Virus kills Trump’s chances

More bad news for El Trumpo overnight with The Economist endorsing Joe Biden:

Our cover this week  sets out why, if we had a vote, it would go to Joe Biden. The country that elected Donald Trump in 2016 was unhappy and divided. The country he is asking to re-elect him is more unhappy and more divided. After almost four years of his leadership, politics is even angrier than it was and partisanship even less constrained. Daily life is consumed by a pandemic that has caused almost 230,000 reported deaths amid bickering, buck-passing and lies. Much of that is Mr Trump’s doing and his victory on November 3rd would endorse it all. Mr Biden is Mr Trump’s antithesis. He is not a miracle cure for what ails America. But he is a good man who would restore steadiness and civility to the presidency. Were he to be elected, success would not be guaranteed—how could it be? But he would enter the White House promising the most precious gift that democracies can bestow: renewal.

The latest polls are unmoving for El Trumpo. Headline:



538 is at 89%:

Then there is the virus:

Which is gutting Trump support in battleground states, at FT:

Donald Trump’s chance of victory in next week’s presidential election rests on a dwindling number of swing states as a spike in coronavirus cases across the Midwest dents his ratings in crucial battlegrounds, according to pollsters.

Mr Trump will continue his tour of battleground states on Thursday, with planned visits to Florida and North Carolina, before returning to the Midwest on Friday with campaign stops in Wisconsin and Minnesota.

But the president’s hopes of winning the upper Midwestern states that propelled him to victory in 2016 — Pennsylvania, Michigan and Wisconsin — have taken a blow in recent weeks as a third surge of Covid-19 cases ravages the region and focuses voters’ attention on his administration’s handling of the pandemic.

Nobody could have foreseen that killing your own base would cost you at the polling booth.

Still, Trump’s hopes for stealing the election got a boost this morning:

And 538 has outlined his coup methodology:

Take Pennsylvania, arguably the most important swing state this election as it’s currently the likeliest “tipping-point state” in our forecast, or the state that could determine the winner of the Electoral College. About 2 million mail-in ballots have already been returned so far, almost one-third of the total number of votes cast in the state four years ago. But because the state can’t begin processing mail ballots until 7 a.m. on Election Day, it could be awhile before we get full results in Pennsylvania. State officials have said that it could take until Friday to finish counting most ballots. And between Tuesday and Friday, there could be a pretty big shift in terms of which party is favored in the vote tally, given that Biden supporters are far more likely to vote early or absentee than Trump supporters, who are far more likely to vote on Election Day

In other words, we need to brace ourselves for a “blue shift” in states like Pennsylvania. That is, states that primarily report Election Day results first could show Republicans with an initial lead on election night only to then shift toward Democrats as more mail ballots are counted. To be clear, this won’t be true everywhere. Some states, like Florida, are already counting early votes and will likely report a lot of its early in-person and mail votes ahead of many Election Day votes.

Declare the victory on the night then try to shut down the postal vote count that contains the “blue wave”.

It’s going to be one hell of a day.

David Llewellyn-Smith
Latest posts by David Llewellyn-Smith (see all)


  1. The extension of the postal vote deadline is merely the Democrat getting the US Supreme Court to rules that all votes postmarked before and on the date should be counted. Trump have already said, on record, that postal votes past the November 3rd should not be counted.

    If Trump wins because of this, he will be no better than Xi Jingping.

    • Greenwald is seemingly one of the last genuine journos out there i.e. one with principles and a commitment to the truth. He’s politically left-leaning and has published heaps through the Guardian and the Intercept, in particular. This business wit the Intercept shines a bright light on their true objectives and diminishes their credibility.

    • Good piece @swampy on perils of cancel culture.
      Risk here is to US 1st amendment rights and US Constitution posed by Democrat big information agencies, super-government structures and deep state.
      More pro-Dem ballot harvesting and more riots in Penn State and DC.

      • Trump and the Republicans lose any sympathy after the Cambridge Analytica scandal when it comes to media exploitation and censorship. I’m not a general fan of the increased censorship in 2020, but Carlson has tricked a naive Greenwald into appearing on his show under the censorship pretence when it’s purely to help Trump. And you know what, the timing with this laptop’s contents discovery just before the election shows it clearly isn’t that urgent an issue…

        • Irrespective of Carlson’s intentions it doesn’t invalidate what has happened at the Intercept. The bald facts are that both sides are playing dirty and if you don’t recognise that then you’re one-eyed.

          • Oh, no doubt both sides are playing dirty. My response was a result of your emphasis on the left playing dirty, but playing dirty on an issue the Republicans have cynically raised and focused on in crucial days leading up to the election because they care about getting re-elected more than the issue itself. And the hypocrisy re Trump’s obviously grubby working relationship history also reduces the sympathy here.

    • It’s not so much Fox News itself that is the draw – it’s Tucker Carlson himself. If there’s a better anchor than him on TV today, I haven’t come across them. He’s charismatic, erudite, and sharp as a tack. His stuff is generally well researched and he backs his claims up with evidence, unlike many of the Democrat anchors who are dogmatic and opinionated and rarely feel the need to actually support any of their claims with evidence. TC gives credit where its due, while his counterparts on the other stations suffer terribly with TDS and can’t contain their bile and hate of everything Republican.

      And I confess I quite enjoy the way in which TC heaps derision on the claims of those he’s critiquing: “Oh?” … as he looks genuinely dumbfounded.

      • Correct, but a quick search of news ratings shows Hannity, Ingraham and The Five viewership way up as well.

        • So, what you’re saying is that we shouldn’t be surprised if Trump ends up winning in a landslide?

        • Oh, so a pretend non-partisan organisation finds fault with an organisation/persons they don’t agree with.

          Who would’ve thought, eh smithy?!

      • Dom, Dom, Dom. So disappointed in you, I thought we’d made a connection earlier this week and that our relationship had turned the corner and now you come out with this.

        “It’s not so much Fox News itself that is the draw – it’s Tucker Carlson himself. If there’s a better anchor than him on TV today, I haven’t come across them. ”

        That’s because he reflects your rw beliefs. And as to charisma, really? Imo charisma is the most overrated personality trait going when it comes to politics / sales parting with my money etc. My defences go straight up when I see someone who would be describes as charismatic.

        “TC gives credit where its due, while his counterparts on the other stations suffer terribly with TDS and can’t contain their bile and hate of everything Republican.”

        OMG, you accuse the Dems of the above while behaving in the exact same manner, wtf!

        I was going to suggest we have another virtual celebratory drink, but that’s off until you get your act together!

        Btw, follow drsmithy’s links above.

        • dennis, I don’t watch TV, I don’t watch political debates, I detest 99% of politicians (of either stripe) and I don’t care for political discussion much, however, I do find Tucker to be a cut above the rest – amusing and overall quite entertaining. His ability to run rings around many of the people he interviews is enjoyable and he shines an awfully bright light on some ludicrous progressive thinking.

          By your logic, I should enjoy other rw commentators but I don’t. I make an exception for TC and that’s about it.

          I try and give smithy’s thoughts and links a miss as he’s a dreadful ‘woke’ ideologue who regularly accuses many others on this blog of being …. an ideologue!

  2. I don’t want to pour cold water on your thesis but The Economist is normally a reliable contrarian indicator.

    That said, it is looking fairly bleak for Trump if true that the Boomers think he’s abandoned them.

    • blacktwin997MEMBER

      Were’t The Economist Intelligence Unit the outfit who repeatedly bestowed the ‘World’s Most Liveable City’ title upon Melbourne to recognise it’s world class carjacking, home invasion, ice and coffee credentials?

      • Maybe it’s definition of liveable means you haven’t lived unless all of the above have been experienced? In contrast I once had an actual tumbleweed blow into me on the streets of Perth.

      • You guys understand those awards are usually based on poll style votes by expats who’ve moved there for fixed employment periods etc?

        Edit: maybe not this one.

    • The Economist and discipline of economics over the years is interesting. The deeper entrenched (or more conventional) economics gets in society – probably same with most disciplines – the more pro-control super government structures and socialist it becomes. It is people and people’s behaviour that need to be regulated.
      Priority for economics and economics models has morphed into being ‘correct-ish’ and nailing/disputing the nearest to actual outcome using some clever nuanced narrative. It has moved passed actually understanding anything for mere knowledges sake. It is a manual on how people’s lives could be improved but with no accountability for the mistakes it makes.

      • Yes, economics these days is utilised to achieve social outcomes — as opposed to something that is studied and understood. Contemporary economic theory demands Govt intervene in the economy in direct opposition of the view that the economy is a dynamic system that represents the wants and needs of all the people that participate in it.

  3. Matt Plunkett-Cole

    You keep writing him off with your brilliant analysis, but he’s going to win. Then your “analysis” of the democratic presidential victory will miraculously vanish, just like FMG, just like iron ore prices, just like coal prices, just like a tanking economy, just like… lol…

    • bolstroodMEMBER

      Trump has preset the Right wing Militias, to be armed and present at polling staions
      If the US gets thru voting day without bloodshed I will be amazed.
      Power comes from the barrel of a gun… and there are a lot of guns out there.

  4. I am starting to wish a Trump loss next ( and a clear one) this constant TDS is really boring

    On the flip side this TDS would make their tears beautiful if he wins

    • There is a word that combines the sound of pressing the button on the mouse and alternative name for small fish or worms used for catching larger fish.
      Well that word and also the sinonym for vehicular congestion… to create revenue.

  5. These elections are already a big democratic failure
    From face democratic primaries, biased media coverage, the fact that 80 million already voted, out of 130m that will vote at the end
    Some hybrid countries would be ashamed of such elections

  6. You guys have no clue, stick to economics please.

    Trump is going to win in a huge landslide victory, sweeping the nation.

    The primary model, which was wrong only twice since 1912 has Trump winning with over 360 delegates. And no this is not my only data point, just a funny anecdotal one.

    You’re about to see the entire poll industry go in the garbage bin.