The Pollsters Start Hedging, Midterms Forecasts | The Political Theater

is the data does not support it. We said this from the first show back, till now, the data does not support what these people are polling. It doesn't. It doesn't. And now that I've got three weeks of early vote data, I'm sorry, these people are smoking crack. Okay, it's just there is no way some of these polls are right. Now, I haven't run my model. If those who saw the post that I put out earlier, I have a forecast model for Ohio out now. Okay, so this is taking all historical data from Ohio across 199 county wide races. Okay, so this is 199 things, 199 races over seven different cycles. And you put them all into a canvassing data and you run it through this and this is what you get on the basic data. Okay, this is not polling. This is not, you know, this is not sentiment or any of the public bullshit polls that you see, this is just historical data and trends and how counties usually vote. Now, I tried and I'm not joking last night. I was actually, I was trying to have the show last night to talk about this, but I wasn't, again, I wasn't gonna publish it until I was sure. I ran this thing and it takes a significant amount of time to crunch all this stuff, but I ran it 15 or 16 different ways. No matter how I run this thing, I cannot show a result that is favorable for Democrats in Ohio. I can't do it. Okay, I've tried. Now, the only way it's possible is if the current early vote goes the opposite direction that it's currently trending again. It's currently trending towards a more than about even on the early vote. That's what it's trending towards. It's been slowly ticking in the, towards the Republican direction since day one. But if this trend continues and we get to a close to flat, you know, maybe D plus one or D plus two on election day from the early vote, it's over. Okay, there's no way. Okay, the most conservative number I could come up with, and this is assuming the early vote even trends slightly back towards Democrats in Ohio shows that we've got six, maybe plus six D on early vote going into election day. And guys, that's not enough. Okay, that's the problem. The Democrats have been writing headline after headline about, oh my God, don't you see? Look at our numbers. Like look at the early votes amazing. It's incredible. It's the best number that's ever been numbered. The problem with that is that the problem is the election day turnout for Republicans in Ohio is always a winner. Okay, every single cycle going back till, you shit. I think it actually goes back for the, I went back to 2016 just to go stay within the Trump era. And even in 2018 when that was Trump was president, it was still a plus eight. So you know, if we have a plus eight electoral turnout on election day, it's a, it's like a plus three for Republicans to win in Ohio. Now I even ran plus six on election day, which is a terrible turnout and it's still a win. So, you know, I have been watching the hedge happen live. Okay, I mean, this is just great to see. There I could not believe that the New York Times published a chart that shows, well, if we're wrong by the way, this is where the polls would actually be. And where are they? Almost exactly in line with what I've got. I mean, it's, it is amazing. The, the, the Democrats have been screaming and yelling that they're going to have this unbelievable wave that's happening everywhere. If you look at the betting markets, the betting markets, oh my lord, the betting markets show that they're, you know, it's a 90% chance here and an 80% chance there. Listen, we have been talking about it on this show specifically. We've been talking about how the problems the betting markets. Guys, I am a data person when it comes to this stuff. I would give the most honest answer that I can because the data to me is more important to actually publish real close data. Because that tells the people that are actually running these campaigns where to target for the last bit of the campaigns, okay? You don't want to publish shit data. It doesn't help you any. It doesn't need like the relevance of morale online is significantly less important than actually producing reusable data that people can look at. Okay, anybody that, and there's several people that I've told this to to do the data stuff, it's not about morale. Publish exactly what's there because it's not helpful to try and give people false hope. Okay, that's not useful that you don't need to do that. The morale of your followers online is much less relevant than what actually shows up in data itself. So I tried to run these numbers as conservatively as possible and I presented four different scenarios. Every single one of them has a significant turn out. Okay, it's every single one of them are. Unless the Democrats, the only option for Democrats at least in Ohio to win would be the early vote starts to tick back up to maybe plus 10D, which nothing supports that happening, by the way. It's going the opposite direction, but just say it did. If they managed to do that, tick back up to that and then the Republicans simply don't turn out at all on election day, then maybe they can win in Ohio by like one or two points. Maybe it's just not feasible. It's just not, you know, you can try and argue with other ways and I can try and run the data different ways, but the data shows what the data shows and this is what Chris and I have been talking about for a month now. None of this supports a giant wave. Okay, none of it does. And now you're even seeing the freaking New York Times like, well, we're wrong. By the way, we could be wrong. And there's a new echelon poll that came out today that showed the veck up too. So, you know, I was talking about this yesterday with somebody because of the stuff that came out with wedge wood and so cowl. And now I think there's two other pollsters that have been found to be fake too. You know, at some point, we're going to have to figure out how we're going to deal with the fake poll, the fake polling, okay? You know, there's got to be something that's done about this because one, we know for a fact that wedge wood's polling in the primaries actually directly affected the primary race up in Michigan. What do you think's going to happen? Okay, just think about this. Walk this through with me here. Imagine if Said loses in Michigan, okay? He might not have won that primary if it wasn't for wedge wood's polling knocking out some of his competition. Okay, if wedge wood shows that they did that and when Said gets in there and Michigan falls, right? Michigan loses and Rogers wins. The Democrats are going to go ballistic on that. Okay, they're going to go ballistic. One, and just the fact that they managed to knock somebody out of the primaries bad enough, but two, if that happens, the Democrats are going to be the ones that are going to be the most mad about it. They have been screaming and throwing everything in the ring saying that this is going to be the biggest wave of all waves and the data is from what we have seen has never supported that. It's never supported that. And I'm watching these hedge polls now come out. Oh my God, look, it's close. Oh, you know shit. You think it's close? Well, what are why that is? You know, you think that really that Amy acting is somehow a better candidate than the VEK is? No one likes Amy acting. Okay, even if you don't like the VEK, that does not mean that Amy acting is somehow a strong candidate. Okay, I just don't see it. I never did. And now we're seeing all this come out in the opposite direction. I'm like, you know, it's very tiresome at this point really. Yeah, you know, and Walter, you know, here's the thing. Is there are probably a lot of people in Ohio that support Amy acting. They're just ultra-left Democrats. And so what you really have to look at is the what it comes down to in the operations, right? So by a lot of different models, a lot of different folks I've been reading and watching. So there's some data folks out of Kansas, obviously Iowa, you know, obviously Walter, you, Seth Ketchall, everyone is pointing to one really important fact here. Early voting numbers show that the Democrat party in these states that they need to win to flip the Senate specifically have all but maxed out there four or four and three or four voters in midterms. And actually just in general, general election voters in what you would expect in a midterm primary, right? So what that means is on election day, they have to rely on the laziest, non-frequent of the voters. Not to say that these people are just lazy people. It is to say that you're just not frequent voters, right? And when you've built your entire operation on early voting and your numbers while they look, air quotes strong are not really when you look at it where they need to be going into election day, then you have a problem. And this is essentially like, you know, the break line is, you know, the break fluid is run low, the lights on the dash. Okay. And that's what I'm saying is every, all of these models, all these people that are showing these models, they want to believe, they want you to believe that this is, that, you know, this is where everything's that they're transgoing. Well, they're assuming that the Latino vote has just completely abandoned Trump and has gone back to 2020, 2018 levels, 2016, you know, GOP level or whatever, right? They're assuming the black vote, the black American vote has went all the way back prior to Trump, right? You have, they're making these assumptions because they want to believe in some weird forecast that this is in play. And what they're forgetting is that that's not going to happen. That's just not reality anymore. The Latino base is not going to support Marxist communists. That's just not going to happen. The black American vote is never going back to what it used to be. Okay, as they, especially as they embrace socialist, you know, Muslim radical socialists like L. Syed and these policies that have taken place, I've said this before, the Democratic party has traded a deal with the devil to basically abandon their reliable Jewish base and their reliable black American Democrat party, a primary base for the Muslim alliance. And we're going to see at the end of this, if that was a smart play on their part, I believe it's going to be disastrous for them. In that, in that they're going to win seats, they may likely win the House, but they're going to look back and be like, do we, they actually had a shot at winning the Senate in some realistic terms, but their operations completely fumbled the football. It's like the scene Walter, when Marx and he has with the New York Jets, does a QB sneak and runs into his, his centers, but like he really, like, which it was, it was, it fumbled the ball. It was called the, it's actually called the fumbut. If you search like your, your, your gift or whatever and type in fumbut, it'll probably pull it up. That's exactly what I think's taking place in the summary of the GOTV operations right now for the Democrats. I mean, the problem that I have is that no matter what I do, I have been saying it consistently here that I didn't understand it. Okay, we heard, we heard a couple of, like a few weeks ago. Okay, the argument was, and this has heard, told to us by several Democrat operatives that we're switching to a election day turnout model. Okay. Well, what happened then? Well, election day turnout model would mend that they don't have a giant front load on the early and person vote. Well, what happened every single state? They're like, look at that. The election day, early vote is storming. The Democrats are surging. They're, oh my God, they're winning. This has happened in every state. Okay, this happened in every single state. And then what happened as a result of that? You keep watching the numbers and they're ticking back in the opposite direction. They're ticking back in the opposite direction even. So even in Ohio, okay. So Ohio, they just had the big rally up in, up in Cleveland area with Obama and everybody, right? So Democrats put up their best numbers that they've had in weeks, by the way. They had their best number in weeks. They put up a, it was like a plus, a plus 10 or something on the day. And then the next day, what was it back to our plus four, the following day? Okay, so this is a problem. Okay, you had your giant, your giant push at the very beginning. So their best numbers were the very first day. And then they have consistently gone down every single day sets. So the idea is that what you're going to get your low propensity voters to show up in the final push to the election? None of that makes sense. And the problem again is what we did something we also talked about is the fact that the money advantage is the opposite direction. Okay, there are some seats where the money advantage is not in the Republicans favor. For example, the Iowa Gov. Norship looks like that race is pretty much all but over. Okay, Iowa governor looks like Rob Sand is going to win that. And that's a Democrat who's got a reason to plan. He's got a reasonable platform. But he's also got five times the amount of money that the other candidates did, the Republican candidate does running against it. Okay, five times the amount. So, you know, that's a money disparity that we say. Okay, looks like that's probably not a win. Okay, the same sort of thing if it goes in the opposite direction. Okay, you look at the Republicans in Texas, you look at the Republicans in Ohio, you look at what's going on in Michigan. The money disparity is there, but it's not in the Democrats favor. Okay, it's not the Democrats favor. And no matter what people say, you can claim that money doesn't matter. Money does matter. Okay, money matters a lot, especially for the final bit of the vote. Okay, for the final push, the GOTV effort. Okay, that matters a whole lot because you have to spend the money to get the vote out on the final week. And if you've already hedged in already sent your highest, you know, the high propensity voters to show up on your first day, it is not a good strategy. And it does it look like it's going to pay off unless something dramatically changes in the final week and we're not seeing it. Okay, I'm not seeing it. I'm going to put this forecast out again on Friday this week. I'm going to put it out on Friday and I'm going to put it on Monday one more time. And that's going to be the final forecast that I have. Unless I see the Democrats tick all the way back up and start to see a dramatic change, I don't see how they win in Ohio. Okay, I don't see it. All right, unless you're going to claim, and this is an amazing claim that people have attempt to make me to make to me, that Trump is so unpopular that people are going to storm out and vote against, not just against him, but against any candidate that he supports. Now, listen, I can believe lots of things. Okay, you can convince me of many things. What you cannot convince me of is that in two years, the electorate changes by over 20 points. Okay, because that's if you wanted to believe like a Marist poll that shows act enough by. Okay, that's essentially what you're trying to convince me of that that the advantage is moving almost 20 points in the opposite direction. All right. Now that doesn't make any sense. One, if you were going to are trying to argue that you would need a super strong candidate. Okay, super strong. Nobody, and I don't think anybody that I've even talked to would try and argue to argue to you that either candidate in the Ohio governor's race is a super, super strong candidate. I like the veck personally. I think the veck is going to be a great.