Shocked They Are Shocked

The media is still reeling from the Trump election. I had no idea they would be so blindsided.

I had stopped watching them and reading the first section of the Commercial Appeal. I could see that they were making their final offense and I didn’t see that it was worth watching or reading. Facts yes, wild opinions, no, and there weren’t many facts. The media virtually ignored the whole Wikileaks revelations, for example!

I thought from the beginning that Trump had a very good chance of winning. I did not think any of the other primary challengers did. And they demonstrated that throughout the long months we slogged through the primaries. Most of us Trump advocates liked him because we saw him as the only one who would fight the Hildebeast. The others were clearly afraid of her.

When the eventual “October surprises” came along – and they would for anyone opposing her, even Jesus Christ – I figured they would fold up like Mitt Romney did about his 47% comment or McCain when the arrows went for Sarah Palin.
I knew Trump would fight back hard, which he did.

But back to the shock and the facts.

If you look at American presidential elections, you can see that the pendulum swings quite predictably. The more conservative Eisenhower was followed by eight years of liberal JFK and LBJ. Right sider Richard Nixon occupied the next eight years, followed by the very left Jimmy Carter. Fortunately for us he squeezed eight years of badness into four which made it easy for Ronald Reagan to ride the swing back. Because Reagan was so good, George HW Bush got a chance. He blew it, leading to the Clinton years. He failed, leading to the Bush years. The pendulum then went back to the left via Obama.

Who couldn’t see that the Obama era was due for a swing back to a more conservative candidate?

Evidently, the media couldn’t.

Then there was the very interesting study done by a professor at the University of New York Stony Brook. He checked all the turnout for primaries back to 1912. He saw a pattern there of high primary turnout indicating electoral success. It worked for every election except 1960. That one was an aberration because most of us now believe JFK stole it.

This professor concluded that Trump had an 87% chance of winning. He was pooh poohed, but yesterday he was vindicated.

As for the polls saying Clinton would win and encouraging the media to go with this meme: The Washington Post poll couldn’t be believed to begin with after owner Jeff Bezos said he’d do everything he could to prevent Trump from winning. That one was easily eliminated from any sense of truth.

The others: NYT, NBC, Wall St. Journal, ABC, Rasmussen did not have a good track record. Remember in 2012 and 2000 and 2004 that they were off. They also had people behind them who had a vested interest in a Trump loss. Again, not serious.

I only considered the LA Times and Investor’s Business Daily polls worth while. They had a different, more extensive polling method and more importantly, they had been right before. In both, Trump had a lead most of the summer. Before election day he still had the lead. That told a lot.

Most liberals took hope in Nate Silver and his 538 polling website. Why? He was right in 2008 and 2012, but he completely blew the 2016 primary votes. At the beginning he gave Trump no chance of winning. He maintained that throughout the winter and spring months. Then Trump won the nomination. For most of us that would be a neon sign saying maybe I’m not right, but not to a lefty like Silver. He kept on promising that Hillary would win. Days before the election he had Trump’s chances at 35%, which he felt was generous.

With all these logical conclusions it didn’t seem to me to be a stretch to say Trump would win. And who could deny the enthusiasm, which counts a lot in voting? Trump’s rallies were stupendously big. People had to wait hours in all kinds of weather to see him. The lines were a mile long sometimes. The parking had people walking sometimes two miles to get back to their cars. And still they came. Go through an experience like that and you will show up at the polls.

It’s a case of who do you believe, me or your lyin’ eyes?

So sure was the media that Newsweek even put out a special issue with Hillary on the cover and the words “Madame President.” In the world of karma, that was a grievous error. Ask Tom Dewey.

So why Democrats were shocked stuns me.

It’s always tempting to let your feelings and optimism get in the way of judgement. In news reporters and punditry we think they could divorce themselves from that in their own interest and integrity. Seeing that they didn’t eliminated them from any kind of authority.

Donald Trump is a very astute man, something the Left doesn’t get. He obviously weighed the risks and studied his chances before he got in the race. He had 70 years of experience and history to draw on and he did with realism and thought.

It is a great feeling to see him – and us – vindicated. The media is now shown to be worthless. Unless they clean up their act, they are doomed. Many people, like me and my husband, chose to forego election news broadcasts. Instead we looked at vote totals as they came in, along with reports from Twitter and websites. When we finally turned on Fox and Fox Business, we were surprised at how slow they were to announce results. Perhaps they wanted to draw the drama out so viewers would continue to watch them. Still, that was a big mistake.

We won’t be listening or trusting them again and news will morph into a better, fairer kind of journalism. President Trump will have had a big hand in that major achievement.

... Leave a Reply

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.