No strong women, huh?

Trump is never seen with smart strong women, right?

Your gurus were wrong

I'm not going to dance on the graves of my enemies here, but Alan Lichtman was wrong about a Kamala Harris win.  The thing is, his model wasn't wrong, just him.  The old saying garbage in - garbage out explains why he was wrong, even though he clearly doesn't get that yet.

He claimed 9 of his 13 predictors favored Harris. For the record, here the are, in a nutshell:

Key 1 (Party Mandate): After the midterm elections, the incumbent party holds more seats in the U.S. House of Representatives than it did after the previous midterm elections.

Key 2 (Contest): There is no serious contest for the incumbent-party nomination.

Key 3 (Incumbency): The incumbent-party candidate is the sitting president.

Key 4 (Third party): There is no significant third-party or independent campaign.

Key 5 (Short-term economy): The economy is not in recession during the election campaign.

Key 6 (Long-term economy): Real per-capita economic growth during the term equals or exceeds mean growth during the previous two terms.

Key 7 (Policy change): The incumbent administration affects major changes in national policy.

Key 8 (Social unrest): There is no sustained social unrest during the term.

Key 9 (Scandal): The incumbent administration is untainted by major scandal.

Key 10 (Foreign/military failure): The incumbent administration suffers no major failure in foreign or military affairs.

Key 11 (Foreign/military success): The incumbent administration achieves a major success in foreign or military affairs.

Key 12 (Incumbent charisma): The incumbent-party candidate is charismatic or a national hero.

Key 13 (Challenger charisma): The challenging-party candidate is not charismatic or a national hero.

Here's the real score, via Tim Pool. And to be fair, Tim Pool is even being generous to Lichtman in his interpretation of the factors, and it still lands on Trump:

Just to top on that, Ann Selzer predicted, rather insanely, that Harris would win Iowa. How anyone believed her makes me incredulous.

The Iowa poll, conducted by Selzer & Company for The Des Moines Register/ Mediacom, found Harris had a three-point lead over Trump in the state, 47 percent to the Republican's 44 percent.

The poll surveyed 808 likely voters in Iowa between October 28 and 31 with its shock result falling within the poll's 3.4 percent margin of error.

Announcing her findings on Saturday, Selzer, previously described as "the best pollster in politics" by aggregator FiveThirtyEight, said Harris had "clearly leaped into a leading position."

However, the Iowa poll turned out to be wrong by 16 points following the results of Tuesday's election. The former president has won Iowa by 55.9 percent to Harris's 42.7 percent, a difference of 13.2 percent so far.

Sorry media, your gurus were wrong. Go get some new ones.

Epic.

I imagine many people, myself included, feel exactly like this today:

I'm far less surprised by Trump's win and his electoral college win, his expected popular vote win and the senate and (likely) house victories than I am surprised by the speed of it.  I expected things to drag on for days, and with each passing day the chances of a Harris 'magical' come from behind win to materialize. That did not happen, and to me that was the biggest surprise.  It was not only too big to steal, it was too quick to steal.

The fact that Fox News called Pennsylvania when it did is historically not surprising, but for recent history a bit of a shock.  Perhaps Fox was trying to atone for calling Arizona way too early in 2020, or perhaps it was just too obvious to not call. Indeed the AP called the state shortly afterward. With that state gone and Trump leading in all the battleground states the weight of the victory was just too much to overcome by a vote dumping.

Dow futures are way up this morning.  I'm not surprised by that either. The Democrats' economic policies have been asinine for decades but have truly blossomed in their putrescence during the Let's Go Brandon years.

Here's another big surprise, as of 9:25 this morning, 

...Trump edged Harris by a few million votes -- 71,436,910 to 66,364,497 -- with 88% of precincts reporting, according to NBC News.

Trump is roughly on track to win just under the same number of votes as he did in 2020.  According to Cook Political Report, Let's Go Brandon got 81.28 million votes to Trump's 74.22 million votes in 2020. And according to CNN, Hillary Clinton also beat Trump 65.8 million to his 62.98 million votes.

Trump may end up with fewer votes than in 2020 but a landslide victory compared to a loss that year. The surprising part is that Let's Go Brandon somehow got 81.28 million votes in 2020. More than any other president in history. Roughly 12 million more than Obama's best year (2008). No one believes Let's Go Brandon's popularity on the left rivalled Obama at his peak, or even Obama in 2012.  You'll never convince me that TDS was so bad in 2020 that Let's Go Brandon overperformed to that extent. It supposedly was high turnout, during COVID. Something clearly happened in 2020 that still needs to be reviewed and fixed. 

Getting back to 2024, this win was epic.  More importantly it was justice; they tried to imprison him, they tried to keep him off the ballot, they incited violence against him. This may indeed have even been more than justice. It may have been Divine Providence.

VOTE!

As I mentioned earlier, this is incredibly important.

Is her whole existence astroturfed?

I mean, c'mon man. It really does feel like it's not just the campaign that's astroturfed, it's the actual candidate.

Be anti-woke

 A good argument to be anti-woke.