That you Erickson?
This is like the old Yogi Berra joke:
"Hey, Yogi, do you want to go get lunch at that pizza place?"
"That place? No one goes there anymore! It's too crowded!"
Am I the only one who is confused by this?
What a load of baloney.
If you’re my age, you’ll recall America already has had a landslide President we didn’t want.
“Landslide Lyndon” Johnson in 1964.
If the election is about Hillary, she will lose - if about Trump, he will lose.
Funny. I took it to mean this libtard is admitting Trump will win by a landslide.
The president that leftards don’t want maybe.
Trump is going to win by a landslide.
Because the citizens see that this is our last chance to keep our country.
The politicians are trying to give it away.
Or more accurately sell it out from under us.
To Kyle:
What do you mean “we”, Kimosabe?
I’m a Trump supporter. He wasn’t my first choice, but my first choice lost—and has since disgraced himself by failing to support Trump. For all his faults, he’s clearly the better choice. I desperately want him to win.
However, what I don’t see anywhere is any EVIDENCE (i.e., DATA) that he is likely to do so. The only evidence (data) we have on which to base any kind of rational prediction is the polls, however flawed and biased they are, and they don’t show Trump actually winning, especially in the states that matter.
There are arguments to be made that the polls are grossly biased in Hillary’s favor. But arguments are not evidence (data). It’s true that Trump seems to get far more people than Hillary at his campaign events. It’s true that he’s pretty close in the polls, even after a month of intense Trump bashing. It’s true that he’s slowly closing the gap in the polls. We can make all sorts of arguments that this shows that he will win in November. But these arguments are simply theories interpreting a combination of evidence (polls) and anecdotes that may or may not reflect if people will actually vote, and if so, how.
So this guy offers a theory that Hillary will win in a landslide. It’s nothing more than a theory weakly supported by evidence (data). But what evidence (data) there is does, in fact, support his theory, however weakly.
None of us actually know how this is going to turn out. When it comes to making accurate predictions about the election, we’re all biased by our hopes, by desperation, by the demographics of the state in which we live, by the political positions of our families, friends, acquaintances, and co-workers. But none of us has an accurate knowledge of how the 6 or 7 states that will decide the election will actually vote.
So all we can do is to assume that Trump has a decent shot at winning, and do our best to convince others to vote for him. If we know people who live in those 6 or 7 crucial states, concentrate on them.
Yes, the only people that seem to want him are the voters
Google the author. He's an entertainment critic. I would have been as likely to post this as a Donny Dumbass tirade.
“Kyle Smith (born 1966) is an American critic, novelist and essayist. He is a staff film critic[1] for the New York Post.”
A Clintonite in his fairy tale got to the point, where you know he is a Leftist:
“Get ready for the winner-by-default president. Hillary Clinton’s selling point, and the one that’s probably good enough for America right now, is that She isn’t He. But so is every other person (but one). How many of them could also have beaten Donald Trump? Not only Joe Biden and Elizabeth Warren but Al Gore, John Kerry, Walter Mondale and Alec Baldwin must be shaking their heads and wondering why they didn’t run. (Thought bubble over Baldwin’s head: I could have been the stable, even-tempered voice of reason in this race.)”
FDR could have swung that. Probably TR, too. Maybe Eisenhower. Bill Clinton could have tried when Dole ran against him, but it probably wouldn't have worked.
There is much chatter in DC these days about the meaningless, journalist-invented concept of “a mandate,” a voodoo belief that a president elected by a wide margin can do whatever he or she wants.
Voters don’t think that way, though: As soon as Barack Obama started doing unpopular stuff, they remembered they were still allowed to have opinions and opposed his policies, then immediately began installing Republican roadblocks to the Obama agenda starting with the election of Scott Brown to replace Ted Kennedy just one year into the new president’s term.
True, but the media are really going to push the "mandate" thing, and the country may be too demoralized to know how to react.
Voters can change their minds quickly, but in Clinton’s case it won’t even be clear what they think in the first place. A double-digit win, a “Hillary Clinton mandate,” would mean what, exactly? What does she stand for? Her early Flower Power radicalism, best expressed by her trippy Wellesley commencement speech in which she said politics was about opening up “ecstatic and penetrating modes of living”? Her wonky moderate turn in the last six years of the (first) Clinton administration? Her support for the Iraq War and for Wall Street as senator? The sharp turn left she made this summer, after primary season, solely to secure the endorsement of Bernie Sanders? Even Hillary must go to sleep at night wondering, “Wait a sec, which me am I this time?” You can’t vote decisively for a blur.
That is true, but politicians who are as chameleon-like as that usually find it easy to snap into one of their roles and play it to the hilt. When the wheel finally stops spinning they pick up and go on like nothing's happened. I don't think Hillary really spends much time on introspection, self-questioning or identity crises.
It’s how you define the word “We”..
To all of you who are from NYC; are people there really that detached from the rest of the US to hold that sort of opinion?
It is pretty bad when the elitists’ pick has to be hidden from the public in order to get them to vote for her.
The reason we keep hearing over and over how unlikeable and unstable Trump is, is that Hillary truly is nasty and dangerous, and the media must convince us that Trump is worse. But if the public actually sees her, convincing us that Trump is worse becomes almost impossible.
-PJ
I think Kyle Smith has a little special person hiding in his pocket........