speaker 1: that Trump is going to win the election. That's part
4:43
Speaker 1: of what drives me crazy here is I wish we
4:45
Speaker 1: could at least be consistent, you know, if NBC is
4:50
Speaker 1: good when Trump is winning, which their last poll in
4:55
Speaker 1: July had Trump up by two points.
4:58
Speaker 2: Now, of course that was before or the big.
5:00
Speaker 1: Biden switch, but Trump was winning forty seven to forty
5:04
Speaker 1: five the last time NBC polled the presidential race. Well,
5:07
Speaker 1: he's now losing forty nine forty four in a two
5:10
Speaker 1: way race to Harris and losing by six points with
5:13
Speaker 1: only forty one percent of the vote in.
5:15
Speaker 2: A full field.
5:18
Speaker 1: Now, again I have no way of knowing is that accurate.
5:22
Speaker 1: But if that result, if that result is in fact
5:25
Speaker 1: indicative of where the national mood of the country is,
5:30
Speaker 1: where the national popular vote would end up, Trump is dead.
5:36
Speaker 2: He cannot win. There's just absolutely no way.
5:39
Speaker 1: Now you may the first question you have, and it's
5:41
Speaker 1: a good one, is okay, well, what's the breakdown?
5:44
Speaker 2: Who did the poll?
5:45
Speaker 1: By the way, it's important to point out that the
5:47
Speaker 1: NBC poll is a classic example of what I talk
5:51
Speaker 1: about when I say that the media outlet has very
5:55
Speaker 1: little of anything to do with the conducting of the poll.
5:59
Speaker 1: NBC pay to have a Republican polster and a Democratic
6:04
Speaker 1: polster combined to conduct their poll, and their sample actually,
6:13
Speaker 1: in my opinion, over sampled Republicans because it actually had
6:17
Speaker 1: one percentage point more Republican voters than it had Democratic voters.
6:23
Speaker 2: So right there, two.
6:24
Speaker 1: Of the things that you would immediately look at, Okay,
6:26
Speaker 1: who's actually conducting.
6:27
Speaker 2: The poll and what's their sample?
6:30
Speaker 1: Are not indicative of an anti Trump or pro Kamala
6:36
Speaker 1: Harris bias, and their generic ballot even slightly different than
6:42
Speaker 1: their sample had Democrats plus two. That's perfectly consistent with
6:47
Speaker 1: what we know about the electric electorate as a whole,
6:50
Speaker 1: as well as what's happening with the vast majority of polls.
6:54
Speaker 1: So at least on the surface, there's nothing inherently terribly
6:58
Speaker 1: wrong with this poll. Then we go to the approval ratings,
7:03
Speaker 1: and this is something that I have said consistently that
7:06
Speaker 1: this is the biggest problem for Trump right now is
7:09
Speaker 1: that Harris's approval rating is way way too high or
7:13
Speaker 1: approval or favorability, depending on how you describe it. That
7:18
Speaker 1: people like her way too much. She has not hated
7:21
Speaker 1: nearly enough for someone as unpopular as Trump.
7:26
Speaker 2: To beat her. I talked a lot about how this is.
7:30
Speaker 1: Not the same thing as twenty sixteen, where Republicans and
7:34
Speaker 1: the right wing media conspiracy had twenty four years to
7:40
Speaker 1: bring down Hillary Clinton's favorabilities. Twenty four years, Kamala Harris
7:46
Speaker 1: got helicoptered in a couple of months before an election,
7:50
Speaker 1: with all sorts of tremendously positive media coverage. It's just
7:56
Speaker 1: not enough time, and they let the horse out of
7:58
Speaker 1: the barn. I think might end up being the biggest
8:01
Speaker 1: mistake of this entire election. I talked about it at
8:04
Speaker 1: the time. They did not prepare for this during the
8:06
Speaker 1: GOP convention. They should have been closing off the escape patches.
8:10
Speaker 1: But they let the Harris horse out of the barn,
8:13
Speaker 1: and the media has run with it to mix a metaphor.
8:17
Speaker 2: Well.
8:17
Speaker 1: This NBC poll indicates exactly that Harris's favorability has jumped
8:23
Speaker 1: sixteen points since July, last time NBC did a poll,
8:28
Speaker 1: the largest increase for any politician in NBC News polling
8:33
Speaker 1: since then President George W. Bush's standing surge after the
8:37
Speaker 1: nine to eleven terrorist attacks. So not since nine eleven
8:43
Speaker 1: has NBC polling ever seen a politician's approval rating surge
8:49
Speaker 1: more dramatically than they have with Kamala Harris. Because in
8:52
Speaker 1: July she was not seen as relevant. She was a
8:55
Speaker 1: vice president, she had run a Looney Tunes twenty twentyid
9:00
Speaker 1: cidential campaign. Everyone was still invested in Biden. But now
9:04
Speaker 1: all of a sudden, she's the last hope to beat Trump.
9:08
Speaker 1: She's the greatest things in sliced bread. She receives all
9:11
Speaker 1: this incredibly positive media coverage. Everyone is deeply, deeply invested
9:16
Speaker 1: in her succeeding. We just got rid of our president,
9:20
Speaker 1: we just had a coup, so she better be awesome.
9:23
Speaker 1: And so that is what has happened with Harris's approval
9:27
Speaker 1: or favorability ratings. Meanwhile, while Harris is a plus three
9:31
Speaker 1: in favorability in the NBC poll, Trump.
9:34
Speaker 2: Is a minus thirteen.
9:37
Speaker 1: That's a sixteen point gap that is very very difficult
9:42
Speaker 1: to overcome, very very difficult to overcome, no matter how
9:46
Speaker 1: bad things are in the country. Now, there were some
9:50
Speaker 1: other amazing and fascinating, I think, very telling elements of
9:54
Speaker 1: this NBC poll on the good news side, and I'm
9:58
Speaker 1: amazed they actually asked this question. But they did ask respondents,
10:02
Speaker 1: do you have a favorable or unfavorable opinion of capitalism
10:06
Speaker 1: and socialism? Capitalism was a net plus twenty six fifty
10:12
Speaker 1: one to twenty five, not the way I would like
10:15
Speaker 1: it to be, but at least it's winning big. Socialism
10:19
Speaker 1: is losing big eighteen to fifty five minus thirty two.
10:24
Speaker 1: So that is a massive gap, much better than I
10:28
Speaker 1: might have feared. I'm not sure what they would have gotten.
10:31
Speaker 1: If they had just pulled California, it would be a
10:33
Speaker 1: lot closer between capitalism and socialism, unfortunately. But the reality
10:39
Speaker 1: is that's if this was a race between capitalism and socialism,
10:43
Speaker 1: which it should be, you got Donald Trump, a well
10:46
Speaker 1: known capitalist, although he's not remotely a pure capitalist, and Harris,
10:50
Speaker 1: who has given every indication that she's actually a socialist
10:54
Speaker 1: right there. This should be landslide territory. This should be
10:58
Speaker 1: you know, Reagan in eighty four. This is this is
11:02
Speaker 1: not a close race. So that gives me at least
11:06
Speaker 1: a little bit of hope about where the country is.
11:08
Speaker 1: But it's not showing up with regard to the race
11:11
Speaker 1: between Harris and Trump, because right now Harris is up
11:15
Speaker 1: either five or six points, depending on how you look
11:18
Speaker 1: at it.
11:18
Speaker 2: And then they ask.
11:20
Speaker 1: About the most important issues inflation, the threats to democracy,
11:24
Speaker 1: border security, jobs, the economy, abortion, and they're exactly as
11:27
Speaker 1: you might expect. But here's where things really get mind blowing,
11:31
Speaker 1: in my opinion, they ask which candidate is better on
11:36
Speaker 1: a whole series of not really hardcore issues, not like
11:41
Speaker 1: you know, the economy or the border, but more esoteric stuff.
11:46
Speaker 1: And they ask which candidate is better at being honest
11:50
Speaker 1: and trustworthy. And Harris is up by fifteen points. That's
11:53
Speaker 1: not good, especially since she's not an honest person. But
11:56
Speaker 1: Trump is not an honest person either, So that's a
11:59
Speaker 1: fifteen point gap on a really important issue, at least
12:02
Speaker 1: traditionally for Americans, being honest and trustworthy. But here's the
12:06
Speaker 1: one that really blew my mind. And we've talked about
12:10
Speaker 1: this in the past, and I thought that this was
12:13
Speaker 1: a really really dangerous issue for Trump and one that
12:18
Speaker 1: the Harris campaign has tried very, very hard to take over. Now, previously,
12:23
Speaker 1: the New York Times had indicated that people weren't buying it,
12:27
Speaker 1: but according to NBC, I guess it depends on.
12:29
Speaker 2: How you phrase the question.
12:31
Speaker 1: People are buying it, and that is which candidate does
12:34
Speaker 1: a better job of representing change? Who is the change candidate?
12:39
Speaker 1: We are clearly in a change election, and Kamala Harris
12:45
Speaker 1: the vice president currently of the party that has controlled
12:49
Speaker 1: the White House for at least twelve of the last
12:52
Speaker 1: sixteen years. And I will go to my death saying
12:54
Speaker 1: it's actually thirteen of sixteen because of the COVID year.
12:58
Speaker 1: We're Fauci Newsom and Quama. We're actually president that the
13:02
Speaker 1: current Vice President Kamalaras represents change forty seven thirty eight
13:12
Speaker 1: by a nine point margin. In this NBC Paul Harris
13:16
Speaker 1: has the change issue, What how is that fucking possible?
13:25
Speaker 1: And that is that's devastating in a change election, devastating.
13:30
Speaker 1: Trump can't at least win on change. He's got no shot.
13:36
Speaker 1: And by the way, just out this morning the Lincoln Project,
13:40
Speaker 1: which I loath. A lot of these guys I used
13:42
Speaker 1: to know and even kind of work with. These are
13:44
Speaker 1: the so called former Republicans who, in my opinion, have
13:47
Speaker 1: completely sold their souls to be total liberals in order
13:52
Speaker 1: to remain relevant and to be able to figure out
13:55
Speaker 1: a way to grift off the system now that they're
13:59
Speaker 1: out of power. That they have their non Trump so
14:02
Speaker 1: called Republicans. But none of them, these guys are really Republicans.
14:05
Speaker 1: They're all They all reveal themselves to be complete frauds
14:08
Speaker 1: and sellouts. But they have an ad out voiced by
14:12
Speaker 1: Sam Elliott, you know, the western style old guy actor
14:18
Speaker 1: with the bushy mustache, you know, beef What's for Dinner?
14:22
Speaker 1: Who is perceived, because of the roles that he plays,
14:25
Speaker 1: that he's somewhat conservative. I guess he's voicing an ad
14:30
Speaker 1: making the argument that Harris is the change candidate, and
14:34
Speaker 1: I'm just like, we have reached peak insanity here. How
14:38
Speaker 1: is this even possible? But this kind of gas lighting
14:42
Speaker 1: can be effective in twenty twenty four, and so this
14:48
Speaker 1: NBC poll has a lot of lethal data in it
14:52
Speaker 1: for Donald Trump. Oh, by the way, they asked, did
14:55
Speaker 1: the presidential debate make you more to make you more
14:59
Speaker 1: or like less likely? If I can get my mouth
15:02
Speaker 1: to work properly, did the presidential debate make you more
15:05
Speaker 1: or less likely to support Trump Harris or no difference?
15:08
Speaker 1: Twenty nine percent said it was the debate made it
15:12
Speaker 1: more likely that they would vote for Kamala Harris. Twelve
15:15
Speaker 1: percent said it was more likely they would vote for
15:18
Speaker 1: Donald Trump. Fifty seven percent said no preference. So that's
15:21
Speaker 1: a pretty significant difference, And I think it's important to
15:24
Speaker 1: point out just because it's nowhere near majority, is irrelevant.
15:29
Speaker 1: The debate is intended or should be strategically intended, to
15:33
Speaker 1: target a very small sliver of voters that are still
15:38
Speaker 1: truly undecided. Most people are not undecided even among those
15:43
Speaker 1: that are watching, because those that are watching are most
15:45
Speaker 1: interested in the race those that are most interested in
15:48
Speaker 1: the race have probably already chosen for whom they're going
15:52
Speaker 1: to vote. So when you have twenty nine percent of
15:54
Speaker 1: people saying the debate made you more likely to vote
15:57
Speaker 1: for Kamala Harris, which is more than twice as many
15:59
Speaker 1: people said the same about Donald Trump, that's another indication
16:03
Speaker 1: that just as I predicted, and just as I stated afterwards,
16:07
Speaker 1: Donald Trump lost the debate. He'll never accept that, but
16:10
Speaker 1: he lost the debate again, just like he lost all
16:14
Speaker 1: the other debates prior to Joe Biden crapping his pants
16:18
Speaker 1: because of his dementia basically or diminished mental state had
16:24
Speaker 1: nothing to do with Donald Trump. So the NBC poll
16:29
Speaker 1: is frankly the most ominous piece of evidence I have
16:34
Speaker 1: seen so far that Donald Trump is in big trouble nationally.
16:40
Speaker 1: If that pole is close to accurate, Trump cannot win, period.
16:46
Speaker 1: He cannot win. And that poll had an interesting impact
16:50
Speaker 1: on some of the projection models. Nate Silver has fallen.
16:56
Speaker 1: Nate Silver, what I believe to be a liberal hack
17:00
Speaker 1: fraud who has become a MAGA savior because he was
17:03
Speaker 1: the last major election projection guy to show that Trump
17:08
Speaker 1: was the favorite to win, has now shifted his projection
17:12
Speaker 1: rather dramatically in a very short period of time, just
17:15
Speaker 1: as I suggested would eventually happen. Silver has now joined
17:19
Speaker 1: everybody else. Now he barely has Harris projected as a
17:24
Speaker 1: potential winner, somewhere in like the fifty four percent range.
17:28
Speaker 1: But now every major projection organization has Harris as the favorite.
17:34
Speaker 2: Not a dramatic favorite. To me, You're not a dramatic.
17:38
Speaker 1: Favorite until you hit the eighties, all right, and then
17:41
Speaker 1: you're talking about it. It's a major, major upset. If
17:44
Speaker 1: you lose, you stay, you know, even to the sixties.
17:48
Speaker 1: That's still a very very close race. You still have
17:52
Speaker 1: a real chance if you're Donald Trump. So we're nowhere
17:56
Speaker 1: near this thing being over. But if the elect we're today,
18:00
Speaker 1: nothing dramatic happens between now an election day, the chances
18:05
Speaker 1: are that Harris is going to win. But and there's
18:10
Speaker 1: a huge butt here when you look at the state poles.
18:14
Speaker 1: The state poles are telling a very very very different story.
18:20
Speaker 1: And I'm not one hundred percent sure I understand exactly
18:23
Speaker 1: what's going on here, But I have a couple of
18:26
Speaker 1: theories that I will provide to you. First, let me
18:30
Speaker 1: give you the numbers There are two series of state polls,
18:36
Speaker 1: one by The New York Times, one by Emerson the Hill,
18:40
Speaker 1: neither of which is perceived it as remotely conservative. Obviously,
18:45
Speaker 1: both aren't perceived as very liberal, although I will say
18:48
Speaker 1: the New York Times during this year, glinting during the
18:53
Speaker 1: primaries and throughout the entire Trump Biden era of this
18:57
Speaker 1: election cycle, has been very pro Trump in comparison to
19:03
Speaker 1: other major polls. But The New York Times Sienna is
19:08
Speaker 1: out with a series of state poles that are about
19:12
Speaker 1: as good a news for Trump as we have seen,
19:16
Speaker 1: certainly since the debate. They have Trump up five in
19:19
Speaker 1: Arizona when they had Harris up five to the last
19:22
Speaker 1: poll they did, which was in August.
19:25
Speaker 2: In Arizona. That's a remarkable turnaround.
19:28
Speaker 1: They have Trump up by two in North Carolina when
19:31
Speaker 1: Harris was up by two in North Carolina the last
19:34
Speaker 1: time they pulled. And they have Trump up by four
19:37
Speaker 1: in Georgia, which is exactly what he was the last
19:40
Speaker 1: time they pulled. So they have Trump winning Arizona, North Carolina,
19:46
Speaker 1: and Georgia in this New York Times Siana poll. By
19:50
Speaker 1: the way, all of those results are very plausible. In fact,
19:55
Speaker 1: I currently in my electoral college projection, have Trump winning Arizona,
20:00
Speaker 1: and have Trump winning Georgia, and I have North Carolina
20:03
Speaker 1: right on the precipice. I keep going back and forth.
20:07
Speaker 1: I'm not, you know, gun to my head, I honestly
20:09
Speaker 1: don't know who would win North Carolina.
20:11
Speaker 2: Right now.
20:12
Speaker 1: In my current projection, I still have Harris winning it,
20:14
Speaker 1: but I could be easily persuaded that Trump was gonna
20:18
Speaker 1: win North Carolina. So those results are certainly very very
20:23
Speaker 1: very plausible, but they're also very good one from the
20:27
Speaker 1: from the standpoint of Trump is getting fifty nine forty
20:30
Speaker 1: nine percent, which is very very key and to the margins,
20:34
Speaker 1: at least in two of those polls are outside the
20:36
Speaker 1: margin of error, So that's very good news for Trump
20:39
Speaker 1: on the state polling side. Also, it's important to point
20:44
Speaker 1: out that Emerson seemingly has very very similar results. Trump
20:50
Speaker 1: up by three in Georgia, hitting fifty percent, Trump barely
20:53
Speaker 1: winning Arizona but at forty nine percent, Trump winning Wisconsin
20:56
Speaker 1: by one point, Trump winning Pennsylvania by a point in Emerson. Now,
21:03
Speaker 1: this if true, if that's really the case, if Trump
21:07
Speaker 1: is really winning as Emerson is pointing out, or in
21:11
Speaker 1: indicating right now, and this is all within the margin
21:14
Speaker 1: of error, so I don't.
21:15
Speaker 2: Take it all that super seriously.
21:17
Speaker 1: But if it were to turn out the way that
21:20
Speaker 1: Emerson currently has it, and Trump were to win Georgia, Arizona, Wisconsin,
21:25
Speaker 1: and Pennsylvania, that's game, set match.
21:28
Speaker 2: Trump wins. But it's really really important to point.
21:32
Speaker 1: Out that these results are all by one point except
21:35
Speaker 1: for Georgia. So it's incredibly easy for there to be
21:39
Speaker 1: polling era error or for there to be a shift
21:44
Speaker 1: between now and the election, you know, one or two
21:47
Speaker 1: points either way, especially when your margin of error in
21:49
Speaker 1: these polls is generally two or three points. So that's
21:52
Speaker 1: certainly in no way, shape or form an indication that
21:55
Speaker 1: Trump is gonna win. It just shows this is still
21:58
Speaker 1: a race that is very very much up for grabs.
22:02
Speaker 1: All right, So what's going on here? How is it
22:05
Speaker 1: that the mainstream national polls are showing Harris with seemingly
22:11
Speaker 1: a pretty strong at least three to four point margin nationally,
22:16
Speaker 1: which all the statisticians will tell you means she cannot
22:21
Speaker 1: lose if she wins the national popular vote, which is
22:25
Speaker 1: not how we elect presidents by four.
22:27
Speaker 2: Points or more. It's almost literally.
22:30
Speaker 1: Impossible for her to lose. It's theoretically possible.
22:34
Speaker 2: Now.
22:34
Speaker 1: Biden won it by just over four points in twenty twenty,
22:37
Speaker 1: and he did come much closer than people realize to
22:41
Speaker 1: losing the electoral college. If you flip, you know, forty
22:45
Speaker 1: five thousand votes absolutely perfectly in three different states, we've
22:49
Speaker 1: got a two sixty nine two sixty nine.
22:50
Speaker 2: Tie, and we're headed to the House of Representatives.
22:53
Speaker 1: We're probably having a civil war, and Trump is probably
22:55
Speaker 1: ending up as a re elected president in twenty twenty. So,
23:01
Speaker 1: you know, from an electoral college perspective, twenty twenty was
23:04
Speaker 1: a lot closer than it looked, and a lot closer
23:07
Speaker 1: than people realize. But what's going on here where Harris
23:12
Speaker 1: is winning fairly consistently and by a strong margin on
23:17
Speaker 1: the national side, but you got the New York Times
23:19
Speaker 1: and Emerson showing an exceedingly close race in the swing states,
23:25
Speaker 1: I mean, almost all within the margin of error, where
23:29
Speaker 1: Trump is actually winning barely in enough of these states
23:33
Speaker 1: where he could pull off a very similar result to
23:36
Speaker 1: what happened in twenty sixteen, where he loses the popular vote,
23:40
Speaker 1: but he has an inside straight on the swing states
23:43
Speaker 1: and he ends up winning. I don't have a very
23:47
Speaker 1: strong explanation for this. I have said previously that I
23:51
Speaker 1: do think that there's a phenomenon I'm going to stay
23:53
Speaker 1: at one more time for which I have no explanation.
23:57
Speaker 2: That it takes a longer.
23:58
Speaker 1: Time for the state pole to show trends than it
24:02
Speaker 1: does the national polls, which is exactly the opposite of
24:06
Speaker 1: what you would expect, at least logically, because you're talking
24:09
Speaker 1: about a smaller sample size, You're talking about a smaller
24:13
Speaker 1: geographical size, obviously very much smaller in a state than nationally.
24:17
Speaker 2: You would think it would be the opposite. You would
24:19
Speaker 2: think that state.
24:20
Speaker 1: Poles would respond to events like a debate or would
24:23
Speaker 1: have you far more quickly the national polls. My experience
24:27
Speaker 1: has been exactly the opposite. I do not know why
24:30
Speaker 1: that is, so it is still possible we may see
24:33
Speaker 1: a delay when it comes to the state poles shifting.
24:37
Speaker 1: There's another part of this that may play an even
24:41
Speaker 1: stronger factor. And this is something I've never discussed before
24:44
Speaker 1: because I've never really thought about it before. But one
24:47
Speaker 1: of the things that I have noticed in this cycle
24:51
Speaker 1: is that when one of these polling outlets does a
24:54
Speaker 1: series of state poles all at the same time. They
24:59
Speaker 1: tend to end up with a better result for Trump
25:02
Speaker 1: then if they do one state poll at a time,
25:08
Speaker 1: and we were actually seeing evidence of that this morning.
25:11
Speaker 1: Both Emerson and The New York Times polled simultaneously multiple
25:17
Speaker 1: swing states, and the results were very good for Trump,
25:21
Speaker 1: especially given the current trend.
25:24
Speaker 2: However, there's a poll out this.
25:27
Speaker 1: Morning by a group that doesn't appear to be openly
25:30
Speaker 1: partisan that has Harris winning Wisconsin fairly easily. But they
25:36
Speaker 1: only polled Wisconsin. They didn't poll several states at the
25:40
Speaker 1: same time. I don't know why that would have a
25:44
Speaker 1: massive impact, but I do see a correlation here and
25:48
Speaker 1: something I'm going to keep my eye on as we
25:50
Speaker 1: get closer to the election. Is there something to this? Interestingly,
25:55
Speaker 1: my friend Steve Cortez, who works for a Trump political
25:58
Speaker 1: Action Committee, been doing an enormous amount of state polling,
26:02
Speaker 1: swing state polling, but he does it one state at
26:06
Speaker 1: a time, and his results, even though it's a pro
26:10
Speaker 1: Trump pack, have been right down the middle. They have
26:14
Speaker 1: not been pro Trump, and in fact sometimes they're a
26:17
Speaker 1: little bit I don't I wouldn't say anti Trump, but
26:21
Speaker 1: they're not as pro Trump like as the New York
26:24
Speaker 1: Times is, The New York Times currently has results in
26:27
Speaker 1: the state polls that are better for Trump than the
26:30
Speaker 1: Steve Cortes pro Trump pack does.
26:34
Speaker 2: And I wonder, is there's.
26:36
Speaker 1: Something to this phenomenon of doing one state at a
26:40
Speaker 1: time versus trying to do three or four or five
26:45
Speaker 1: swing states at a time. It seems like, again, this
26:49
Speaker 1: is just a correlation, just something I've noticed, something I'm
26:53
Speaker 1: gonna keep an eye on that. Is there something to
26:56
Speaker 1: this that for some reason, when these polling outlets try
27:00
Speaker 1: to do multiple swing states at the time, that there's
27:04
Speaker 1: something in their methodology that helps Trump just a little bit,
27:09
Speaker 1: I should I want to point out one more time,
27:11
Speaker 1: The New York Times has been rather pro Trump all
27:16
Speaker 1: year long.
27:18
Speaker 2: And this is part of what drives.
27:19
Speaker 1: Me crazy with conspiracy theories. It really drives me nuts.
27:24
Speaker 1: I just wish for some logic and some consistency. So
27:29
Speaker 1: what is the explanation I get? I get the conspiracy
27:34
Speaker 1: theory that the mainstream media outlets are all being pro
27:39
Speaker 1: Harris anti Trump and their polling because they want to
27:42
Speaker 1: build momentum for Harris and they don't like Trump. Okay, fine,
27:47
Speaker 1: I guess I guess I get that, although how do
27:50
Speaker 1: you explain then the New York Times? Did the New
27:54
Speaker 1: York Times not get the memo? Just like in the
27:57
Speaker 1: last episode of the podcast, did the Atlantic Journal Constitution
28:02
Speaker 1: not get the memo when they put out a terrible
28:04
Speaker 1: poll for Harris in Georgia a few days ago? Did
28:08
Speaker 1: they not get the memo? Are they not part of
28:10
Speaker 1: the conspiracies? The New York Times not part of the conspiracy?
28:15
Speaker 1: Can you please explain that to me. The other part
28:18
Speaker 1: of this, which is similar, is why is it that
28:21
Speaker 1: the mainstream polls are not part of the conspiracy when
28:25
Speaker 1: they're showing Trump trouncing Biden.
28:28
Speaker 2: Oh wait a minute, I'm sorry.
28:30
Speaker 1: That is part of a conspiracy that was all part
28:32
Speaker 1: of the conspiracy to get rid of Biden.
28:35
Speaker 2: Now we're talking batshit crazy. Okay, so now this is
28:38
Speaker 2: all part. These posters are all part.
28:40
Speaker 1: Of a massive conspiracy where they decided, Okay, it's time
28:44
Speaker 1: to get Biden, so we're gonna put out all these
28:47
Speaker 1: polls showing that he's losing to Trump, even though even
28:50
Speaker 1: though they had a perfect excuse to provide polls that were.
28:55
Speaker 2: Catastrophic for Biden.
28:56
Speaker 1: After that horrendous debate, and you know, after Trump's a
28:59
Speaker 1: sound nation attempt, they could have shown Trump winning by
29:02
Speaker 1: twenty points and people might have believed it. They didn't
29:05
Speaker 1: do that. The polling was actually quite muted. It was
29:09
Speaker 1: barely showing Trump with a surge at all after both
29:13
Speaker 1: of those earthquakes occurred. So they didn't really take advantage
29:18
Speaker 1: of the events that they were provided in order to
29:20
Speaker 1: pull off this conspiracy to get rid of Biden. I
29:23
Speaker 1: don't understand why they didn't do that, right if there
29:26
Speaker 1: this all part of a conspiracy.
29:28
Speaker 2: And then they all flip around.
29:30
Speaker 1: And immediately other than a couple like the New York Times,
29:33
Speaker 1: they decide they're going to be part of a pro
29:36
Speaker 1: Harris conspiracy. So we're an anti Biden conspiracy, and where
29:41
Speaker 1: Trump fans are touting our polls on a daily basis,
29:44
Speaker 1: and now all of a sudden it's part of a
29:46
Speaker 1: a pro Harris conspiracy. And now all of a sudden,
29:49
Speaker 1: all the Trumpsters hate palls and think all the mainstream
29:52
Speaker 1: media balls are out to get them. Can we at
29:55
Speaker 1: least be consistent? Can we at least have some semblance
29:59
Speaker 1: of logic? And I want to play a clip from
30:02
Speaker 1: an interview that frankly bothered me quite a bit, although
30:06
Speaker 1: I think there's some decent points made in this, but
30:09
Speaker 1: I want to provide the other side.
30:10
Speaker 2: I'm trying to be fair.
30:12
Speaker 1: And this is an interview that jd Vance, vice presidential
30:14
Speaker 1: nominee for Trump, did with Tucker Carlson, a guy I
30:17
Speaker 1: used to have a lot of respect for. Now I
30:19
Speaker 1: consider him to be a grifter, a conspiracy theorist, a
30:23
Speaker 1: borderline loon, although at times he's still very lucent and
30:27
Speaker 1: very smart and very funny, which drives me crazy. But
30:31
Speaker 1: as far as jd Vance is concerned, you know, I'm
30:34
Speaker 1: really on the fence on jd Vance. I've mentioned Steve Cortez.
30:38
Speaker 1: Steve Cortez loves the guy, has worked with him. You know,
30:42
Speaker 1: his endorsement of Vans carries a lot of weight with me.
30:45
Speaker 1: But if it was not for Steve Cortez telling me
30:48
Speaker 1: how great Vance is, I would be probably in the
30:52
Speaker 1: anti Vance category at this point, because you know, Vance's
30:56
Speaker 1: evolution on Trump and evolution on Maga is a bit suspicious,
31:01
Speaker 1: and it feels to me like, while he's a very
31:04
Speaker 1: very very smart guy, he's a bit of an actor
31:07
Speaker 1: and now you know he's trying to portray these polls
31:11
Speaker 1: in this interview that he did with Tucker Carlson as fake.
31:15
Speaker 2: He's calling them fake fake. Now that's a problem.
31:22
Speaker 1: I have a problem with that word because faith to me,
31:25
Speaker 1: that's essentially you're declaring that you believe this is part
31:28
Speaker 1: of a conspiracy, that they're they're coming up with the
31:31
Speaker 1: results on purpose, that they're trying to create an outcome,
31:36
Speaker 1: and that's what Dvance alleges in this fairly long clip.
31:40
Speaker 1: But I'm going to play it all partially out of
31:42
Speaker 1: my intent to be fair and partially because there's several
31:45
Speaker 1: elements of this that I want to address because no
31:49
Speaker 1: one else on the conservative side is willing to do this.
31:51
Speaker 1: No one else has what I would consider to be
31:54
Speaker 1: the experience and the expertise in this area. But also
31:57
Speaker 1: I don't have any fear of pissing off the Trumpsters.
32:00
Speaker 2: But here is JD. Vans and Tucker Carlson.
32:04
Speaker 1: I want to acknowledge they make some important points in
32:08
Speaker 1: this clip, but they are trying to make the argument
32:11
Speaker 1: that the current polling is not to be believed, that
32:14
Speaker 1: it is faked, and that this is part of the
32:18
Speaker 1: media's agenda to create an outcome that is beneficial to Democrats.
32:25
Speaker 1: And here was that interview just done a couple of
32:28
Speaker 1: days ago.
32:29
Speaker 3: The same people who put those public opinion polls together
32:32
Speaker 3: are the same people who say, for example, that Donald
32:34
Speaker 3: Trump was going to lose Wisconsin by seventeen points. Remember
32:37
Speaker 3: that three days before the twenty twenty election, Donald Trump
32:40
Speaker 3: was supposed to lose Wisconsin by seventeen points, and set
32:43
Speaker 3: to the side all of the debates about what happened
32:45
Speaker 3: in twenty twenty, Wisconsin was basically a tied election.
32:47
Speaker 4: So these guys use public polls, They use the media
32:52
Speaker 4: not even just to manipulate public opinion, but to manipulate
32:56
Speaker 4: our leadership about what public opinion actually says.
33:00
Speaker 5: How does that happen? So those poles are fake, it's
33:01
Speaker 5: what you're saying. Oh, absolutely, they're fake. They're absolutely fake.
33:05
Speaker 5: And we see this.
33:06
Speaker 3: I mean again, you know this is like very nerdy.
33:10
Speaker 3: But let's like go down this polling rabbit hole. Okay,
33:12
Speaker 3: So I you know a friend of mine I think
33:14
Speaker 3: is the best pollster in America every race I've ever
33:16
Speaker 3: seen a poll He's way better than anybody else. Okay,
33:19
Speaker 3: So good pollster versus a standard media polls Farsio, Tony Farsio,
33:23
Speaker 3: great guy is the President's bolster. Okay, take a standard
33:27
Speaker 3: media poll and ask yourself, like, what are they doing?
33:31
Speaker 3: Those polls are all conducted by what's called online panels.
33:34
Speaker 3: In other words, they have a group of people that
33:36
Speaker 3: they go to again and again and again they ask
33:38
Speaker 3: their opinion. Well, who are the people who are going
33:41
Speaker 3: to respond aggressively to online panels about what they feel
33:45
Speaker 3: about every issue of the day. A bunch of highly engaged,
33:49
Speaker 3: typically far left, typically people with professional degrees, people who
33:53
Speaker 3: are not representative of the American people at large.
33:56
Speaker 5: Right, Meanwhile, most Americans are trying.
33:58
Speaker 3: To pay their mortgage and try to take care of kids,
34:00
Speaker 3: and trying to do all the things that are necessary
34:02
Speaker 3: to live a life in this country.
34:04
Speaker 5: And they're not answering the phone when a pollster picks up.
34:07
Speaker 3: So if you actually look at the good pollsters, they're
34:10
Speaker 3: telling you a radically different story because they're talking to
34:13
Speaker 3: a representative sample of the United States, and the fake
34:16
Speaker 3: media pollsters are talking to a very narrow slice of
34:20
Speaker 3: the United States. And again, they're trying to sell us
34:22
Speaker 3: a story. And it's not just again, it's not just.
34:24
Speaker 3: This is not primarily to manipulate the American people. I
34:28
Speaker 3: think it's to manipulate us, meaning elected officials, because I've
34:31
Speaker 3: sat in lunches with a number of my colleagues who
34:34
Speaker 3: will say, look at this poll, and look how Americans
34:37
Speaker 3: are responding to this or that issue, and then you
34:40
Speaker 3: realize that that exact same poll was wildly inaccurate two
34:45
Speaker 3: years ago. Why are you making your judgments about what
34:47
Speaker 3: the American people believe based.
34:50
Speaker 5: On some poll? And oh, by the way, why don't
34:51
Speaker 5: you express some leadership.
34:53
Speaker 3: Why don't you just actually have a view and go
34:55
Speaker 3: to the American people and try to persuade them that
34:58
Speaker 3: your view is wise and then enact legislation in accordance
35:02
Speaker 3: with that wisdom.
35:02
Speaker 5: Right, Like, that's how real leadership should work.
35:05
Speaker 3: Deceptive, And I think what people don't realize is that
35:07
Speaker 3: a lot of these polls are designed not to measure opinion, but.
35:11
Speaker 5: To shape it. Yes, so they are tools of influence.
35:16
Speaker 5: President Trump said.
35:17
Speaker 3: This recently in an interview where he said that the
35:20
Speaker 3: purpose of some of these polls that say, okay, you're
35:22
Speaker 3: down seventeen points in Wisconsin. So say you're a publican voter,
35:26
Speaker 3: you want to support Donald Trump and JD.
35:27
Speaker 5: Vance.
35:28
Speaker 3: And of course the polls now are much better for
35:31
Speaker 3: us than they were back in twenty twenty. But let's
35:33
Speaker 3: say you want to support President Trump and you read
35:36
Speaker 3: a story that says he's down by seventeen points in Wisconsin,
35:39
Speaker 3: why even show up, right, So there's a voter suppression
35:42
Speaker 3: dynamic here where you try to get people to get
35:45
Speaker 3: depressed and to drop out of the democratic process, don't
35:48
Speaker 3: even go and vote if the president is down by
35:51
Speaker 3: so much. The purpose of these polls is actually manipulation
35:54
Speaker 3: of both the public themselves but also of course elected officials.
35:58
Speaker 5: And I think that we just have to we have
36:00
Speaker 5: to have.
36:01
Speaker 3: The courage to trust our own convictions, to say screw you,
36:04
Speaker 3: I don't buy the polls, and to do what you
36:06
Speaker 3: think is right on behalf the country.
36:08
Speaker 1: Now, first, I want to acknowledge that Advance makes a
36:11
Speaker 1: couple of interesting and important points there what he references
36:16
Speaker 1: with regard to that wisconsinant poll, which he did a
36:19
Speaker 1: couple of times where Biden. This was in twenty twenty,
36:24
Speaker 1: to be clear, not twenty sixteen, because it was horrendous
36:28
Speaker 1: polling in Wisconsin in twenty sixteen as well, where Hillary
36:31
Speaker 1: was in lock cinch to win Wisconsin, and she ended
36:34
Speaker 1: up losing, mostly because their voters were complacent and didn't
36:38
Speaker 1: show up. But Vance is referring there to an ABC poll.
36:43
Speaker 1: He's a little bit inaccurate with regard to the timing.
36:46
Speaker 1: It wasn't just a couple of days before the election.
36:48
Speaker 1: It was sooner. They're further away from the election than that,
36:52
Speaker 1: but not by much. I think it was a week
36:53
Speaker 1: or two before the election. ABC put out a poll
36:57
Speaker 1: showing in twenty twenty that Biden was going to win
37:00
Speaker 1: Wisconsin or was winning Wisconsin by seventeen points, and as
37:05
Speaker 1: it turned out, Biden won Wisconsin by less than one point.
37:09
Speaker 2: That is catastrophic error. Catastrophic error.
37:14
Speaker 1: And I can certainly understand when the poll has ABC's
37:18
Speaker 1: name on it that Trumpsters are like, oh, okay, wow,
37:22
Speaker 1: that was done on purpose to try to demoralize Trump fans.
37:26
Speaker 1: And do you know, of course, that doesn't make a
37:28
Speaker 1: lot of sense given what happened in twenty sixteen, Because
37:32
Speaker 1: in twenty sixteen, Hillary lost Wisconsin because of clear complacency
37:37
Speaker 1: and lack of Democratic turnouts. So you would think that
37:40
Speaker 1: if ABC was part of a conspiracy, they would have been.
37:43
Speaker 2: Doing exactly the opposite.
37:45
Speaker 1: They would have been showing, you know, Trump losing by
37:49
Speaker 1: one point or maybe even up by one point if
37:51
Speaker 1: this was purely fake. This is purely part of a conspiracy.
37:55
Speaker 1: That doesn't make any goddamn sense that you would have
37:58
Speaker 1: Biden up by seventeen when your biggest concern if you're
38:01
Speaker 1: rooting for the Democratic side is complacency. Now, I would
38:06
Speaker 1: argue that now that we've seen Trump as president and
38:09
Speaker 1: everything that's happened with Trump, Democrats are never going to
38:11
Speaker 1: be complacent about Trump Trump again. We're not going to
38:14
Speaker 1: see at twenty sixteen again. But they didn't know that
38:17
Speaker 1: in twenty twenty, So it doesn't make any sense from
38:21
Speaker 1: the conspiratorial perspective that ABC would do this. Now was
38:25
Speaker 1: it absolutely catastrophically wrong? One hundred percent. One hundred percent,
38:31
Speaker 1: And it shows that polling is a very very inexact science.
38:36
Speaker 2: And so one hundred percent.
38:38
Speaker 1: There should be criticism of ABC for putting out a
38:42
Speaker 1: poll showing that Wisconsin was going seventeen points for Biden
38:47
Speaker 1: just before the twenty twenty election. They should absolutely lose
38:51
Speaker 1: some credibility over that.
38:52
Speaker 2: I have no problem with that. There ought to be accountability.
38:55
Speaker 1: And oh, by the way, I think, because I understand
39:00
Speaker 1: and the way human beings work, and I understand incentive structures. See,
39:05
Speaker 1: I wonder what the incentive structure is for those who
39:10
Speaker 1: do the ABC poll when it comes to results in
39:15
Speaker 1: twenty twenty four, especially in Wisconsin. Are they incentivized to
39:20
Speaker 1: once again be way too anti Trump and get burned badly?
39:25
Speaker 1: Or would they be incentivized to be way more careful
39:28
Speaker 1: when it comes to interpreting the potential of an underground
39:33
Speaker 1: Trump vote or not wanting to under estimate Trump's support
39:39
Speaker 1: in a place like Wisconsin. To me, that makes a
39:42
Speaker 1: lot more sense given the nature of humanity and given
39:45
Speaker 1: the incentive structure of these posters, who, in most cases
39:49
Speaker 1: I believe are trying to get this right. But there's
39:53
Speaker 1: another element of what Vance said that that bothered me.
39:57
Speaker 1: There's many elements, but one of them other than this
40:00
Speaker 1: word fake And clearly, without saying the word conspiracy, he's
40:05
Speaker 1: alleging a conspiracy.
40:08
Speaker 2: How is it?
40:09
Speaker 1: And I don't make this point nearly enough, And nobody
40:11
Speaker 1: ever makes this in any media that I've ever seen,
40:14
Speaker 1: And it's one of those things that's just so obvious
40:17
Speaker 1: that I think.
40:17
Speaker 2: It gets lost. But how is this theory of.
40:20
Speaker 1: Polling remotely consistent with the rigged election theory? Think about this, folks.
40:29
Speaker 1: So jd Vance is putting forward a theory that Trump
40:36
Speaker 1: was purposely underpolled in twenty twenty as part of a
40:42
Speaker 1: media agenda to get him. Okay, fine, he was. He
40:47
Speaker 1: was underpolled. So you're telling me that he overperformed in
40:54
Speaker 1: the actual election results.
40:58
Speaker 2: Well, how does he perform overperform.
41:01
Speaker 1: In the actual election results if the election is rigged
41:07
Speaker 1: against him, If there's actual vote rigging, if the actual
41:12
Speaker 1: vote counting in some way, shape or form is rigged
41:16
Speaker 1: against Trump, how is he overperforming the pre election polls.
41:25
Speaker 2: How is that possible? That makes no sense.
41:30
Speaker 1: If it was happening that way, it would be the opposite.
41:35
Speaker 1: If the election counting was somehow rigged against Trump, what
41:39
Speaker 1: you would see is a whole bunch of balls showing
41:41
Speaker 1: Trump winning and then for some reason the results don't show.
41:45
Speaker 2: Up that way.
41:47
Speaker 1: Frankly, I think that the conservative media right now, a
41:52
Speaker 1: lot of them, are setting up yet another.
41:58
Speaker 2: Rigged election narrative.
42:00
Speaker 1: If it's one of my great concerns about what we're
42:02
Speaker 1: heading into, and for that to happen with any semblance
42:07
Speaker 1: of logic, you would have to have a situation where
42:11
Speaker 1: Trump was actually winning in the scientific polls, but then
42:15
Speaker 1: for some reason on election day he doesn't win. He underperforms,
42:21
Speaker 1: because then logically I realized logic doesn't have the power
42:26
Speaker 1: that he used to. But logically you could argue, well,
42:28
Speaker 1: what happened If the media polls were saying that Trump
42:33
Speaker 1: was going to hit forty eight forty nine percent and
42:36
Speaker 1: he only ends up with forty six forty seven percent,
42:38
Speaker 1: then that is certainly consistent with something funky going on
42:42
Speaker 1: with the vote counting. I don't believe in massive voting
42:48
Speaker 1: irregularities or our corruption because we have this thing called
42:51
Speaker 1: the precinct system which prevents that. Is our voting system
42:56
Speaker 1: remotely perfect. No, I despise mail in voting. There's all
43:02
Speaker 1: sorts of opportunities for corruption. There By the way, the
43:05
Speaker 1: New York Times recently basically urged their readers to help
43:10
Speaker 1: their elderly parents and grandparents fill out their mail in votes,
43:15
Speaker 1: which was this the recipe for corruption? So the Left
43:19
Speaker 1: even fully understands this, they won't admit it. But mail
43:23
Speaker 1: in voting is a joke. So our system has never
43:26
Speaker 1: been perfect. It's getting more and more imperfect, and I
43:28
Speaker 1: fully support all efforts to try to clean it up
43:31
Speaker 1: and try to make sure that only eligible voters can vote,
43:34
Speaker 1: and that they're not voting twice for you know, using
43:37
Speaker 1: their votes and their spouse's vote, or their parent or
43:41
Speaker 1: their grandparents vote when it comes to mail in.
43:44
Speaker 2: So I'm all on board with all that.
43:46
Speaker 1: I'm just asking for some remote level of intellectual consistency
43:52
Speaker 1: when you're going to make an allegation. So it doesn't
43:56
Speaker 1: you know, what Vance is saying. It doesn't jive, by
43:59
Speaker 1: the way, with the buy era of this. So what
44:02
Speaker 1: was Vance's theory? There is Vance believing that they were
44:06
Speaker 1: part of a conspiracy to get rid of Biden and
44:08
Speaker 1: now they're engaged in a completely different conspiracy to make
44:12
Speaker 1: sure Trump doesn't get re elected. I would like to
44:15
Speaker 1: know that, but it's also inconsistent with the entire rigged
44:19
Speaker 1: election theory. And then I want to just mention one
44:23
Speaker 1: thing about Wisconsin because and this is an area that
44:27
Speaker 1: no one will touch because it's politically incorrect in a
44:31
Speaker 1: lot of ways. You can easily go down some rabbit
44:34
Speaker 1: holes you don't want to go down. But I think
44:36
Speaker 1: there's something unique about Wisconsin, which makes it more difficult
44:41
Speaker 1: to poll, and that is among the swing states, Wisconsin
44:47
Speaker 1: has somewhat unique demographics. Michigan and Pennsylvania have similar demographics.
44:55
Speaker 1: They actually have somewhat similar demographics to North Carolina and Georgia,
45:00
Speaker 1: and that is that you have not exact but you
45:02
Speaker 1: have similar numbers of white people and similar numbers of
45:07
Speaker 1: black people und or other minorities. Arizona gets in the
45:11
Speaker 1: Novata get more complicated because that's far more Hispanic, which
45:15
Speaker 1: is a very different demographic than the black demographic is nationwide.
45:20
Speaker 1: But by far of all the swing states, Wisconsin is
45:24
Speaker 1: the most white, and obviously white people are Trump's best demographic.
45:31
Speaker 1: But Trump does worse with the white people of Wisconsin
45:38
Speaker 1: generally than he does in the other swing states.
45:42
Speaker 2: That's why Wisconsin.
45:44
Speaker 1: Is still always very very close. So you inherently have
45:48
Speaker 1: a problem for polsters. Posters are dictated largely by demographics,
45:54
Speaker 1: and when you have a population that is overwhelmingly white,
45:58
Speaker 1: which would normally be Trump's best demographic, but that that
46:03
Speaker 1: demo generally is more liberal or less trumpy than white people.
46:08
Speaker 1: Say in Pennsylvania, you know, the middle of Pennsylvania is
46:12
Speaker 1: very very white and very very trumpy. You don't have
46:16
Speaker 1: that same kind of demographic in Wisconsin, and I think
46:20
Speaker 1: it makes Wisconsin a more difficult state to pull. And frankly,
46:26
Speaker 1: and I'm gonna sound maybe like I'm contradicting myself here,
46:29
Speaker 1: I think that if there was one state, if there
46:33
Speaker 1: was one state where I would say that the Trump
46:36
Speaker 1: fan argument, which I think is generally laughable, that my god,
46:41
Speaker 1: Trump is in great shape right now because he's doing
46:44
Speaker 1: so much better than he did at this stage against
46:46
Speaker 1: Hillary and the polling, and so much better than he
46:49
Speaker 1: did against Biden in twenty twenty in the polling, that
46:52
Speaker 1: therefore he's surely going to win. I mocked that theory
46:57
Speaker 1: in the last episode of the podcast. However, if there
47:00
Speaker 1: was one state where I think that could could have
47:05
Speaker 1: some bearing, some could have some credibility, it would be Wisconsin.
47:11
Speaker 1: The fact that Trump is doing incredibly consistently competitively in
47:17
Speaker 1: Wisconsin other than that one pole A just referenced this morning,
47:21
Speaker 1: but if you take that out, and if you look
47:23
Speaker 1: at all the recent polling in Wisconsin, it is almost
47:28
Speaker 1: time and time and time again, either Trump is one
47:31
Speaker 1: point down, or Trump is tied or occasionally Trump is
47:34
Speaker 1: up by a point, but if you average them all out,
47:37
Speaker 1: Trump is clearly within a point or two at worst
47:41
Speaker 1: in Wisconsin, and that is way better than he was
47:46
Speaker 1: in twenty sixteen and twenty twenty. Now have the pollsters
47:51
Speaker 1: finally figured out the white demographic being different in Wisconsin
47:56
Speaker 1: than in other swing states. Maybe, so maybe there's just
48:01
Speaker 1: something weird about Wisconsin and Trump will overpoll there or
48:05
Speaker 1: under He'll be his vote will be underestimated by polls
48:11
Speaker 1: going into the election, and then he will overperform on
48:14
Speaker 1: election day as he did in twenty sixteen and twenty twenty.
48:17
Speaker 1: I think that that actually has some logic behind it.
48:22
Speaker 1: That's a semi coachin argument in Wisconsin. I don't think
48:26
Speaker 1: it's an argument nationwide, and I don't think it works
48:30
Speaker 1: in most of these swing states. So I realize this
48:34
Speaker 1: is probably more than you need when it comes to polling,
48:37
Speaker 1: because a lot of people are board of polling already.
48:40
Speaker 1: We get bombarded by all this. But I really do think,
48:43
Speaker 1: as I said in the last episode, that this is
48:46
Speaker 1: a key point here.
48:48
Speaker 2: We are very very close to Harris either.
48:51
Speaker 1: Pulling away or this coming back on the state level
48:56
Speaker 1: to an incredibly doorally closed selection where you have six
49:04
Speaker 1: or seven states that are on a razor's edge that
49:08
Speaker 1: may take days or weeks to count before we determine
49:12
Speaker 1: who the winner here is. Now, I don't know which
49:16
Speaker 1: scenario is the more likely. I said in the last episode,
49:19
Speaker 1: I think it's actually the close election scenario. Based upon
49:23
Speaker 1: what the New York Times and Everson put out today,
49:26
Speaker 1: I think that that's still very much the most likely
49:29
Speaker 1: scenario unless these state polls are delayed in moving in
49:34
Speaker 1: the same direction that the national polls have post debate.
49:39
Speaker 1: But for those that are in the conspiracy camp that
49:42
Speaker 1: just completely disregard all of these left wing media polls.
49:47
Speaker 1: I just simply ask, how do you explain the New
49:50
Speaker 1: York Times, How do you explain Emerson this morning? How
49:54
Speaker 1: do you explain the Biden era polls?
49:57
Speaker 2: Please?
49:58
Speaker 1: Just somebody make it make any sense. Polling is not perfect,
50:02
Speaker 1: nowhere near perfect. It's much more difficult in this era
50:06
Speaker 1: to In some ways, it's way more difficult in this
50:09
Speaker 1: era with technology to get accurate polls. But in other ways,
50:12
Speaker 1: we have so much more data than we ever have
50:15
Speaker 1: had before. So I'm not sure one hundred percent buy
50:18
Speaker 1: that idea that polling is now irrelevant. And then I
50:22
Speaker 1: just want to address one another thing because I keep
50:24
Speaker 1: forgetting to do it, and I wish I had the
50:27
Speaker 1: opportunity to ask jd Vance about this. But one of
50:31
Speaker 1: the reasons I'm much more in the mainstream media camp,
50:35
Speaker 1: which is ironic for a guy who hosts a podcast
50:37
Speaker 1: called The Death of Journalism when it comes to when
50:40
Speaker 1: it comes to polling and evaluating the credibility of polls,
50:43
Speaker 1: is that I really don't have any faith in the
50:46
Speaker 1: non mainstream so called independent or I refer to them
50:50
Speaker 1: as pro Trump polling outlets. These are outlets like for
50:55
Speaker 1: flogar Ras Muscin insider Advantage.
51:01
Speaker 2: These are the so called pro Trump polls.
51:04
Speaker 1: Now, at times these guys have done a better job
51:09
Speaker 1: than the mainstream poles.
51:10
Speaker 2: You could argue in twenty twenty they did so. But
51:13
Speaker 2: twenty twenty was such a weird situation. You have brand
51:17
Speaker 2: new rules, you were in the.
51:18
Speaker 1: Middle of alleged massive pandemic. It was literally unprecedented, and
51:25
Speaker 1: so things like seventeen points in Wisconsin, as insane as
51:30
Speaker 1: that was by ABC, that's gonna happen when you're in
51:34
Speaker 1: an unprecedented situation. And in my view, those so called
51:40
Speaker 1: pro Trump posters.
51:42
Speaker 2: They got lucky. Now was there a reason they got lucky?
51:45
Speaker 2: I don't know.
51:46
Speaker 1: But I'm a big believer in incentive structures, and their
51:50
Speaker 1: incentive structure.
51:52
Speaker 2: Is far far more perverse.
51:55
Speaker 1: Than the so called mainstream liberal media pulling out lets,
51:59
Speaker 1: because they are deeply invested in the idea that Trump
52:04
Speaker 1: is doing well and that their polls are the ones
52:07
Speaker 1: to trust, and that if they produce a pro Trump headline,
52:12
Speaker 1: they get a lot of attention, they get a lot
52:15
Speaker 1: of clicks, they get a lot of credibility within the
52:17
Speaker 1: right wing. By the way, they all blew it in
52:20
Speaker 1: twenty twenty two in the midterms, And so I do
52:24
Speaker 1: not trust where they are coming from. And it's not
52:27
Speaker 1: just a feeling. You know, ras Mustin I crap on
52:30
Speaker 1: all the time, and for good reason. The guy who
52:33
Speaker 1: runs the RAS Musten poll. And it's important to point
52:35
Speaker 1: out that there's been a split there between Scott Rassmussen
52:39
Speaker 1: and rass Muscin polling and way more inside baseball than
52:42
Speaker 1: you need. But the guy that runs the RAS Muscin poll,
52:45
Speaker 1: which is by far the most pro Trump poll, he
52:48
Speaker 1: just did an interview.
52:49
Speaker 2: This was amazing. I posted this on Twitter. He just
52:52
Speaker 2: did an interview.
52:53
Speaker 1: Where he was promoting a pole he's about to do
52:58
Speaker 1: in Pennsylvania where he basically predicts that the poll will
53:04
Speaker 1: be very pro Trump and show that the race, even
53:08
Speaker 1: in Pennsylvania is now going in Trump's direction. This was
53:13
Speaker 1: before they started the poll, before they started the poll.
53:20
Speaker 2: There's not a poster worth.
53:22
Speaker 1: Anything that would ever even dream of publicly predicting where
53:29
Speaker 1: their poll was gonna end up. There's no way you
53:32
Speaker 1: would do that. None one of you had credibility.
53:36
Speaker 2: You wouldn't do it.
53:37
Speaker 1: But two, it's perfectly consistent with a guy who is
53:40
Speaker 1: contriving the results. He's making that prediction, promising, he's literally promising, Oh,
53:47
Speaker 1: next week, we're going to come out with a great
53:48
Speaker 1: poll in Pennsylvania for Trump. How the fuck could you
53:51
Speaker 1: possibly know that? If you were a real poster, you
53:55
Speaker 1: wouldn't know that. The only way you would know that
53:58
Speaker 1: is you were planning on cooking the and that your
54:01
Speaker 1: results would be bullshit, and that you were simply feeding
54:05
Speaker 1: a pro Trump narrative. And these are all posters that
54:10
Speaker 1: have gotten credibility in large part because they're part of
54:12
Speaker 1: the so called real Clear Politics average, which I no
54:16
Speaker 1: longer give any credibility to because I strongly believe, and
54:20
Speaker 1: and have suspected for a long time, and have strong
54:23
Speaker 1: reason to believe, that Real Clear Politics is actively actively
54:30
Speaker 1: promoting pro Trump polls, and that's why their averages are
54:34
Speaker 1: not nearly as negative for Trump as some others are.
54:39
Speaker 1: And yet somehow the Real Clear Politics average is still
54:41
Speaker 1: given a lot of credibility in the national news media.
54:45
Speaker 1: So you know, those pollsters have a perverse self interest.
54:49
Speaker 1: Does it mean they're totally wrong? No, not necessarily. They
54:55
Speaker 1: could directally be right. Maybe they had some magic in
54:57
Speaker 1: twenty twenty that they lost in twenty twenty two, and
55:00
Speaker 1: they somehow found it again in twenty twenty four.
55:03
Speaker 2: I just don't believe it.
55:05
Speaker 6: Thanks for listening to today's free drop of the abbreviated show.
55:09
Speaker 6: If you're interested in listening to the entire show, you
55:12
Speaker 6: must become a patron. Please go to Patreon. That's p
55:17
Speaker 6: A t R e O N dot com. Patreon dot com.
55:22
Speaker 6: Slash the Death of Journalism with John Ziggler. My name
55:28
Speaker 6: is j H N z I E G L e R.
55:31
Speaker 6: That's patreon dot com. Slash the Death of Journalism with
55:37
Speaker 6: John Zigler good luck to you on that, but that's
55:41
Speaker 6: how you can subscribe.