During the preamble to his Gettysburg Address …
Trump lashed out at his “accusers” and said he was going to sue them.
Said he’ wouldn’t allow the AT&T – Time Warner deal to get approved … because of a concentration of power.
Of course, his opposition was not because CNN is a part of the deal.
I haven’t seen press mentions of a 3rd Trump lash out …
Bottom line: The devil is indeed in the details.
=======
Let’s get really numbers geeky today ….
To satisfy, my curiosity, I dug a bit deeper into the 12 point difference between the recent Washington Post – ABC Poll (Clinton +12) and the historically accurate IBD poll (race tied).
========
Avid Trump supporters claim that WaPo over-sampled Dems … boosting Hillary’s numbers.
Break that into 2 parts: (1) Did WaPo over-sample Dems? (2) More generally, does over-sampling matter?
First, let’s draw a distinction between “over-sampling” and “over-weighting”.
Over-sampling means surveying more people in a particular group than their proportionate share of the population.
Over-weighting is disproportionately counting folks in a particular group when compiling an overall total.
Specifically, IBD says that it polls Democrats, Republicans and Independents in roughly the same numbers.
In other words, they over-sample Republicans and Independents since more than 1/3 of likely voters are Democrats (or, so they say).
But, IBD corrects for the over-sampling by re-weighting based on population proportions derived by separate studies called “enumeration surveys”.
Specifically, the IBD poll weights Democrats 36%, Republicans 30% and Independents 34%, assuming that mix is representative of likely voter turnout.
Note: overall, headline total numbers are highly sensitive to these turnout assumptions. Since roughly 85% of folks typically vote for their party’s nominee, each point shift in the turnout assumptions changes the weighted average by almost a point. And, these turnout ratios are derived outside of surveys based on the enumeration studies and political analysis.
As near as I can tell, the WaPo turnout weightings are about the same as IBD’s … maybe a couple of points more skewing to the Dems … maybe accounting for 2 or 3 of the 12 points.
No big deal.
=======
Digging deeper is where things start to get really interesting.
If you get all of your news from the MSM, you might have missed this one.
=======
As loyal readers know, I’ve been trying to figure out why there is such a wide range in poll results.
At the extremes, the Washington Post has Clinton up by 12 … and IBD – the most accurate poll in the last Presidential campaign – is calling the race a dead heat.
I can understand a couple of points of difference … but, a 12 point spread ????
=======
Well, courtesy of WikiLeaks, here’s a partial explanation…
=======
According to ZeroHedge.com …
One of the leaked emails reveals that Team Clinton had an active program in place to consult with pollsters in an effort to “manufacture” data in order to “maximize what we (the Clinton campaign) get out of our media polling.”
Note the key word: “media” … as in Washington Post, ABC, NBC, Huff Post … the usual band of suspects.
Specifically, they coached media pollster how to “oversample” certain groups that tend to be more favorable to Clinton:
Think: Democrats, minorities, urbanites, West Coasters, Native Americans, etc.
The purloined email even attaches a handy, 37-page guide with poll-rigging recommendations.
Check out the ZeroHedge.com article to see the email, the attachment, the names of the key players and, most important, an analysis of why this matters.
Bottom line: if a candidate gets a large share of a specific group and that group is over-sampled (say more Democrats), then the candidate’s poll results get a bump.
I can understand why a campaign would want to juice the numbers – to build supporters’ enthusiasm and to get opponents discouraged.
But, I don’t understand why the media outlets would put themselves out on such a public limb.
Eventually, the actual results will be known and any shenanigans will come out in the wash.
Maybe these guys don’t care.
A classic case of ends justifying the means I guess.
========
#HomaFiles
Follow on Twitter @KenHoma >> Latest Posts
========
The most accurate polls in the 2012 election have the race tied.
=======
I’m really intrigued by the wide variance in polling results for this year’s election.
The most publicized polls – usually associated with MSM or university sponsors — have Hillary up by 5 or 6 points.
That feels about right to me.
But, there are a couple of outliers that have Trump either tied or marginally ahead.
Those polls are usually dismissed by the MSM as “unscientific” since they might not use “pure” random sampling or might not have a live call center person asking the questions or use some form of rolling sample technique (vs. a fresh start with each poll).
Rather than looking at methodologies – all of which have issues – I thought I’d look at past performance ….
========
Nate Silver is the polling darling of the left – largely because he boldly predicted Obama’s win in 2008 – early, often and loud.
His FiveThirtyEight group did an analysis of pollster accuracy in the 2012 election.
Results are revealing …
=======
For starters, note that 4 of the top 7 pollsters – based on actual 2012 performance — use the much blasphemed internet polling methodology.
Pollsters using the RoboCall method (“press 1 for Hillary, 2 for Trump”) fared in the middle of the pack.
Traditional phone call surveys were sprinkled throughout the standings … and landed in 5 of the bottom 6 spots.
Also note that a couple of the most often reported “scientific” polls – Quinnipiac, Marist, Washington Post / ABC – are in the middle of the pack
Two of the current “outlier” polls – IBD and LA Times (nee. Rand Corp poll) were #1 and #4 in accuracy.
Hmmm.
=======
Let’s dig a bit deeper …
Answer: Not looking good for the Trumpster.
==========
Nate Silver is the left-leaning pollster who made his mark being early, often and loud predicting Obama’s 2008 victory.
These days, he’s saying that Hillary has an 87% of winning the election … based on an average of polls tracked and massaged by his FiveThirtyEight group.
===========
More specifically, Silver says that there’s a:
=========
Looks pretty bleak for The Donald based on Silvers recap.
But … tomorrow, we’ll use some of Silver’s own numbers to paint a different picture of the race.
=========
#HomaFiles
Follow on Twitter @KenHoma >> Latest Posts
=========
Psst: It’s not the Russians
=======
Let’s start with a couple of caveats and disclaimers:
1. Breitbart is real far right … very pro-Trump.
2. This isn’t a “scientific” analysis
3. This certainly doesn’t answer the question: who won the debate.
That said, I thought this was pretty interesting.
========
Most overnight “click polls” had Trump winning the first 2 debates.
So, a cottage industry developed to trash those polls as “unscientific”.
Now that didn’t stop CNN from gleefully reporting “even far-right website Breitbart’s overnight poll had Hillary Clinton winning the final presidential debate by 6 percentage points”.
Kudos to Breitbart for reporting the numbers; shame-shame to CNN for reversing course legitimizing click-polls.
=========
Well, Breitbart dug into the numbers to figure out what was going on.
Here’s what they found …..
OK, Trump made a tactical mistake by being bluntly truthful on the question: “Will you commit today to accept the results of the election?”
He should have said: “Sure, just like Gore in 2000. Once all the related legal processes are settled and the results are certified, I’ll abide by the election results.”
But, he didn’t … so, Dems and the MSM got challenge his patriotism, commitment to the Constitution, blah-blah-blah.
Sample, the Atlantic:
======
Too bad, because it would have been great to have had coverage of the other big issues that surfaced during the debate: open borders, free trade, 2nd amendment, tax & spend, pay-to- play, tiered justice system, religious freedom, partial-birth abortion, etc.
The best part of the debate (my opinion) was that Chris Wallace got Trump & Clinton to stake out their positions on most of those issues.
Of course, there was bobbing & weaving, but the sharp contrasts in positions were laid out.
=======
Now, back to the concession dust-up ….
… then why are so few folks satisfied with the way things are going?
========
OK, Obama inherited a mess from Bush.
According to Gallup:
Under Bush, “satisfaction with the way things are going in the U.S.” dropped from the high-60s that Clinton handed over to him.
When he left office satisfaction was generally in the low 20s … a big drop.
No problem.
Prior Presidents got things back on track.
Reagan pulled us out of the Carter malaise … and Clinton turned things around after Bush, Sr.
Obama promised to usher in an era of hope & change, right?
How has that worked out?
Fine if you listen to him … or Hillary on the stump.
But, fact is, he didn’t move the needle much … a couple of points, at best.
So, tell me again, why are so many folks argue that we should stay the course?
Has dissatisfaction become the new normal?
As one candidate would say, “What the hell do you have to lose?”
=========
#HomaFiles
Follow on Twitter @KenHoma >> Latest Posts
=======
The answer may surprise you and, for sure, presents an ironic twist.
=======
Chapman University does an annual survey of Americans’ fears
Here’s some quick background ….
The study queries on 11 “Domains of Fear”:
=========
The study deep dives into specific fears within each domain:
==========
OK, make your pick from the above list.
What do Americans fear the most?
Here are some debate predictions prompted by Axelrod’s tweet .
========
Late last week, Trump opined that both candidates should be drug tested before Wednesday’s debate … ostensibly, to make sure that Hillary’s not being propped up by chemical additives.
David Axlerod – Obama’s chief political strategist – countered with idea that Hillary should scratch from the debate card.
I don’t know which is the wilder idea: drug testing or scratching?
=======
At least the latter started me thinking …
What does Hillary have to gain by showing up … or not?
If she doesn’t show up, rumors will immediately surface that she has another bout of pneumonia … or worse.
Hmmm.
Or, all but the MSM will pound her: “How can we expect you to stand up to Putin if you can’t stand up to Trump … and Fox’s Chris Wallace?”
Double hmmm.
Advantage to to showing up.
But wait …
Let’s add one more piece and then connect the dots.
The answer may surprise you … and, give some of you heartburn.
========
The most reported polling result is probably the RealClearPolitics poll-of-polls … the average across the hal-dozen or so polls that RCP deems to be the most credible.
In 2012, the RCP average just before the election – the purple line below — pegged Obama’s lead at about 1 point.
Obama ended up winning by about 4 points.
That’s a pretty big miss.
========
The poll that came the closest according to RCP was the Rand Poll … the aqua line above.
Rand had Obama as a 3 point favorite … within a point of the final tally.
So, how come we’re not hearing about the Rand poll these days?
News isn’t good for the Donald.
=======
The headline reads:
========
That’s what the numbers say, but I don’t think that it’s the big story….
One of this week’s WiliLeaks certainly caught my attention:
Clinton’s senior staffers exchanged several emails that mocked the Catholic church, referring to it as a Middle Ages dictatorship”.
Hmmm.
Raises a couple of questions.
First, do they think that this guy a “Middle Ages Dictator”?
Seriously, the most liberal Pontiff in the history of the Catholic Church?
OK, he still preaches that partial births abortions are a no-no … but, on most issues, he has moved the Church towards most planks of the Progressive platform.
I thought they’d love the guy.
========
Bigger question: if Islamaohobia is bad, how can Catholiphobia be OK?
In fact, no just OK, it’s socially fashionable.
I guess that isn’t really a surprise.
Many authors have referred to Catholicism as “the last acceptable prejudice”.
Not OK to raise your eyebrow at Jihadists who cut off people heads.
But, OK to trash Neanderthals who think that lives are sacred.
Go figure.
Only consolation for Catholics is that Team Clinton says that Evangelicals are even lower on the food chain.
Somehow, that doesn’t make me feel better,
Wonder what the priests will say at masses this Sunday.
My bet: it’ll be swept under the altar’s rug.
We’ll see.
=======
#HomaFiles
Follow on Twitter @KenHoma >> Latest Posts
========
This one has been hiding in plain sight for a long time.
I’d been wondering why this tape has largely gone unnoticed by folks.
Maybe, because it’s damning to Hillary, not Donald?
Well, it’s likely to get noticed now.
========
In one of his tirades about Clintonian women abuse, Trump landed a body blow:
“One of the women, who is a wonderful woman, at 12 years old, was raped at 12,” Trump said. “Her client she (Clinton) represented got him off, and she’s heard laughing (on tape) on two separate occasions, laughing at the girl who was raped.”
=======
According to the Washington Post …
The attack on Clinton has less to do with the fact that she defended an accused rapist and more to do with how she did it and what she said about the case later
Specifically, it focuses on her efforts to attack the girl’s credibility and allegations that she spoke callously about getting the man a reduced charge, despite appearing to suggest he had been guilty.
The attack plays into twin allegations about Clinton’s character:
1) That she lacks a moral compass and will do whatever is advantageous to her, and
2) That she’s a hypocrite who says one thing today about sexual assault but did the opposite decades ago.
=======
Here are few more snippets from the Washington Post’s recap of the story …
Of course, we’re not talking about Clinton-Trump or Pence-Kaine …
=======
Every time that I watch one of these current day mud-slings, I think retro to the good old days when 2 contending candidates could share a stage, explain their contrasting positions so clearly that voters had a basis for choosing, and leave the stage as friends – just like they were when they walked in.
The year was 2000 and it was the Vice Presidential debate: Joe Lieberman and Dick Cheney.
========
The nation was ideologically divided … maybe not a divisively as today … but, there were stark contrasts in positions.
Still the men were willing and able to conduct themselves as statesmen …
Anybody remember Biden vs. Ryan?
========
As I was watching Tim Kaine make a butt of himself Tuesday night, a little voice was asking “Haven’t I seen this before?”
Answer: you bet … 4 years ago when sitting VP Biden went at it with Paul Ryan.
=========
Apparently, Biden is Kaine’s role model ….
After the debate, it seems appropriate to reprise an old post.
First, he original post from July … then, some debate snippets.
=====
Both seem rational & hard-working with some degree of moderation … history of working across the aisle.
Sure, they’re boring … and my favorite (Pence) would probably lose … but I’d sure feel better about the election.
=========
Let’s update that a bit …
This stuck me as interesting …
Trump had a bad week … bombing the debate and chasing Miss Piggy around.
And, apparently, Hillary got a post-debate bump.
Note: The “apparently” … LA Times survey still has Trump up … and there has been a curious lack of so-called “scientific polls released since the debate. Hmmm.
Let’s cut numbers a slightly different way ….
Over the past week or so, Clinto has gained about 2 points in the 4-way polls.
During that same period, Johnson & Stein have fallen from a combined 12% to under 10%.
That’s roughly 2 points, right?
Hmmm.
Also during that time, Johnson plead the 5th on Aleppo and had trouble naming a world leader – any world leader.
Could Hillary’s gain be more Aleppo than the debates?
Counterintuitive, but maybe the debates didn’t really change the landscape very much.
==========
#HomaFiles
Follow on Twitter @KenHoma >> Latest Posts
========
P.S. Hillary had one, too (but the NYT missed that one).
=======
This would be laughable except it will probably gain more traction with the MSM than Miss Piggy.
Here’s the “smoking gun”:
The New York Times obtained records from 1995 showing that Donald J. Trump declared a $916 million loss.
The figure is so substantial that it could have allowed him to legally avoid paying federal income tax for 18 years.
=======
Let’s unpack this journalistic gem …
Pundits are trashing online polls and praising “scientific” ones.
========
Let’s take some risk today …
As I write this, the expected flurry of so-called scientific post-debate polls haven’t hit the airwaves yet.
Early on Tuesday, we posted about the online polls that showed Trump to have won the debate.
I pointed out that I thought Trump got crushed so I was surprised … especially since the polls were from a range of sites from far-right Drudge to far-left CBS-NY.
I doubted that the shaky Trump organization has a system in place to troll all those sites and stuff all those ballot boxes.
Well, the mass media went nuts … disparaging those polls and putting their golden eggs in the basket of the scientific polls.
Case in point the newspaper of record: the NY Times.
========
The media and professional pollster (who get paid a lot to be about as accurate as weather forecasters) may be right, but here are a couple of angles for you to consider …
My objection is technical, not political,
=========
The phrase “don’t grade him on a curve” has now eclipsed “It’s not who we are” as my absolute least favorite.
Folks who are saying it (think, Clinton supporters) are inadvertently flaunting their ignorance (which makes for great irony).
Speaking as a card-carrying academic, my objection is strictly technical.
===========
Let’s get basic. What does it mean to grade on a curve?
Now, will Trump draw inspiration from Rocky?
=======
The debate reminded me of the classic clip from the first Rocky movie.
In the flick, Apollo Creed –- fighting within the Marquess of Queensberry Rules — was pummeling Rocky … round after round after round.
With little time left in the fight, Rocky uttered those memorable words:
“I ain’t going down no more”
Then, he came out of his corner like a bull and changed the trajectory of the fight.
click to view the memorable clip <= worth watching
========
My view:
Clinton pummeled Trump, but she didn’t knock him out.
Trump landed a few strong punches.
Trump lives to fight another a day.
He’s a fighter.
Let’s see if Trump pulls a Rocky.
=======
P.S. I recollect that Rocky won the re-match and took Creed’s title … hmmm.
click to view the memorable clip
======
#HomaFiles
Follow on Twitter @KenHoma >> Latest Posts
======
More overnite numbers ….
=======
Great recap in the Daily Mail … worth browsing – lots of polls.
========
Left-leaning pundits — especially Hillary’s surrogates — are apoplectic on TV today.
“Is the American electorate that stupid?”
Which is worse, stupid or irredeemably deplorable?
========
Great tweet from Michael Moore to his left-leaning pals:
This is way more fun than I expected I to be
========
Here’s the original post from this morning … just in case you missed it.
========
First, my overall take:
Hillary was very well prepped, got all of her talking points in and stayed on offense.
Trump wasted too much time defending himself, didn’t hammer the email scandal and didn’t even raise pay-to-play, Benghazi or “deplorables”.
Holt nibbled at Trump all night, but gave Trump the most important gift: making the first 15 minutes about the economy.
Takeaway from that segment – which pundits pre-argued would be determining – was that Trump will be aggressive on saving jobs and Clinton will create tax payer funded green energy jobs.
Advantage: Trump.
Clinton’s biggest score (with a boost from Holt): birther issue “proves” that Trump is a racist.
Trump’s biggest scores: “why haven’t you done any of this in the past 30 years?” and firmly headlined “law & order”.
Both demonstrated why they’re the most disliked candidates ever.
OK, now for the numbers which, frankly, surprised me ….
========
From left to right:
Time scored it a 50-50 draw.
==========
CBS scores it Trump 76%, Clinton 24%
========
CNBC scores it 61 to 39 Trump.
=========
And, far right-leaning Drudge has it Trump 80, Clinton 20
========
Team Clinton must be pulling their hair out this morning.
There isn’t much else that Hillary could have done – she was locked & loaded.
Maybe there’s something in her message … or her character … or that smirky “I’m smarter than you” smile that she kept flashing.
Bottom line: Pundits will dismiss the internet polls and score it heavily for Hillary … but Donald gets to crow about the overnite results and lives to fight another day.
My question: what ammo does Hillary have left for the next debate?
==========
P.S. Yesterday’s post is worth re-reading:
Trump: Inspired by the 1972 Cuban Olympic boxing team?
======
#HomaFiles
Follow on Twitter @KenHoma >> Latest Posts
======
Here are the overnite numbers ….
========
First, my overall take:
Hillary was very well prepped, got all of her talking points in and stayed on offense.
Trump wasted too much time defending himself, didn’t hammer the email scandal and didn’t even raise pay-to-play, Benghazi or “deplorables”.
Holt nibbled at Trump all night, but gave Trump the most important gift: making the first 15 minutes about the economy.
Takeaway from that segment – which pundits pre-argued would be determining – was that Trump will be aggressive on saving jobs and Clinton will create tax payer funded green energy jobs.
Advantage: Trump.
Clinton’s biggest score (with a boost from Holt): birther issue “proves” that Trump is a racist.
Trump’s biggest scores: “why haven’t you done any of this in the past 30 years?” and firmly headlined “law & order”.
Both demonstrated why they’re the most disliked candidates ever.
OK, now for the numbers which, frankly, surprised me ….
========
From left to right:
Time scored it a 50-50 draw.
==========
CBS scores it Trump 76%, Clinton 24%
========
CNBC scores it 61 to 39 Trump.
=========
And, far right-leaning Drudge has it Trump 80, Clinton 20
========
Team Clinton must be pulling their hair out this morning.
There isn’t much else that Hillary could have done – she was locked & loaded.
Maybe there’s something in her message … or her character … or that smirky “I’m smarter than you” smile that she kept flashing.
Bottom line: Pundits will dismiss the internet polls and score it heavily for Hillary … but Donald gets to crow about the overnite results and lives to fight another day.
My question: what ammo does Hillary have left for the next debate?
==========
P.S. Yesterday’s post is worth re-reading:
Trump: Inspired by the 1972 Cuban Olympic boxing team?
======
#HomaFiles
Follow on Twitter @KenHoma >> Latest Posts
======
Last weekend, I caught an interview with Jill Stein – the Green Party’s candidate for President.
While she stands zero chance of winning and I disagree with most of her positions, the interview was interesting.
She was articulate and cut to the chase on the issues in a simple understandable way.
Example: “We should go with renewable energy because pollution from fossil fuels is responsible for more than 200,000 deaths each year.”
That resonated with me.
No reliance on weather predictions from dudes who predicted that Hermine would devastate the East Coast this past weekend.
Just a simple: Stop pollution, it causes deaths every year.
I can buy in to that argument faster than worrying about forecasts of the seas rising in a couple of hundred years.
=========
According to several polls – the MorningConsult being among the latest – a majority of likely voters would like to see Libertarian Gary Johnson and Greenie Jill Stein on the presidential debate stage even though they are below the 15% popularity threshold.
Based on the Stein interview, I’d like to see more of Johnson and Stein. I wouldn’t waste my vote on either of them, but I’d like to here more.
========
The prime argument against their participation is that it would shorten the time allotted to Clinton and Trump …
In a prior post — In Google we trust? – we recapped some experiments that seemed to suggest that Google was rigging its search engine to favor Hillary Clinton.
Now, there’s more evidence …
Robert Epstein – “a distinguished research psychologist” – and his associates at the American Institute for Behavioral Research and Technology (AIBRT) — a nonprofit, nonpartisan organization based in the San Diego area — have been investigating claims that Google systematically alters search results to favor Hillary Clinton.
========
Here’s what they did and what they found …
Hillary’s FBI interview teed-up her health as a reason for concern.
=======
The disclaimers: I’m not a doctor and don’t play one on TV (<= line is from a 1960s TV commercial) … and I don’t wish ill health on anybody, ever, for any reasons.
That said, let’s connect a couple of dots re: Hillary’s health …
======
Back in 2012, she fainted and suffered a concussion
That happens, no big deal, right?
Probably just a coincidence, but note the timing:
It happened after the Benghazi terrorist attack and before her Benghazi testimony to Congress … a period of high personal stress, I imagine.
The implication – according to CNN:
U.S. Secretary of State Hillary Clinton sustained a concussion after becoming dehydrated and fainting, and will no longer testify Thursday before the House Foreign Affairs Committee on the deadly attack on the U.S. consulate in Benghazi, Libya.
Hmmm.
========
Retrospectively, husband Bill filled in a couple of pieces …
One of the sillier aspects of the campaign is Clinton trying to neutralize her yes vote for the Iraq War by using the schoolyard tactic: “Well, he did it first.”
Her evidence: “Trump told Howard Stern …”
Say, what?
And, the MSM is running with the gotcha as a headline story:
=======
Just for the entertainment value, let’s unpack this story …
NBC: “Trump comfortably earns the support of military-affiliated voters overall 55% to 36%”.
=======
What a week.
CNN reports a poll with Trump leading Clinton.
Then yesterday, NBC released a poll of military personnel & veterans.
My hunch: NBC was expecting Clinton to win that poll … and probably planned to headline the results in last night’s commander-in-chief forum.
Oops.
======
Here’s the rub:
While Hillary holds a slim lead across the broad base of registered voters, Trump wins big — by 19 points — among current military & veterans.
==========
Drilling down, a majority of military folks are confident of Trump’s “ability to be commander–in-chief”.
Not so for Hillary.
Only about 30% of military folks are confident of Clinton’s ability to be commander–in-chief.
=======
P.S. I watched the entire NBC commander-in-chief forum last night.
Here’s my take …
Answer: This morning, CNN released poll results – Trump 45, Clinton 43%
I’ve had CNN on background this morning … kudos to CNN for releasing the numbers … but, it has been hysterical listening to the CNN anchors and poli-shills try to minimize the turnaround reported in their own poll.
=======
Let’s run through the numbers ….
Among likely voters, Trump leads 45 to 43 … Trump upped his numbers by 4 points, Hilary dropped by 1 point.
Technical note: CNN shifted its polling from registered to likely voters … the latter is commonly regarded as most relevant
========
Digging a bit deeper ….
By now, you should have heard that – during her FBI interview – Hillary had trouble recalling many details.
Details such as whether she gave or got state department guidance on email policy.
More of the “I can’t recall” items are listed at the end of this post
For the record, she signed a statement stating that she understood the rules & consequences … and emailed her minions about the importance of following the policy to the letter.
Easily forgotten, right?
And, she told the FBI that she could not recall any briefing after her December 2012 fall that left her with a concussion.
Say, what?
That’s presidential timber for you …
=========
Frankly, I expected Hillary to plead the ‘George Castanza Defense’ … just asking “was that wrong?”
Nope she went the Steve Martin route.
In a famous skit, Martin tips people how to get a million dollars tax-free.
His advice:
First, get a million dollars and don’t pay taxes.
Then, when the IRS calls, tell them “I forgot … I forgot to pay taxes.”
Martin offers the same advice for bank robbery and other transgressions.
Click to view the 3-minute clip … it’s really funny.
=========
Also, for the record, here’s a list of other things that Clinton could not recall in the FBI interview:
Another interesting Noonan piece in today’s WSJ …
Peggy Noonan observes that there may be a deep psychological dynamic underlying the 2016 presidential race … it centers on depression and anxiety:
Mrs. Clinton is depression:
You know exactly who she is, what trouble she brings — she always brings that sack full of scandal — and you know deep down that she won’t make anything better.
=======
Mr. Trump is anxiety:
If you back him you know you’re throwing the long ball, a real Hail Mary pass to the casino developer and reality TV star who may or may not know how to catch the ball when catching the ball means everything.
But he’s entertaining—he scrambles all categories, makes things chaotic.
He has fun with his audience.
Noonan’s conclusion: “in America anxiety beats depression because it’s the more awake state”. I guess that favors Hillary.
But, as Trump would say “What the hell do you have to lose?”
Hmmm.
========
Happy Labor Day !
========
#HomaFiles
Follow on Twitter @KenHoma >> Latest Posts
My nomination: Dennis Miller.
=======
NY Times ran a piece contrasting Donald’s and Hillary’s debate prep:
Hillary Clinton Piles Up Research in Bid to Needle Donald Trump at First Debate
=======
Predictably, the Times slams Trump for a refusal to wade through policy books or practice mock debates.
Hillary, though, is disciplined, studious and advice-seeking.
She’s consulting with psychologists “preparing ways for her to unnerve Mr. Trump and provoke him to rant and rave.”
They conclude that Trump’s hot buttons are: his intellect, his net worth and his image as a successful businessman.
Easy picking, right?
========
So, how can Trump possibly win a debate against her?
Spotted an interesting analysis of a recent Monmouth poll …
Cutting to the chase, the likely voter poll is split roughly in thirds with respect to candidate favorability:
Only about 1/3 view Hillary favorably, less than that view Trump favorably and slightly more than a third view neither candidate favorably.
Note that the “neither” is multiples higher than in past elections.
Previously, there was partisan divide, but partisans at least liked their candidates.
=======
These numbers are consistent with the most recent WSJ poll:
Dissatisfaction with the two main candidates is at historic levels: 37% of Democrats said they would have preferred that somebody other than Mrs. Clinton become the Democratic nominee, and a resounding 52% of Republicans said they would have preferred somebody other than Mr. Trump.
My take: I think the “neither” numbers are grossly understated.
I don’t think that I’ve run into a single person – on either end of the political spectrum – who is enthralled by their side’s candidate. Not a one.
Most people seem more motivated to vote against a candidate … than vote for one.
Wonder if that will be enough motivation to get people to the polls?
Political pundit Charlie Cook opines that “fear and hatred are the strongest emotions in politics” and motivate voter turnout.
Apathy tends to suppress turnout.
He doesn’t say what “disgust” does.
We’ll see
=======
#HomaFiles
Follow on Twitter @KenHoma >> Latest Posts
=======
How many times have you seen clips of the police confiscating a suspect’s computer for forensic analysis?
Pretty common on Forensic FIles, CSI and the 11 o’clock news, right?
And, the punch line is always the same …
The perps try to delete files & browsing histories, but unknowingly leave behind evidence.
Oops.
==========
Well, thanks to Team Hillary, FBI documents and a shout-out by Congressman Trey Gowdy, criminals now have no excuse for not covering their tracks.
Introducing to the American consciousness: BleachBit:
==========
Here’s the story ….
Short answer: Disproportionately from Hillary.
=========
According to the latest NBC / Survey Monkey poll (<= gotta love the ‘Survey Monkey””’ part, right?):
No bounceback for Trump … he still trails Hillary by 8 in a head-to-head match-up …. 50 to 42.
=========
Here’s what I find most interesting …. the 4-way race.
Weekend MSM headlines focused on Trump’s campaign staff shake-up, not on his favorably reviewed speeches or his trip to Louisiana.
So, I wasn’t expecting any movement in the polls.
Surprise, surprise, surprise.
On Sunday, the USC-LA Times poll reported Trump in the lead.
No less than Dem-favorite pollster Nate Silver sped over to CNN to disparage the poll’s methodology.
Of course, that raised my curiosity.
Bottom line: yep, Donald over Hillary by 2 points.
========
Here’s what I find more interesting than the single day’s numbers ….
Watching the Olympics last night, I was sneak-exposed to a Hillary jobs ad.
The 3 point plan: (1) make everybody pay a fair share – where, of course, ‘everybody’ is shorthand for ‘somebody who is not you, so cheer’ (2) ‘invest’ in infrastructure – where ‘invest’ means overspend on poorly managed government projects using Cadillac-planned union workers and (3) institute an “exit tax” to keep companies from leaving the U.S.
It was the exit tax that caught my eye … partially due to the ads placement in the Olympics and because Trump gave his economic speech a few hours earlier.
Here’s why …
Dare to take the “ I Side With …” Presidential Quiz.
========
This is a very interesting online quiz from a group called “I Side With …”.
In a nutshell, you just sign on to the site and answer a battery of multiple choice questions in a variety of categories, e.g. foreign policy, social issues, science. It takes 10 or 15 minutes to make it through the questions.
I thought the array of questions was appropriately comprehensive … and the answer choices were fair (i.e. nothing tricky or embarrassing ).
Some of the questions made me pause to check my gut on where I stood on some issues.
That alone made the quiz worthwhile.
After answering all the questions, answers are matched against the candidates’ positions.
========
And, which candidate did I match most closely?
Over the weekend, former President Bill (Bubba) Clinton lashed out at FBI Director James Comey.
You may remember that Comey laid out the evidence against Hillary … and then let her walk.
Righties were displeased because of Comey’s illogic: The conclusion didn’t follow from the premises.
Lefties simply dispute premises … since they reveal Hillary to be a boldface liar.
Hubby summed it up: “Comey is full of bull …)
Hmmm.
Former President calling out the current FBI Director … who gave his wife a stay-out-of-jail free card.
My question: will Comey take that lying down?
He doesn’t have to … Congress just provided Comey with an opportunity to rehabilitate his cred as a straight arrow.
The WSJ jumped on the pile yesterday — outlining Trump’s flaws as a candidate — and opining:
“Mr. Trump, needs to stop blaming everyone else and decide if he wants to behave like someone who wants to be President—or turn the nomination over to Mike Pence.”
Hmmm.
Where have I heard that before.
Oh yeah, in the HomaFiles a couple of weeks ago when we posted:
Wish Pence & Kaine were at top-of-tickets …
Here’s the flashback:
Both seem rational & hard-working with some degree of moderation … history of working across the aisle.
Sure, they’re boring … and my favorite (Pence) would probably lose … but I’d sure feel better about the election.
Agree?
Just imagine: Trump back in the Towers, Hillary finally in jail …. and Pence & Kaine duking it out on the issues.
Two good choices instead of two bad ones.
=========
#HomaFiles
Follow on Twitter @KenHoma >> Latest Posts
========
Frequent readers know that I’m big fan of the WSJ’s Peggy Noonan.
I love the way the lady writes and she always cutting to the chase with keen insights.
Her most recent column is no exception:
========
Here are a couple of snippets from Noonan …
Checking today’s polls …
======
This week, Trump gave a pretty good speech on his economic plan (<= my opinion) … and a mellow, favorably-reviewed speech to a homebuilders trade association.
But, he got blasted in the mainstream media for rallying 2nd amendment supporters (“obviously inciting violence against Hillary”) … and for referring to Obama & Clinton as founders of ISIS (since BHO pulled ALL troops from Iraq – leaving a hole that ISIS filled).
Here’s the ironic twist:
Trump started the week down 7.7 points on the RCP poll-of-polls.
Today, he’s down 6.3 … still a big number, but 1.4 better than the week started.
========
Of course, there were other forces at work: the typical dissipation of Hillary’s post-convention bounce … and, oh yeah, the email – Clinton Foundation thing … she got caught with her hand in the cooking jar again.
Still, I wonder: was it the mainstream media that took the bait this time?
Blasting Trump, they spotlighted terror and gun rights … two of Trump’s strong suits.
Hmmm.
========
#HomaFiles
Follow on Twitter @KenHoma >> Latest Posts
========
Yesterday, we channeled a WSJ opinion piece by Peggy Noonan.
Her takeaway point:
I end with a word that speaks of the moment we’re in.
It is “kakistocracy.”
From the Greek, it means government by the worst persons, by the least qualified or most unprincipled.
We’re on our way there, aren’t we?
Yes, Peggy, we are.
Let’s do a quick recap of yesterday’s news.
========
The guy didn’t just “attend” the rally.
He was ushered to a VIP seat right behind the podium.
Team Clinton – which bills itself as a disciplined political machine and is known to script everything — says that they didn’t know who the guy was and that he just slipped behind the podium unnoticed.
Yeah, right.
BTW: Survivors of the massacre were invited guests at the rally.
In classic understatement, the media reported that they were “disappointed”.
=========
That would have been the story of the day if Trump had just stayed in bed.
But, he didn’t … and seriously gaffed again.
Brutal op piece by Peggy Nooman in the WSJ last Friday.
The title tells most of the story: “The Week They Decided Donald Trump Was Crazy”.
The evidence: his taking the Khan bait and dissing Ryan and McCain.
“People started to become convinced he was nuts, a total flake.”
That’s all that most folks will take from the article.
But, there was an important twist that most folks will miss or dismiss.
Headline in Drudge: “Grandma helped up stairs.”
In this 2016 picture, a frail –looking Hillary Clinton – who has a history of injuries from falls (including at least one concussion) – hobbles up a flight of stairs with the assistance of Secret Service agents and aids.
Poignant imagery, right?
The mainstream media will likely bury the picture.
But, I fully expect Trump to ask:
“Is she even physically able to handle the Presidency?”
======
Before you claim “foul”, there’s a Presidential precedent …
I can’t believe my eyes.
I’ve oft opined that the Washington Post is most biased of the Clinton-supportive print media.
Stories of the Post’s 30-person Trump attack team are widespread and not denied by the paper.
So, imagine my surprise when I saw the headline:
The article is a thorough investigative story — not an opinion piece.
Here’s the short version of the story …
OK, let’s start with the obvious: Trump had a very, very bad week … and, if I were Trump, I’d rather have Clinton’s poll results than Trump’s.
But, Trump’s campaign obit may be a bit premature.
At least one poll’s results suggest that Donald may still have a pulse.
The Reuters / IPSO poll shows a typical dissipation of Hillary’s post-convention bounce … and a statistically significant bounceback for the Donald … narrowing Clinton’s advantage to only 2.4 percentage points … within the margin of error.
========
Clintonites surely consider the results to be simply an outlier.
For Trumpsters, it’s a ray of hope.
Which is it?
Here are some factors to consider …
Last week, the WSJ ran an opinion piece: Trump’s Big Data Gamble.
The punch line: “While Donald tweets to the masses, Hillary will be precisely targeting persuadable voters.”
Advantage Hillary, right?
Maybe. Maybe not.
In an AP interview, Trump said that he “always thought that it (meaning data analytics) was overrated” and, accordingly, he’ll spend limited money on data operations to identify and track potential voters and to model various turnout scenarios that could give him the 270 Electoral College votes needed to win the presidency.
He’s moving away from the model Obama used successfully in his 2008 and 2012 wins, and the one that likely Democratic nominee Hillary Clinton is trying to replicate, including hiring many of the staff that worked for Obama in his “Victory Lab”.
=====
A data-light strategy may sound very old-school in the era of big data … especially coming from Trump …. but it reminded me of an opinion piece that Peggy Noonan wrote in the WSJ soon after Obama’s 2012 election win.
Noonan had a riff about predictive analytics that caught my eye.
It pointed out one of the downsides of predictive analytics … the craft of crunching big data bases to ID people, their behaviors and their hot buttons.
Here’s what Noonan had to say …
According to pollster Frank Luntz …
“It’s not the low-information “undecideds” who will determine the election, it’s the “none-of-the-above voter” … who knows lot about both candidates and doesn’t like either one.”
These folks have deeply held opinions about what they want and expect from the next President.
“They can’t stomach the choice between “crude” and “corrupt” … a decision with no good outcome.”
Luntz concludes that these none-of-the-above voters have eight core hot buttons …
The Homa Files 