Depending on which poll you trust, Pete Buttigieg (D) wavers between a whopping 24% in the Iowa State poll, and hovering around 7 to 9% in most of the other polls of late. Should Mayor Pete pull off a major upset and win the Iowa caucus in February, he could be a serious challenge to the other mainstream Democrats (also called Socialists) in the field.
Then again, it's that faith that you put into these polls. If we all recall, Donald Trump 'had no path' to the Oval Office just a month out from the elections. No chance, no way, no how. The polls had Hillary Clinton ahead by double digits, and yet that's not the way it went, not even close.
I suspect that back in 2016, if a pollster asked you if you supported Donald Trump, you would tell them that you did not, lest your house get egged, toilet papered, or worse, set on fire by Antifa or another Democratic organization which is prone to violence. But left alone in that voting booth, all by yourself with just that chad waiting to be punched without anybody knowing, you knew what to do.
Same thing happened to Mayor Tom Bradley (D-Ca) who ran for the California governor's seat against the ultimate victor in 1982, George Dukmejian (R-Ca) and yet Bradley lost despite a huge lead in the polls right up to the day of the election. The subsequent 'Bradley Effect' was applied to a white vs black contest, and the results of polling that had respondents indicating they would vote for the black and yet did otherwise, responding that they would support the black candidate out of fear of appearing to be racist to the pollster should they lean the other way.
This effect can widely be applied to any number of electoral dynamics, such as the Trump/Clinton tilt in 2016, or in this case, not wanting to appear to be anti-gay and indicate support for openly gay candidate Mayor Pete, but once in that booth pulling another handle than the one they told the pollster.
Mayor Pete and his supporters are clearly suggesting the the U.S. is ready for a gay president. I suspect they are wrong; most of the U.S. voters are not actively against the gay movement, but it is a very noisy, vocal and hostile constituency and to slight this crowd in any way will invite undesirable effects onto those foolish enough to oppose this movement publicly. Better to just bake their wedding cake and shut up.
We will certainly see in a few weeks how this all plays out, but my guess is that Mayor Pete and his gay movement will fall by the wayside with a distant 5th or 6th place showing in Iowa despite the polls.
The 'Bradley Effect', or something akin to it will surface, and Mayor Pete will diminish from the front page to become a footnote down the road, similar to the late Geraldine Ferarro (first woman to be tapped for U.S. Veep). We are still waiting for that first woman to show up on the winning ticket.
And the first gay president is a long way off as well.
John Blackshoe Sends: Serendipity History - Motivation matters - The Battle
of Trenton 26 December 1776 - A bold, desperate Christmas gamble that
changed history (Part 2 of 2)
-
Last time we discussed events leading up to General Washington’s decision
to take his shrinking, tired and battle weary army across the Delaware
River into...
12 hours ago
15 comments:
People have little reason to be truthful with pollsters. Minimum wage or convict pollsters might have their own agenda in recording responses. Your points are valid.
Personally, I refuse to be polled except actual voting. Per LL I'm already on the list for first to the reeducation camp.
Fool: and as first in, you get the bunk beside the pot belly stove, right?
I no longer discount the insanity of the SJW's who voted for Odumbo simply because he was perceived as black and will vote for Saint Pete because he's a homosexual. I remember my commie ex-brother squirming with delight when Odumbo went to Mpls and his ecstatically crowing about "history being made." Arrrrrrgh!
That is the theory.
That's his plan, Fredd!
The Butt Guy wouldn't do well in a match up against President Trump.
Adrienne: we dirt people are not interested in making history, just for making history's sake. We want results. That's the way of us dirt people.
Jim: sure seems like it, doesn't it. The guy seems reasonably intelligent, I'm confused as to why he can't see that this push for the gay agenda on a massive scale is much akin to Don Quixote and his issue with windmills.
LL: the Butt Guy, as only you could nickname him, indeed has no shot against a showman like The Donald. Neither does anybody else, living or dead. Assuming the economy, jobs and our national security are tended to as they have been for the last three years and counting, I don't think even Jesus Christ could get the electoral votes necessary to defeat Trump.
Fool: when a pollster asks me anything, I lie on every question just for the sake of skewing whatever results he /she wants. Am I being a big nasty meany when I do this?
I say no, no I'm not. I am doing my civic duty to foil commies and their destructive agenda.
Not many of us care who someone sleeps with. Not many of us will actively place some niche group above us.
Trump by a landslide. People don't like having anything stuffed down their throats. Pun if you will.
Most don't want their guns confiscated.
Most don't want a sucky economy
Most don't want others ideas stuffed down their throats whether they admit it to their peers or not
Most don't equate a man's penis stuffed up another man's anus with a rainbow
Most don't want savage vermin being imported like popcorn - (hundreds killed in mass shootings but 10s of Thousands killed by illegals. Even more raped)
Many have been enlightened to clinton's crimes
Many have seen what a non-politician successful business man can do for Americans
If I'm wrong then every man and woman for themself.
I've never been polled. Course, I don't answer the phone if I don't know the number and when I believe over 99.999999999999999999999999 % of calls are scammers. I also don't use my phone for a phone. So, Who are they polling?
Kid: we don't have a landline anymore, so no more polls from me. Most polls are via telephone, and so the sample in the poll consists of people who answer their landlines - which excludes conservatives like you and me, hence the screwy polls that are everywhere.
Your list: agree with all of it. I am still confused as to why Obama was elected, and then re-elected despite the reality and truth of this list, as Obama wants to force all of it down our throats, and so do his like minded ilk. I don't get it. Voters seem to agree with all of that stuff you listed, but you and I know they don't when in the voting booth. I think most voters are idiots.
Damn, I just commented on the Wilder/Bradley Effect on another blog relating to
President Trump's approval numbers. While the polls remain fairly static, Trump's
approval ratings among blacks, Hispanic, and union voters has been growing. At
recent Trump rallies, an average of 20 percent of the attendees are registered
Democrats. Either the pollsters are fudging the numbers, or the people are not
accurately stating their preferences to the pollsters.
Damn, I just commented on the Wilder/Bradley Effect on another blog relating to
President Trump's approval numbers. While the polls remain fairly static, Trump's
approval ratings among blacks, Hispanic, and union voters has been growing. At
recent Trump rallies, an average of 20 percent of the attendees are registered
Democrats. Either the pollsters are fudging the numbers, or the people are not
accurately stating their preferences to the pollsters.
Post a Comment