Sometimes life truly imitates art.  You might recall the 1994 movie Dumb and Dumber, where the woman Jim Carrey’s character wants to be with tells him there’s a one in a million chance of that happening.  Lloyd (played by Carrey) then utters the famous phrase…”So you’re telling me there’s a chance.”  Classic.  And while the mainstream media would have you believe that Trump’s chances of winning are about in that one in a million range, the betting sites don’t reflect THAT dire of a situation…about a 15% chance of winning…a seemingly monumental uphill challenge, nonetheless.  Despite what these cockamamie polls say, the only poll that counts is the one on November 8th.  In fact, there is a list of things longer than Pinocchio’s (and fellow liar, Hillary’s) nose that could point to an unlikely Trump victory.  And it wouldn’t hurt either to swizzle it all with just a tad bit of wishful thinking.  No better time than to just lay this all out on the table right here and now as to why the polls just may be wrong…WAY wrong…

Not to get too wonky on all of the nuances of polling, but it is clearly more art than science…despite their claims of it being “scientific.”  That’s precisely why many in the media rightly look at the Real Clear Politics average of major polls, so the effects of all the scattered results are somewhat neutralized.  Ok, fine.  The theory I have, though, is that the majority of polls are over-polling Democrats.  Well, I didn’t invent that theory…but I surely ascribe to it. Considering one of the latest Wikileaks revelations, maybe it’s NOT simply a theory.  In an email from Hillary’s Campaign Chairman, John Podesta, he states, “I also want to get your Atlas folks to recommend oversamples for our polling before we start in February. By market, regions, etc. I want to get this all compiled into one set of recommendations so we can maximize what we get out of our media polling.”   And lo and behold, one of the latest polls that was a media darling was from ABC/Washington Post that showed Clinton up nationally by 12 points.  This particular poll grossly oversampled Democrats by 9 points.  There ARE more “registered” Democrats in the country, but c’mon.  At the same time, three polls that do not play this game have shown the race to be a statistical dead heat for weeks…Rasmussen, Investors Business Daily, and LA Times.  Interestingly enough, Rasmussen was the most accurate poll in the 2008 election cycle, and Investors Business Daily was the most accurate in 2012.  Hmmm. These historically accurate polls are either never cited by the mainstream media, or completely dismissed. The intent, of course, it to pretend like Hillary is so far ahead, Trump voters will just stay home and not bother voting.  This has the potential to blow up on them bigger than Bill Clinton’s wedding vows.

Beyond the outright fraud perpetrated by some pollsters, there are many other less nefarious reasons why the polls are wrong.  Aside from party affiliation, the composition of the electorate in 2016 will likely differ, maybe drastically, from the last few election cycles.  It is this historical composition that many pollsters largely utilize.  I think we’d all agree that most of the historical norms as they relate to presidential elections can be thrown right down the disposal for this cycle.   It’s quite plausible that the white vote, as a proportion of the electorate, could increase by at least a couple percent due to the Trump effect, and the percent of the African-American vote could decrease in a similar fashion. Does anyone think for a New York minute that as many blacks will show up to the polls as they did for Obama in 2008 & 2012?  Not on your life.  I submit that virtually none of this is being accurately reflected in polling.

The next item that might ultimately be viewed as a blueprint for this election is the Brexit vote over in the UK a few months ago.  Polling consistently showed people favoring STAYING in the European Union (EU), some polls by as many as 5% -10% the day before the vote.  The ACTUAL vote was 52% to 48% in favor of LEAVING the EU.  There are more parallels here than in geometry class.  First, the polls here, to some degree that remains to be seen, are not picking up new or infrequent voters, likely many blue-collar white males, that are right in Trump’s wheelhouse in terms of his most enthusiastic supporters.  Secondly…have you noticed how everyone from the media to Hillary supporters to The “Basket of Deplorables” Girl herself, view Trump supporters pretty universally as the scum of the earth…and are VERY vocal about it.  So, there likely are very significant numbers of people who will not even admit, including to live pollsters, that they support The Donald.  Exact same types of things were happening over in the UK leading up to the Brexit vote.  If you favored leaving the EU, you were considered anti-immigrant, racist, bigoted, etc.  Sound familiar?  Uh huh.  Like Brexit, this is a change election. And like it or not, Trump represents change.

One last item, dismissed by most experts, is the size of rally crowds (insert size DOES matter joke here).  Once again, traditional, conventional wisdom says this aspect in no way foretells the ultimate outcome of an election.  Of course every rule has been broken so far, so let’s feel this one out a bit.  Hillary generally draws something in the hundreds to most of her campaign events.  Trump…in the tens of thousands, including folks who show up but can’t even get in. Even on the VP side, Mike Pence draws relatively large crowds.  On Oct 24th in West Palm Beach, Florida, Tim Kaine drew thirty people to a rally.  Ok, rub your eyes and read that again. Thirty.  I’ve seen more people at a cock-fight at 2:30am.  I mean, Jesus, why not just do a caravan down to the Cracker Barrel and give everyone a rocking chair so they’re at least comfortable.  Back to the main players, though…there is such a sick disparity in these numbers, it HAS to have SOME meaning in terms of enthusiasm that translates to some level of actual voting advantage.

Now, there are no great revelations here.  You’ve likely heard these things before…but in their totality, they do offer a somewhat different perspective from the biased media portrayal of where this election really stands.  Time will tell.   It’s painfully obvious, though, that the media, the White House, and most other powerful entities in the country are putting forth a gargantuan effort to drag Hillary’s unpopular, untrustworthy, corrupt rotund posterior across the finish line.  And truth and ethics be damned.  (I refuse to use terms like “fat ass” in this blog…I mean, I DO have standards).  Despite the premature declaration of victory by the Clinton campaign and the media, only one thing is 100% certain…nobody knows what the hell is going to happen on November 8th.