The polls for the presidential race continue to demonstrate that there has been a major change. As of this morning, Donald Trump now leads Hillary Clinton by less than a point in the average of all recent polls compiled by Real Clear Politics. This is because two new polls that together show the race tied replace polls from nearly a month ago that had Hillary far ahead.
What has caused this shift? Most of the pundits (who never seem to get anything right anymore) ascribe the shift to Republicans backing Trump now that he has clinched the nomination. These same pundits go on to say that once Hillary has clinched, she will get the same effect from her party and will move back in front of Trump. That line may be comforting to the politicians and media people who live in the DC/New York bubble, but it sure does not look correct. In the first twenty days of April, Hillary was polling at roughly 50% of the voters. In the polling of the last two weeks she is polling at roughly 43%. Trump, meanwhile, was polling at roughly 41% in the April period and that has risen to 43% in the last two weeks. That means that voters are not moving to Trump so much as away from Hillary. She lost 7% of the electorate and Trump gained 2%. If the shrinking margin was caused by Cruz, Rubio and Kasich voters moving to back Trump, the big move would have been Trump gaining, not Hillary losing.
So I ask again, what has caused the shift? Two things have shifted in a big way during this time. First, the full extent to which the Democrat nomination has been rigged to favor Hillary has become clear. There really are many voters who will not forgive the theft of delegates by Clinton and her troops in Nevada and elsewhere. She is losing some of the Bernie supporters. Second, Trump has begun to attack Hillary for real. Much of the recent attacks are of the "crooked Hillary" variety or about Hillary trying to destroy the lives of the victims of Bill's sexual misconduct who had the nerve to speak out about it. The continuing crooked Hillary rhetoric may seem like nothing to the pundits in the bubble, but it resonates with many in America. Also, when Trump points out not just what Bill did to woman after woman but also how Hillary led the charge to destroy the victims who spoke out, there are literally millions of voters who are hearing about this for the first time. Remember, most of this happened twenty or more years ago. The average thirty-year-old voter was ten or less when these stories were in the news. This is all new stuff. In today's world, a woman like Hillary who led an effort to destroy the women who were victims of sexual misconduct by her husband is someone that millennials will not support. The damage done to Hillary by her war on the woman who were victimized by Bill is truly hurting her. Indeed, this very damage is most likely the reason for the silly New York Times story on Trump's past with women. The Times rushed out the story which basically said that Trump likes women, has had a series of affairs over the years, hired a lot of women when others would not and spoke coarsely sometimes to the women he employed. The response of most people to that story would be this: "So what?" Then the story itself was undermined in dramatic fashion when the main woman discussed rushed out to say that her words were twisted and that she likes Trump and is going to vote for him. If anything, the Times' escapade reinforced the difference between the way Hillary has treated women and the way Trump has. All the rhetoric in the world will not overcome the reaction once the basic facts get known.
The election is far from over. Things may change (and most likely will) repeatedly before the nation votes in November. It does seem right now, however, that 2016 will see Hillary's war on women costing her dearly.
What has caused this shift? Most of the pundits (who never seem to get anything right anymore) ascribe the shift to Republicans backing Trump now that he has clinched the nomination. These same pundits go on to say that once Hillary has clinched, she will get the same effect from her party and will move back in front of Trump. That line may be comforting to the politicians and media people who live in the DC/New York bubble, but it sure does not look correct. In the first twenty days of April, Hillary was polling at roughly 50% of the voters. In the polling of the last two weeks she is polling at roughly 43%. Trump, meanwhile, was polling at roughly 41% in the April period and that has risen to 43% in the last two weeks. That means that voters are not moving to Trump so much as away from Hillary. She lost 7% of the electorate and Trump gained 2%. If the shrinking margin was caused by Cruz, Rubio and Kasich voters moving to back Trump, the big move would have been Trump gaining, not Hillary losing.
So I ask again, what has caused the shift? Two things have shifted in a big way during this time. First, the full extent to which the Democrat nomination has been rigged to favor Hillary has become clear. There really are many voters who will not forgive the theft of delegates by Clinton and her troops in Nevada and elsewhere. She is losing some of the Bernie supporters. Second, Trump has begun to attack Hillary for real. Much of the recent attacks are of the "crooked Hillary" variety or about Hillary trying to destroy the lives of the victims of Bill's sexual misconduct who had the nerve to speak out about it. The continuing crooked Hillary rhetoric may seem like nothing to the pundits in the bubble, but it resonates with many in America. Also, when Trump points out not just what Bill did to woman after woman but also how Hillary led the charge to destroy the victims who spoke out, there are literally millions of voters who are hearing about this for the first time. Remember, most of this happened twenty or more years ago. The average thirty-year-old voter was ten or less when these stories were in the news. This is all new stuff. In today's world, a woman like Hillary who led an effort to destroy the women who were victims of sexual misconduct by her husband is someone that millennials will not support. The damage done to Hillary by her war on the woman who were victimized by Bill is truly hurting her. Indeed, this very damage is most likely the reason for the silly New York Times story on Trump's past with women. The Times rushed out the story which basically said that Trump likes women, has had a series of affairs over the years, hired a lot of women when others would not and spoke coarsely sometimes to the women he employed. The response of most people to that story would be this: "So what?" Then the story itself was undermined in dramatic fashion when the main woman discussed rushed out to say that her words were twisted and that she likes Trump and is going to vote for him. If anything, the Times' escapade reinforced the difference between the way Hillary has treated women and the way Trump has. All the rhetoric in the world will not overcome the reaction once the basic facts get known.
The election is far from over. Things may change (and most likely will) repeatedly before the nation votes in November. It does seem right now, however, that 2016 will see Hillary's war on women costing her dearly.
No comments:
Post a Comment