The Inexcusable Arrogance of The Pundits

poor-nate-silver

Tuesday, Donald Trump defeated Hillary Cinton to become President-elect of the United States. Trump celebrated the win late that night, Ms. Clinton conceded early Wednesday morning, but as the week ended the major pundits were largely unwilling to admit that they were wrong. Excuses for blowing the call ranged from blaming inaccuracy on late voter decisions to complex explanations that – statistically – the pundits weren’t that far off.

For example, Nate Silver (who boasted for four years how well he did in predicting state and national results in 2012), presented a weak defense of his statistical model.

http://fivethirtyeight.com/features/why-fivethirtyeight-gave-trump-a-better-chance-than-almost-anyone-else/

Silver also claimed that the results were within the standard margin-of-error, implying that he didn’t really get it wrong.

http://fivethirtyeight.com/features/what-a-difference-2-percentage-points-makes/

Silver gave Trump a 29% chance of winning early Tuesday night. It’s important to keep in mind that Silver also limited Trump’s chances of winning to 12.6% back on October 18,

http://projects.fivethirtyeight.com/2016-election-forecast/

and that Silver’s forecast fluctuated as polls did; Silver locked his forecast into poll accuracy, even though he claimed to adjust for bias and outliers – he bluntly failed to consider the effect of groupthink.

Next up is the Huffington Post, which boldly predicted a 98% chance of a Clinton win, then blamed the loss on a “black swan event” (and Trump only a 2% chance),

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/pollster-forecast-donald-trump-wrong_us_5823e1e5e4b0e80b02ceca15

which amounts to claiming no one could have seen it coming. This would be a lie.

The New York Times gave Clinton an 85% chance of winning the day of the election, down a bit from 93% on October 25. This equated to giving Trump a 15% chance, up from 7% on the respective dates.

Rather than candidly admit their bias and its results, the NYT actually blamed … the data itself. Hypocrisy in print, folks.

Larry Sabato, who has made a nice living from predicting elections over the years, actually claiming a 99% success rate in 2004 and 97% in 2012.

http://ijr.com/2016/08/667335-famed-election-predictor-with-97-100-track-record-reveals-his-trump-vs-hillary-2016-results/

Sabato called 347 Electoral Votes for Clinton this year, which cannot be sanely called anything but a faceplant.

Forbes, best-known for business reporting, also got into the election forecast game, and when they got it badly wrong they blamed ‘statistical error’.

http://www.forbes.com/sites/startswithabang/2016/11/09/the-science-of-error-how-polling-botched-the-2016-election/#452ff2e27da8

And so it goes. At this writing, exactly none of the people who made money and gained fame from predicting elections, had the guts to plainly admit they got this one completely wrong.

Why should we care? Because a lot of media paid attention to these pundits all through the election, especially at the end. They threw out predictions that were clearly way off the mark. A lot of them have offered excuses, but let’s step back and see why the explanations are worthless.

Silver, for example, goes into great detail about different factors and how they influenced the election results.

http://fivethirtyeight.com/features/why-fivethirtyeight-gave-trump-a-better-chance-than-almost-anyone-else/

Some of that is interesting reading, but the sum effect is that it comes off as butt-covering, not least because any professional should have properly included such factors in their pre-election forecast.

So what should the forecast have looked like? To answer that, we need to step back and ask what we expect from a forecast. A forecast should have general similarity to what actually happens. For example, in a weather forecast we often hear about, say, a ‘30% chance of rain’. That’s actually a little vague, since it doesn’t tell us where that rain will happen or when, but if we hear 30%, we would expect some clouds and only in some places. A completely clear, sunny day or a torrential downpour would mean the forecast was wrong, no matter what explanation the weather guy offered. So the election results can be seen this way:

In a straight look at the Popular Vote, Hillary Clinton claimed 47.8% to Trump’s 47.3%. Of course, the actual election does not depend on the Popular Vote, but this result is consistent with a national picture, and the main point is that none of the major pundits gave Trump a 47.3% chance. By this metric, the major polls grade out this way in their calls:

FOX News: Called 44% for Trump (-3.3%), called 48% for Clinton (+0.2%), aggregate (-3.5%)
LA Times: Called 47% for Trump, (-0.3%), called 44% for Clinton (-3.8%), aggregate (-4.1%)
ABC/WaPo: Called 43% for Trump (-4.3%), called 47% for Clinton (-0.8%), aggregate (-5.1%)
IBD/TIPP: Called 45% for Trump, (-2.3%), called 43% for Clinton (-4.8%), aggregate (-7.1%)
CBS News: Called 41% for Trump (-6.3%), called 45% for Clinton (-2.8%) aggregate (-9.1%)
Bloomberg: Called 41% for Trump (-6.3%), called 44% for Clinton (-3.8%), aggregate (-10.1%)

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/latest_polls/president/

Pretty much everybody was outside a statistical margin of error (Fox was almost inside that line). No one can claim to have nailed that call, but each poll got close-ish on at least one candidate. Grade them C’s and D’s at a professional standard.

But Presidential elections depend on wining electoral votes from state contests. In the end, Trump won 306 electoral votes to Clinton’s 232 electoral votes, or 56.9% of the EV to 43.1%. No one at all came close to predicting Trump would nearly 57 percent of the EV. Absolutely none of the pundits listed above were anywhere close to being right. If these were students, we’d be comparing different levels of ‘F’ grades on an exam.

Again using Real Clear Politics’ published results,

http://www1.realclearpolitics.com/elections/live_results/2016_general/president/map.html

we can see the average results of each state by vote for each candidate; the average should give us a reasonable forecast for a candidate winning election. Using the vote results by state, Trump claimed an average 48.9% of the vote to Clinton’s 45.2%. Again, none of the pundits came close to this result.

Pundits will sometimes point to variables, margin of error, and other technicalities to excuse blowing the call. But never forget that the main reason for any forecast is to give you a reasonable expectation of what is coming. It’s fair (but very rare) for a statistician to admit that he cannot forecast a clear outcome; pay attention here to the fact that both Gallup and Pew refused to publish election predictions this year. But if a pundit publishes a forecast that projects a clear winner by a wide margin, as Silver, Huffington, the New York Times, Sabato and so on all did, they cannot pretend that they did anything but fail when results are so plainly different from their predictions. Aggregation is a poor tool in election forecasting, and sooner or later the public should demand better work from people who are happy to take credit and publicity for their projections.

Man up, you wimps. You blew it.

We Live In Interesting Times
The Eleventh Day of the Eleventh Month
  • jim_m

    Apart from the increasing difficulties in actually finding people to poll in a world filled with cell phones rather than land lines, I think the biggest issue in this election was the unwillingness of Trump voters to be polled at all, and the refusal of Trump voters to say what they thought.

    Left wing media and individuals have filled this country with so much hate that the rest of us have hidden our opinions, choosing to express them at the polls alone. There is no way you account for that.When you drive people to hide what they think you no longer can have responsible polling.

    However, this leads me to think of one thing that I haven’t said about this election: Yes, Bruce, this is the preference cascade you have been sneering at. People hid their opinions until they could safely express them and now it has come out to destroy your fascist party. Now the truth is out and people are not going to hide from your thought police any longer or take the abuse from our honor brigades any more. Told you so.

    • Brucehenry

      Well you have a point that many people will now feel emboldened to say things that aren’t “politically correct.” Of course that means some of them will now feel emboldened to go around spewing racism and misogyny and xenophobia and homophobia. Others will just be mildly offensive occasionally.

      But most folks, the majority, will continue to be polite and try not to hurt the feelings of others unnecessarily, because that is where the culture is nowadays. We don’t laugh at punch-down humor anymore, and we don’t think it’s polite to offend women or minorities just for the hell of it.

      I don’t think people will suddenly think the shit that comes out of Ann Coulter’s mouth, for example, will suddenly be ok. Some, sure, and probably more than before Trump’s win, but not most. Ditto fucksticks like Howard Stern.

      By the way, Mr Drummond, a fine article, but couldn’t you have made your citations into links? It would be a lot easier to “read the whole thing,” wouldn’t it?

      • jim_m

        If you think that left wing culture is not about hurting people they disagree with I beg to differ. Your side treats people that they disagree with like animals to be put down.

        • Brucehenry

          Hyperbole thy name is Jim

          • LiberalNightmare

          • jim_m

            You were saying Bruce?

          • Brucehenry
          • jim_m

            The person making the recording can be heard condemning the victim for voting for Trump. Just stop with your filthy lies.

          • Brucehenry

            Sure they can but the woman participating in the beating can be heard saying “You gonna pay for my shit?”

            Read the link from Snopes

          • jim_m

            You just admitted it was a politically inspired hate crime.

          • Brucehenry

            Still haven’t read the link I see.

          • jim_m

            Still haven’t remembered the democrat sponsored violence against Trump supporters during the campaign I see. But then fascist inspired violence in pursuit of forcing your agenda on the public is OK as far as you are concerned. If dem operatives are paying for violence against Trump voters you are fine with that.

            You might as well have put them in brown shirts and jack boots. Your party engaged in ideologically inspired violence and you support them and you continue to do so and you do nothing to stop it. You own that violence too. You believe in it and you will accept any and all violence that advance your agenda.

          • Brucehenry
          • Brucehenry

            I guess you’ll be glad that these folks will no longer be afraid to express their heartfelt opinions in polite company.

          • jim_m

            I believe that the best way to deal with fascism is to get it out in the open so we can squash it. Kind of like we did in this election. Kind of like we have in 33 states the dems no longer control.

          • Brucehenry

            Non responsive but sure ok whatever

          • Brucehenry
          • jim_m

            Not a single one has been traced to a Trump supporter, while some claims of Trump inspired bigotry have already been revealed as lies and false police reports by leftists seeking to inspire hatred toward conservatives and to promote a false narrative.

          • Brucehenry

            Really? So if they’ve been revealed, where, which, by whom?

          • jim_m
          • Brucehenry

            That’s one, you said “some.”

          • jim_m
          • Brucehenry

            Yes it’s true that this wave of “hate crimes” and perhaps some of the incidents in my “Day One” link are overhyped. So is LN’s video above, in which bystanders are heard making cruel jokes about “he voted for Trump” instead of helping a victim of assault, or trying to stop it, or at the very least saying “that’s a shame.”

            So is your overheated rhetoric. And so is the concern over the ongoing anti-Trump protests, only a few of which have degenerated into incidents of violence or property damage, and all of which will fizzle out soon.

          • Retired military

            “And so is the concern over the ongoing anti-Trump protests, only a few of which have degenerated into incidents of violence or property damage, and all of which will fizzle out soon.”

            Have you seen the videos from Seattle? Come on Bruce.

            Why will they fizzle out soon? Well when it gets cold then these snowflakes go inside to stay warm.

            Why is it that Obama getting elected with 95% of the black vote is not racism but Trump getting elected with about 53% of the white vote is racism?

          • jim_m

            Nice that you excuse people cheering on the violent assault of someone who disagrees with you politically.

            File this under proof of my claim that you will excuse fascist tyranny right up to when they are marching people into camps.

            Shorter Bruce, “I have no idea how all those dead people got that way, but I am certain that someone should have done something, at the very least saying, ‘That’s a shame’.”

          • Brucehenry

            Who is excusing anyone? My point is that the incident appears to have been, as the police state, started as the result of a traffic issue. The bystanders are the ones “joking” about Trump, the perpetrators are assaulting this guy because they are angry over a traffic incident.

          • jim_m

            Unless he rear ended a clown car, the people assaulting him were at least in part from the sidewalk.

          • Brucehenry

            The point is he wasn’t assaulted for being a Trump voter but because of a traffic incident. That’s why the woman wants him to “pay for her shit” — because she blames him for damaging her car, as the police said.

          • jim_m

            It started with the accident, the beating was done because he was white.

          • Brucehenry

            It may very well be the case. Doesn’t make the beating politically motivated, as the purveyors of the meme want us to believe. They want us to think there are roving bands of blacks pulling innocent white people out of their cars and beating them for no other reason than that they ere accused of being Trump voters. It’s propaganda pure and simple.

          • jim_m

            People are being attacked for being Trump voters. Denying that is the lie.

          • Retired military

            Why is it that a peaceful gathering of republicans is called a riot yet a violent mob of democrats destroying property is called a protest (in the press)?

          • Brucehenry

            What peaceful gathering of Republicans has been called a riot?

          • Retired military

            http://www.huffingtonpost.com/news/tea-party-violence/
            http://aattp.org/tag/tea-party-violence/
            http://www.dailykos.com/story/2010/3/6/842057/-

            Shall I keep going?

            Tell you what Bruce.

            Find me one tea party protest that was as violent as the stuff going on in Seattle.

          • Brucehenry

            None of those three links contained the word “riot.”

          • LiberalNightmare
          • Brucehenry

            Now THIS, apparently, is an actual assault on a Trump supporter for being a Trump supporter. However, it didn’t happen at a protest, which is what this thread was about, but instead at a random intersection where two drugged-out felons got pissed off.

          • Denial thy name is brucehemorrhoid.

          • Jwb10001

            Bruce hang on a sec, you just said this:

            Well you have a point that many people will now feel emboldened to say things that aren’t “politically correct.” Of course that means some of them will now feel emboldened to go around spewing racism and misogyny and xenophobia and homophobia.

            and then accused someone else of hyperbole? I mean that’s a bit over the top isn’t it?

          • Brucehenry

            No, because I qualified it with “some.” We’ll have to see how and to what degree Trump’s election emboldens racists and misogynists, etc. Nothing would please me more than to be proven right when I say that “most people, the majority, will continue to be polite…”

            If I am, the hysteria and overblown fears (to the extent they ARE overblown) will recede.

          • Jwb10001

            OK Bruce what ever you say.

          • jim_m

            “most people, the majority, will continue to be polite…”

            Here is the rare instance where you and I agree. The majority of people WILL continue to be polite. 99.999% of conservatives will continue to be so. <5% of leftists will. Given the near 50/50 split in this nation exemplified by the last 5 Presidential elections, adding the <5% of lefties to the half of the nation that is conservative yields a majority.

            And that is exactly how it will happen.

          • Denial thy name is dhimmocrat.

      • Brett Buck

        Bruce- you miss the point. Part of this is that we aren’t to continue to permit leftists to define “offensive” any more.

        What killed your party is perfectly clear, and is being demonstrated in the streets even as we speak. For years now, we have heard lectures about how:

        white people are intrinsically racist
        if you don’t want men who pretend to be women hanging around ladies rooms you are a homophobe
        if you oppose what is very clearly an invasion by anti-American forces in the form of unchecked illegal immigration you are an isolationist

        etc. Used to be, only the hyper-leftist lunatics spouted this nonsense. For almost a decade, we got this from every Democrat politician and even the President of the United States. No one stepped up and said a word about how stupid this was, despite driving the Democrats out first the house and then the Senate.

        Well, the good people of America have gotten sick and damn tired of this. First we deselected the “Republicans” who went along with these smears without a peep, then we deselected one of the most egregiously and obviously corrupt politicians since the Grant administration.

        Now we see a bunch of whiny 3-year-olds doing exactly as expected, pitching a hissy fit and committing violent acts because they didn’t get their way. If they keep it up, they will *guarantee* they will lose again. Their other grand strategic move appears to drive the party even further to the left to capture the votes of these same whiny little brats – and guarantee that they lose almost everyone else. I see they are floating a radical Muslim as the DNC chair! How further out of touch could they possibly be?!

        • Brucehenry

          The chip-on-the-shoulder perceptions you have is what slays me.

          No one, or anyway almost no one but the most out-there loonies, claims that “white people are intrinsically racist.” But it is true that the white, Christian people benefit from a certain privilege that is so ingrained that many are hardly conscious of it, if they are conscious of it at all.

          If you go around calling trans people “men who pretend to be women” I don’t know if we should call you a homophobe but we should call you ignorant — you know nothing of what transgenderism is, and don’t want to know.

          If you call undocumented immigrants trying to keep their families from poverty “clearly an invasion by anti-American forces” maybe we shouldn’t call you an isolationist but instead suffering from paranoia.

          Throughout the last weeks of the campaign, Trump kept insisting that the “election was rigged, folks,” and then won with slightly less than half the popular vote. He and his supporters suggested over and over that they may not concede had they been presented with a mirror image of this result. It’s hardly surprising that there have been demonstrations now that a somewhat shocking, different outcome has occurred. Most of them have been entirely peaceful, at least as of last night ( I slept in this morning and just got up, has any violence happened overnight?). These demonstrations will thin out and disappear soon, although sporadic ones will probably occur throughout Trump’s term. Nothing to worry about.

          • Brett Buck

            You can discount it if you want, while you contemplate the consequences of your smug attitude for the next 4+years.

          • Wild_Willie

            Bruce, you are as dumb as a bag of hammers my man. You guys on the left went ape shit because Trump would not say if he would accept the election results. Telling him to grow up, etc. Now here we are and the same people now (including you) are NOT accepting the election.

            Bruce, your beliefs have no power anymore. Your pundits helped Trump by relentlessly beating on him. Hillary of all people was telling voters how bad Trump is. All the leftists were 99% sure of a Hillary win.

            By the way, Bernie Sanders said the election was rigged and he was proven right. Maybe it is, but your side didn’t rig it enough. ww

          • It’s taken you this long to figure that out?

          • Retired military

            “No one, or anyway almost no one but the most out-there loonies, claims that “white people are intrinsically racist.””

            Bruce you hear white privilege crap being TAUGHT at MAJOR college campuses just about every week. I am talking about Harvard, Yale, Cornell, and other IVY league schools.

            I could easily come up with a dozen examples. I agree they are the OUT THERE loonies but they are in places where they can spread their lunacy to an entire generation. Did you hear Van Jones on election night? Or Juan Williams? Or Al Sharpton. They used the word racism at least a dozen times over the course of a 2 hour period and I wasnt even watching them full time.

          • Brucehenry

            Talking about white privilege, which does exist, and/or using the word “racism” when talking about many Trump supporters, is different than saying, as Brett did, that people are claiming that “white people are intrinsically racist.”

          • jim_m

            No. White privilege does not exist except in the fevered racist minds of lefties.

            Middle class privilege exists though. People do have advantages do to having a more affluent upbringing. This applies to people of Asian, Indian, ME and yes, even of black descent.

            It is racist to say that only white people have this.

            And, yes, lefties also maintain that white people are genetically racist.

            Deal with it Bruce. GO google “white people are genetically racist” and see the filth your side believes.

            You are a bigot. Get over it.

          • Brett Buck

            They are synonymous. And before you start lecturing me on the “difference”, consider that everyone else that just tossed your heroes out knows exactly what it means.

            I would guess that without the use of the phrase “white privilege”, you had a chance of winning. The fact that this nonsense was shoved down people’s throats in every aspect of their lives, starting about 2-3 years ago, *was the tipping point”.

            Note that the great improvement you made was to undo decades of race relations and pitted race against race and class against class. *YOU* and your ilk did that, not anyone else, you are responsible for it and you got taken to the cleaners for it,

            No one cares what you think, or what some scumbag so-called intellectuals think, about “white privilege”. Decent people do not like getting smeared by a collection of race baiters and condescending elitists.

          • jim_m

            Bruce has devolved into nothing but a cheap race baiter.

          • How unexpected…

          • Brucehenry

            OK, so those on your side — slightly LESS than a majority of voters, who were roused by a rabble-rouser while the apathetic leaderless people who were supposed to vote for what you call a flawed and uninspiring candidate failed to show up — are “decent people” and everyone else is…what, NOT decent?

            I’ll tell you something about condescension, since that is what apparently chaps you so badly: Those undeserving of condescension laugh it off, while those who deserve it seethe with resentment.

            Gee I’m sorry it was unacceptable to be a racist or misogynist in Barack’s America, and glad for you that you think it will be fine now to grab pussies and intimidate trans people and fuck with the marriages of gay folk. I don’t think it will, and I don’t think the election of Trump will suddenly make the offensive inoffensive.

            Speaking of what is offensive and what’s not, it amuses me that you guys are always claiming that liberals are offended waah waah by the things you say, but you yourselves get ALL KINDS OF PISSED OFF when people call you names. It’s fine to call others greedy, lazy, anti-American, commies, mooches, feminazis, weenies, “low-information voters” on and on yada yada but NOT fine to say racist or homophobe or xenophobe — you are “sick and tired” of that. Who gives a fuck if you are sick and tired of being called a racist? Maybe don’t be one, ever thought of that?

          • jim_m

            Fuck you Bruce. You proceed by calling everyone here a racist? FUCK YOU.

            No one here was a racist because0bama was president. You know damned well that every policy disagreement we had with 0bama was held before he was even a Senator and you didn’t call anyone racist until it was disagreement with 0bama. To pretend otherwise is dishonest.

            Frankly, if you are going to call everyone here a racist because of views held for more than a decade that have nothing to do with race you should be banned from Wizbang.

            Maybe Bruce when you get mad at my pointing out your racist views (in specific and not the general slur you just cast on all Wizbang members just now) you should consider stopping being a racist.

          • jim_m

            THAT RIGHT ABOVE FROM BRUCE SHOULD BE THE PROXIMATE CAUSE OF HIS PERMANENT BAN FROM THIS BOARD.

        • Indeed. Shouldn’t have jokingly called myself a ‘deplorable’. Spent a fair bit of time on-line last week trying to reassure people, tell them to chill out, take a deep breath, and wait and see what Trump actually does instead of hyperventilating about the latest rumors in their social circle.

          So what does this special snowflake do? Get on my last fucking nerve.

          Tolerance is a two-way street. And patience isn’t inexhaustible.

          https://uploads.disquscdn.com/images/c2aa135a6315bb3f3818a0f3b8d88ac4f58d455f57c44293929cd6c5dbcc0175.jpg

      • Retired military

        ” we don’t think it’s polite to offend women or minorities just for the hell of it.”

        Bruce

        Heard any rap music lately? Any African American comedians? Or are you saying it is okay if democrats do it but with republicans it is “racism and misogyny and xenophobia and homophobia”

        • Brucehenry

          When I say “we” I mean the majority of Americans. And even rappers are starting to drop the misogyny and homophobia. Eminem used to be quite the homophobe, and there are more and more feminist hip-hop stars. Sure there are comics and musicians I find offensive but they are outliers and hip-hop is changing along everything else.

          • Jwb10001

            When you corsen the culture the heard follows. We are now a population that is dominated by the popular culture. It seems to me there is very tiny minority of people like us that actually try to pay attention and understand the details of our politics and leadership. The majority worry more about the size of Kardashian’s ass than who is president of the US. So when rappers talk about women like cattle what’s a kid going to think? I hope your right about it being dialed back but I doubt it, nastiness sells until it doesn’t expect it to stay.

          • Brucehenry

            As evidence, comics like Andrew Dice Clay faded into obscurity. There are sitcoms about minority people and blacks aren’t portrayed as goggle-eyed cartoon characters and Asians aren’t bucktoothed math geniuses but regular folks. Even shows with gay characters don’t portray them, or at least not so often, as flamboyant swishes who think of nothing else than aberrant sex acts.

            Outside of TV the people you meet are less inclined to shoot their mouths off to people they THINK are like them, because they know that the stranger they are talking to may have a gay child, a black spouse, or a Latino best friend.

            So I have hope that the culture will be ever more accepting of diversity and politeness will continue to be the rule rather than the exception.

          • jim_m

            So you cite the departure from the public stage of a comic from the 80’s who was a flash in the pan fad, and you cite long gone stereotypes from the 1930’s and 1940’s of minorities to claim that culture is not coarsening?

            Yet you ignore 0bama hosting rappers who promote the murder of police and judges and who demean women and blacks. Get your head out of your ass.

            One suggests that your viewpoint on where culture IS is built on the views of your parent’s childhood back in the pre-depression US. You have no idea what this country is like because you have been living under your racist rock for your entire life.

          • Retired military

            We will have to agree to disagree on this Bruce. I am not “in tune” with the rap culture but just about everytime I hear it in the car next to me shaking my car with their speakers it isnt saying anything I would repeat to my mother that is for sure.

          • Jwb10001

            A perfect example of our entitled culture, I can play my stereo as loud as I please and you can stuff it up your a$$ if you don’t like it. Any wonder we have this going on now?

      • jim_m

        ” we don’t think it’s polite for other people to offend women or minorities just for the hell of it, but when we call them too stupid to be able to get a driver’s license that’s OK”

        When Bruce spouts his racist bullshit about how blacks are incompetent and ignorant he means it in a nice way so it’s OK.

        • Brucehenry

          It’s not me who claims black people only vote the way they do because they are too stupid to see the Dems have them “on their plantation,” or that they are greedy for Obamaphones and other “free stuff” as you and others here do.

          • jim_m

            No you have repeatedly claimed that black people are too stupid to get ID, that they are too incompetent to find where they can get ID, that they need white people to protect their interests because they are too incompetent to run their own lives.

            Here are Bruce’s friends repeating virtually every racist thought that Bruce has spewed on voter ID. (FYI Bruce, this is EXACTLY how we all see your views) https://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=youtu.be&v=odB1wWPqSlE&app=desktop

          • Brucehenry

            Never ever have I said anything like that. What I have said REPEATEDLY, is that Voter ID laws of the type Republicans have been pushing the last few years are a solution in search of a problem, since the vast majority of voter fraud occurs NOT by in-person impostor voting but by absentee or mail-in ballot.

            You lie about what I have said every single time this subject comes up. And it usually comes up BECAUSE you pop up with that same lie. You are a liar. I hate to start out a beautiful Sunday morning with this phrase, but Fuck You.

          • jim_m

            You have said that blacks cannot get ID, that ID laws disproportionately burden blacks by making them get ID.

            I wonder if you believe that the blacks in the video must be dupes and that they have had the wool pulled over their eyes by evil conservatives that they would support something so against their interests.

            Oh wait, isn’t that what you claim about my views? Sure it is, but somehow you believe that your thinking that black people are stupid and incompetent is OK, apparently because you believe that you are right when you claim it.

          • Brucehenry

            No I haven’t said that, you lying sack of shit. Go back over the threads in which this is discussed and see if you can come up with a quote from me saying that. Link to it. Go ahead and waste your Sunday doing so, idiot.

            I don’t give a shit whether you “wonder if I believe” this or that. You’re going to say “I believe” this or that whether I do or not, because you are a liar, fuck you.

            What is “apparently” the case to you isn’t “apparent” to anyone who can read English, but keep on lying, fuck you.

          • jim_m

            You sure do get pissy when someone points out your racism.

          • Brucehenry

            A little pissy when you repeat the same lie you’ve been repeating for years. Go ahead and link to my quote, Jim. Waste your Sunday looking for it. Otherwise shut the fuck up about it, you lying sack of catshit.

          • jim_m

            You have repeatedly stated that ID is meant to suppress the black vote and cited the same racist reasons everyone else does.

          • Brucehenry

            Nope I have repeatedly stated that THESE LAWS are intended to suppress the vote, but have repeatedly stated that the photo ID provisions are the least objectionable thing about them. The fact is calling them “Voter ID” laws is a misnomer, and, as I have repeatedly stated, it’s the restrictions on early voting, the closing of polling places in minority neighborhoods, etc that are snuck into these laws that are the problem with them.

            I see that you spent a couple hours trying to find a quote from me that demonstrates your lie and have failed to do so. LOL, Happy Sunday you stinking lying sack of catshit.

            I’m done with you for now. You can continue lying like the — what was it a commenter on this blog calls people who say the things you say? –Oh yeah, loathsome scumbags, despicable liars, beneath contempt, that was it, if you wish. Again, Happy Sunday, fuckstick.

          • Motor Voter is a vote fraud enabler.

          • jim_m

            actually, I thought I captured your quote pretty accurately above.

          • jim_m

            Maybe Bruce when you get mad at my pointing out your racist views (in specific and not the general slur you just cast on all Wizbang members just now) you should consider stopping being a racist.

          • jim_m

            Maybe Bruce when you get mad at my pointing out your racist views you should consider stopping being a racist.

          • Wild_Willie

            Brucy, did you know Hillary is a pedophile? See how easy it is to write stuff. Tsk! You are pathetic my man. ww

      • You and your ilk are forever accusing your political opponents of intending to do the very things you actually do when you gain power.

  • LiberalNightmare

    The dems are blaming the polls, and the pundits so far, and its fun to watch, but the truth is that the rank and file liberal was so wrapped up in their feeling of superiority, that they couldn’t see it coming.

    Fly-over country, rednecks, farmers, kid rock, bob seger listenin’ white trash rose up from the trailer parks and rejected them and they are pissed off.

    They ain’t mad ’cause they lost. They’re mad because we beat them.

    • Retired military

      I was eating at a chicken place today after church. They had MSNBC playing on the TV there. I saw 2 young people (about 18) eating and talking and I overheard one of them saying “Why the hell are they protesting?” and this was a hispanic and African American teenager. Yes I am from TX but still they knew intellectually why they were protesting but just couldnt fanthom the logic of it.

  • Par4Course

    Larry Sabato was interviewed on Fox News on Wednesday morning and admitted the failure of the pollsters. “I don’t have egg on my face; I have a whole omelette.” Exactly right. The only polls I saw giving Trump the edge were the LA Times and Investors Business Daily. Everyone else was awaiting Hillary’s coronation. What is she going to do with those WH drapes?

  • Vagabond661

    So I imagine Big Media will now proclaim that Trump won a landslide Electoral College election.

    Anyone? Bueller? ………Bueller?

  • Retired military

    Did you hear the NY Times stated they would rededicate themselves to more honest reporting?
    Stop laughing. It’s true. I swear. THey said that. Okay if you dont believe me then google it for yourself.

  • twolaneflash

    Once again, with feeling:
    THE POLL PURVEYORS DIDN’T “GET IT WRONG”; THEY LIED THROUGH THEIR ROTTEN COMMIE TEETH!

    • Retired military

      Shhhh Dont tell Pennywit.

  • Retired military

    But but the polls said that HIllary would win in a landslide. Just ask Pennywit