Image 01 Image 03

Politico Co-Founder: Trump Could Lose Texas, Race Not ‘Remotely Close’

Politico Co-Founder: Trump Could Lose Texas, Race Not ‘Remotely Close’

Our Texas Cry: Remember Wendy Davis!

Remember Wendy Davis? She was the Texas Democrat who became an MSM darling for her filibuster against a state law restricting abortions. Davis exploited her 15-minutes of fame by running for Governor of Texas in 2014. But despite the backing of an adoring press, Davis got demolished, losing by more than 20 points to Greg Abbott. For the record, my home county of Hood showed its scorn by awarding Davis all of . . . 18.9% of the vote.

So when on today’s Morning Joe, Politico co-founder Jim VandeHei claimed that Hillary Clinton is so far ahead that she has a better shot at winning Texas than Trump has of winning the presidency, this adopted Texan had to laugh.

VandeHei was reacting to Joe Scarborough’s suggestion that the MSM’s massive anti-Trump bias might actually backfire against Hillary, by feeding into the Trump narrative about an election rigged by the media.

VandeHei scoffed at that notion. While acknowledging that the election has been a “middle finger” to government and the media, he said “I don’t think this race is remotely close. I think there’s a better chance that he ends up losing a place like Missouri or even Texas than there is of him winning the presidency.”

I don’t know about those Missouri mules, but if Clinton carries Texas, I’ll post a pic of myself in a Hillary hat.

Note: Here’s a map showing the results of Davis’ demolition in 2014. The only counties she carried were Dallas, Travis [weird old Austin], and areas along the Mexican border.

JOE SCARBOROUGH: I think, Jim VandeHei, just to take a counter view, I think the media coverage over the past two weeks have been so one-sided against Donald Trump that it’s actually making a lot of people who loathe Donald Trump actually push away from supporting Hillary Clinton, and that’s — I know that’s — I just — I’m hearing it wherever I go, that this race is really, like Mike said, this race is about Hillary Clinton. People are making their choices based on how they feel about Hillary Clinton, and it’s almost like they tune Donald Trump out, but the press is weighing in so heavily here that I don’t know if the coverage actually might have a small effect backfiring — backfiring, actually, in a way that feeds right into Donald Trump’s narrative.

JIM VANDEHEI: Listen, there’s no doubt this whole election has been a middle finger to all of us, to government, to big media. I’ll take the counter view to what you just said. I don’t think this race is remotely close. I think there’s a better chance he ends up losing a place like Missouri or even Texas than there is of him winning the presidency. There’s nothing that I’ve seen in the history of polling that suggests when you have on average an eight-point advantage for a candidate and the trend lines are going in the direction they are that this race is close.


Donations tax deductible
to the full extent allowed by law.


UnCivilServant | October 18, 2016 at 8:35 am

Yeah, no. Hillary won’t carry Texas.

    OnlyRightDissentAllowed in reply to UnCivilServant. | October 19, 2016 at 9:55 am

    That was not the point. The quote is that “a better chance that he (Trump) ends up losing a place like Missouri or even Texas than there is of him winning the presidency

    You do understand what chance means or do you go to a casino and think you are going to walk out a winner. According to Trump has a 16.4% chance of winning the election and Clinton has an 18.3% chance of winning Texas. According to Trump winning election 12.3%. Clinton winning Texas 17.5.

    GET IT? Clinton has a better CHANCE of winning Texas that Trump has of winning the election.

    I responded to this because I think it is a perfect illustration of what is askew with the articles on this site; although it is rare to be able to point it out so clearly and unambiguously.

    BTW, Nobody thought that Wendy Davis was going to win, although we did hope for a better result. In a a couple of more election cycles we should have good reason to expect a better result.

I respond to Politico boy the same way the Texicans responded to the Mexican Army at Goliad – “Come and Take It!”

Can someone find out what this guy is smoking? I would like to try some.

This simply goes to show that Hillary supporters are as intellectually dishonest, morally bankrupt and corrupt as Hillary is.

    thalesofmiletus in reply to Fen. | October 18, 2016 at 8:52 am

    You really shouldn’t — whatever he’s smoking obviously causes permanent brain damage.

casualobserver | October 18, 2016 at 8:45 am

And this race is “like” which of the historical ones? There are so many talking heads across so many different channels these days who give shallow opinions with no real thoughtful analysis. “It’s not usual” is pretty sophomoric. What about historical levels of distrust and dislike, for example?

JoeThePimpernel | October 18, 2016 at 8:57 am

Politico? Isn’t that the fake news site that lets Democrats edit their articles?

The narrative is that Hillary’s election is inevitable. Resistance is futile. There is no shortage of “journalists” to carry this water.

    Rick the Curmudgeon in reply to topcat69. | October 18, 2016 at 12:27 pm

    So then if you’re a Texas Trump supporter, there’s no real reason to go vote then??

    maxmillion in reply to topcat69. | October 18, 2016 at 2:39 pm

    It’s called a “voter suppression” strategy, i.e., demoralize Republicans to the point where many don’t even bother to vote. Many establishment Republicans themselves seem to be pushing this.

All I have to say is if Hillary wins Texas, there will never be another Republican president again for a long time.

theduchessofkitty | October 18, 2016 at 9:36 am

FWIW, in 2008 I was driving a stretch of road between Corpus Christi and Rockport (this is South TX, Coastal Bend) when I saw a roughly made billboard. Nothing but big wood planks nailed to the posts and big letters painted in red, showing they just painted the letters right from big brushes. The message written was very loud, for anyone driving down the road to see. And I believe this is what Texas really thinks:


I’m in San Antonio. On my commute to work, there are two locations that are covered with political signage every election.

Except this one. Not one sign at either location. Nor am I seeing many yard signs, bumper stickers, t-shirts, hats…

Draw your own conclusions.

    Henry Hawkins in reply to Rusty Bill. | October 18, 2016 at 12:03 pm

    Same in eastern NC. I’ve seen one Trump yard sign ( a neighbor, who reports he had to drive 60 miles to Raleigh to get it), zero Clinton signs, but the usual high number of state and local race yard signs. I’ve seen neither Trump nor Clinton bumper stickers.

    inspectorudy in reply to Rusty Bill. | October 18, 2016 at 2:15 pm

    You must work in a coal mine because I see them all day long here in Ga. I never see hillary signs anywhere. Today’s WSJ had a story about a reporter on a long car trip who decided to count political signs. He got to 2,500 Trump signs before he found one hillary sign. He also said that at airports the gift shops had hillary stuff but no Trump stuff. When he asked why they said the Trump stuff goes in a few hours but the hillary stuff NEVER sells! Not her bumper stickers, books or buttons. Somebody is lying in this election or someone has rigged it so that there is no way for Trump to win. I think it is a little of both.

      OnlyRightDissentAllowed in reply to inspectorudy. | October 19, 2016 at 10:48 am

      Yeah, we heard the same thing when Obama beat Romney. I don’t have any signs – didn’t buy any merch. Don’t see the need.

      I did donate some money. I saw the need.

      You keep up the delusion. Arizona is in play!

      I am also trying to understand a fundamental contradiction. Trump signs and Merch are flying off the shelves because people want to tell the world how much they love Trump, but the polls are wrong because people are not willing to tell pollsters they are voting for Trump. Are they both true? I guess we will see. Only then you will claim Clinton stole it.

Confirmed: These guys actually do believe their own hype/lies if repeated often enough.

    Rick the Curmudgeon in reply to UJ. | October 18, 2016 at 12:40 pm

    Joseph Goebbels was right; but he neglected to say it applied to the speaker as well as the spoken-to.

Thank You Pollsters, Politico and the rest of the media. You are acting as Trump Pence GOTV effort. Keep motivating the Trump, #NeverHillary and “Throw the bums out” voters with the “He’s going to loose” refrain. It’s worked so well.

From the day he announced, according to these expert’s, he didn’t have a chance to become the nominee.

They are brilliant, insightful, all-knowing and have no clue!

Trump increases his lead over Hillary Clinton in latest poll:

as much as I hate being a cynic I am, there is a possibility that the beast could take Texas, given all the negativity about Trump, and the demographics changes in the last few years Texas could go blue. think about it, where are a lot of the Californians moving to,Texas. once the democratic leaches get hold of a city they never let go.

There is something called Gell-Mann amnesia. I don’t know why it is called Gell-Mann amnesia –Gell-Mann seems to not be involved in the creation of the term. it was first described by Michael Crichton.

It goes like this: “One day [Nobel Prize winner in Physics], Murray Gell-Man reads a story on the newspaper about Physics and says ‘what rubbish’ he then about international affairs and believes the paper knows more about Palestein then physics. You turn the page and forget what you know.”

Politico is implicated in Wikileaks as modifying stories to favor Clinton.

Could Hillary beat Trump in Texas? Sure, with enough vote fraud. Hence why Texas is currently running an aggressive investigation into that practice there and the Dems are screaming that the investigation will suppress the vote. They are correct, in that it will very likely suppress the ILLEGAL vote.

For the next 2+ weeks we will be inundated with predictions that the race is over and that Hillary has already won in virtually every locale in the country. This is designed to suppress the Trump vote. It is now the only way for Hillary to win the election without widespread vote fraud. See, the internal polls and actual polling results are well known within both campaigns. And, it does not remotely conform to the publicly released polling results. Trump will still continue to campaign in order to keep the excitement of his supporters high. And, as his campaign already realizes that the anti-Trump forces will most certainly attempt to use wide spread vote fraud and voter intimidation to win, he will continue beating that drum. The MSM, and other political operatives know full well that fraud will be used in an attempt to secure the win for Hillary. And, as so much will be needed, it can not be ignored or covered up. And, if it shown that the election was stolen from Trump through illegal means, likely supported or condoned by local government officials, then the reaction of the high energy, anti-establishment Trump supporters may well be physical and devastating. This terrifies the MSM and establishment political actors. So, every liberal and establishment pundit will be telling all of us that the race is over and Hillary has one it, long before election day.

This is likely to get REEEEAALL interesting right after the election.

    2nd Ammendment Mother in reply to Mac45. | October 18, 2016 at 12:17 pm

    I’ve understood for years exactly where the weak points in the election system lay in the early voting and mail in votes.

    I watched the exact fraud that is described in Tarrant County over and over again while I lived in El Paso. No matter what political office you wanted to run for, there were “fixers” or “bag men” that would show up on your doorstep. Depending on how lucrative the position you wanted would be for particularly interested vendors, they would provide you with a guaranteed number of ballots per precinct for a price. There were even known to be bidding wars on those votes from time to time. The whole operation and the names of the fixers were well known and easily identified in campaign finance reports.

    These votes were also purchased by various government entities in order to pass bond issues and referendums they wanted done. It wasn’t a secret at all and it’s much easier than driving voters around to polls with lists of names of people who are registered and don’t usually vote culled from the election office rosters (that are sold to campaigns for a tidy sum every year).

Las December, when I visited my parents in San Antonio, my mother commented that Daddy, a life-long, pull-the-lever Democrat who had previously accused me of “watching FOX News,” said that “Trump is saying things that need to be said.”

This is the one person in the family that enthusiastically voted for Obama in 2008.

I imagine that neither one of them will tolerate voting for Hillary after they get a load of that Project Veritas video.

Rigging the Election – Video I: Clinton Campaign and DNC Incite Violence at Trump Rallies

Like many other Democratic voters (and of course, Republicans and Independents), my parents strongly disapprove of dirty tricks, and they recognize that incitement of violence in an election breaks our social compact.

WikiLeaks Exposes a Corporate Media as Out-Of-Touch As Politicians
by Jordan Chariton | 11:40 am, October 17th, 2016

Oh that Joe, what a card.

“… In a way that feeds right into Donald Trump’s narrative” is as close as he’ll let himself get to saying “…and as everybody can now plainly see, Trump was right about that ‘stolen election’ thing …

Being +4, he’s unlikely to lose TX, but AZ, AK, UT and NC are a whole different matter.

Let us look at poll numbers, shall we.

RCP average Texas: Trump +6
RCP national average: Clinton +7

538 average Texas: Trump +5.8
538 national average: Clinton +7

So, when “Jim VandeHei claimed that Hillary Clinton is so far ahead that she has a better shot at winning Texas than Trump has of winning the presidency”, he is correct. Clinton is not going to win Texas, but Jim can back up his claim, and Mark pulled his out of … you know where.

    I’m not a statistician, but I think sample size figures into the equation somehow. TX is not polled frequently at the moment, the country is, although sample is taken from a larger population.
    I’m pretty sure TX is still R, but, at the same time, Nate Silver gives Hillary higher chances of winning TX than Trump- PA. Hillary doesn’t need TX, for Trump PA is a must-win.

      Texas doesn’t have a lot of polling, no. Still, it has some

      Latest polls are all over the place, from Trump+2 to Trump+25. I think what they have (and both RCP and 538 know their stuff well) is realistic. And sample size, while it matters, of course, is figured out into margins of error.

      For Trump, every state that he could win is a must-win. Looking at Electoral college, 538 gives him 192, RCP 216. Higher than McCain, but you have to remember the opposition. Democrats love Obama, they can’t stand Clinton.

Henry Hawkins | October 18, 2016 at 5:10 pm

Raise your hand if you believe that pollsters are the one and only legitimate, honest members of an otherwise deeply corrupt political system.

I look at polls the same way I look at cable TV news – why would I believe a word – or number – of any of it?

Twenty years ago this would be cynical. Not anymore.

Report from North Central Massachusetts and Southwestern New Hampshire: trump to HRC signs 2:1. Trump won’t carry Mass and may or may not carry NH, but there it is.

Of course, I live in a Deplorables Zip Code.

And all this time I thought polled was a cow that didn’t grow horns….like polled Hereford. Strangers wanting information over the phone just hear a click.