The following list of 20 individuals includes a wide spectrum of voices from politics, academia, and media, many of whom accurately predicted Trump’s win in 2016 (against many who doubted them) but now they all express concerns about Trump's viability in winning in 2024. The first three people on the list, along with many others, predict an outright loss for Trump in the upcoming November election. Can one truly believe that they all have it wrong this time?

 

1. Bill Maher – Comedian and political commentator

2. Allan Lichtman – Historian known for presidential prediction model

3. Michael Moore – Filmmaker and political activist

4. David Axelrod – Former Obama advisor and political strategist

5. Frank Luntz – Republican pollster and strategist

6. Tony Fabrizio – Trump’s 2016 campaign pollster

7. Rick Santorum – Former Republican senator and conservative commentator

8. Lindsey Graham – Republican senator and longtime Trump ally

9. Mitch McConnell – Senate Minority Leader and Republican strategist

10. Karl Rove – GOP strategist and former Bush advisor

11. Michael Steele – Former RNC chairman and political analyst

12. George Conway – Conservative lawyer and co-founder of The Lincoln Project

13. Sarah Longwell – Republican strategist and anti-Trump advocate

14. Jon Meacham – Historian and presidential biographer

15. Larry Sabato – Political analyst and director of UVA Center for Politics

16. Stuart Stevens – Former GOP strategist and Lincoln Project senior advisor

17. Norm Ornstein – Political scientist and American Enterprise Institute scholar

18. Charlie Sykes – Conservative commentator and founder of The Bulwark

19. Thomas Friedman – New York Times columnist and political analyst

20. Jennifer Rubin – Conservative political columnist for The Washington Post

No, but most Trump supporters don’t believe that he’s the idiot racist, fascist, misogynist Hitler that  the legacy media says he is. Even the non-morons on the left (though they would never admit it) can see how ridiculously biased and dishonest their media are and how they lie about Trump.

 

Most everyone now knows the press are liars and are in the bag for Harris, and that they will say anything to help her. Voting against Harris has nothing to do with the cackle, or the Willie Brown issue, or her inability to speak clearly, or that she can’t answer a question, or even her misogynistic position on trans issues. It’s that her whole platform is identical to Biden’s in 2000, which is just to claim that Trump’s a fascist, Hitler, dictator and criminal, and for a lot of people, “I’m not Trump” is just not that compelling,

 

People support Trump because they know Harris is a liar and a cheater, and that she has a history or supporting open borders, mass illegal immigration, DEI, higher taxes, more giveaways, men in girls’ showers, path to citizenship, free health care and tuition for illegals, housing subsidies for illegals, men in women’s sports and prisons, defunding the police, supporting rioters, and free transition surgery for prison inmates.

 

I am against all those things, as is (I believe) Trump. That is why I support Trump. It has nothing to do with me being afraid of a “strong black woman”, If Condoleezza Rice were running, I would vote for her. That said, I do not think Harris is strong. I think she is weak, and I think Walz is even weaker.

 

People that don’t like those things should vote for Trump. People that like those things should vote for Harris.

 

But no, Trump can't win, 

5 minutes ago, Yellowtail said:

But no, Trump can't win, 

At least you understand this key point. 
 

But nobody needs the media to conclude that Trump is a racist, fascist, misogynist, criminal, malignant narcissist, sex offender, and a want to be dictator. He's already personally said things about himself publicly to support all of these conclusions, that's in addition to him already having been found guilty of 34 criminal/felony charges. 
 

But either way, Trump will most likely lose, and then whatever he thinks or says, or what anyone else thinks or says about him, will all instantly become moot. 

They know they can't win at the polls, so it's on to Stolen Election 2024, which they are touting even before Election Day; he did the same thing in 2016, and for some reason the media did not call him on it after he won the electoral, there was no "so the rigging you were talking about in late October was in your favor?"

 

We will know soon enough, anything.is possible, 

5 hours ago, RSD1 said:

The following list of 20 individuals includes a wide spectrum of voices from politics, academia, and media, many of whom accurately predicted Trump’s win in 2016 (against many who doubted them) but now they all express concerns about Trump's viability in winning in 2024. The first three people on the list, along with many others, predict an outright loss for Trump in the upcoming November election. Can one truly believe that they all have it wrong this time?

 

1. Bill Maher – Comedian and political commentator

2. Allan Lichtman – Historian known for presidential prediction model

3. Michael Moore – Filmmaker and political activist

4. David Axelrod – Former Obama advisor and political strategist

5. Frank Luntz – Republican pollster and strategist

6. Tony Fabrizio – Trump’s 2016 campaign pollster

7. Rick Santorum – Former Republican senator and conservative commentator

8. Lindsey Graham – Republican senator and longtime Trump ally

9. Mitch McConnell – Senate Minority Leader and Republican strategist

10. Karl Rove – GOP strategist and former Bush advisor

11. Michael Steele – Former RNC chairman and political analyst

12. George Conway – Conservative lawyer and co-founder of The Lincoln Project

13. Sarah Longwell – Republican strategist and anti-Trump advocate

14. Jon Meacham – Historian and presidential biographer

15. Larry Sabato – Political analyst and director of UVA Center for Politics

16. Stuart Stevens – Former GOP strategist and Lincoln Project senior advisor

17. Norm Ornstein – Political scientist and American Enterprise Institute scholar

18. Charlie Sykes – Conservative commentator and founder of The Bulwark

19. Thomas Friedman – New York Times columnist and political analyst

20. Jennifer Rubin – Conservative political columnist for The Washington Post

The overwhelmingly vast majority of voters don't even know who most of those  people are. Most are them are partisan rogues , RINO's and grifters making a buck off Trump hate. None would be considered credible voices other than to a small targeted audience of political talking heads and those who routinely follow politics 

After pussygate I thought Trump was going to lose for sure. I was surprised, though happy when he did win.

 

There hasn't even been an October surprise, except for the pathetic fail by Kelly.

I don't know who will win, but I hope that she loses.

2 hours ago, nattaya09 said:

The overwhelmingly vast majority of voters don't even know who most of those  people are. Most are them are partisan rogues , RINO's and grifters making a buck off Trump hate. None would be considered credible voices other than to a small targeted audience of political talking heads and those who routinely follow politics 

That’s not the point nor the question. It matters none what their political beliefs are or whether you think they have a financial incentive or not. Most of these individuals simply predicted that Trump would win in 2016, and they were correct. Now, most of them are predicting that Trump will lose in 2024. And there are people like Lichtman, Luntz, Moore, and Maher who have no skin in the game are often very accurate in their election predictions. The question is, are they all going to suddenly be wrong this time?

 

2 minutes ago, thaibeachlovers said:

After pussygate I thought Trump was going to lose for sure. I was surprised, though happy when he did win.

 

There hasn't even been an October surprise, except for the pathetic fail by Kelly.

I don't know who will win, but I hope that she loses.

Yeah, well, you now have Puerto Rico gate with just 8 days left. And according to Lichtman, any of the October Surprises over the last 40 years have never had any impact on the outcome of his September predictions anyway. So the October Surprise is a nothing burger if you follow Lichtman's scientific methodology of predicting the winner 2 months prior to every election using his 13 keys to the White House. 

5 minutes ago, RSD1 said:

Yeah, well, you now have Puerto Rico gate with just 8 days left. And according to Lichtman, any of the October Surprises over the last 40 years have never had any impact on the outcome of his September predictions anyway. So the October Surprise is a nothing burger if you follow Lichtman's scientific methodology of predicting the winner 2 months prior to every election using his 13 keys to the White House. 

Trump didn't say any of it.

Your desperation is showing.

 

No idea who Lichman is or why I should care about his opinion, unless he has a working crystal ball.

12 minutes ago, RSD1 said:

That’s not the point nor the question. It matters none what their political beliefs are or whether you think they have a financial incentive or not. Most of these individuals simply predicted that Trump would win in 2016, and they were correct. Now, most of them are predicting that Trump will lose in 2024. And there are people like Lichtman, Luntz, Moore, and Maher who have no skin in the game are often very accurate in their election predictions. The question is, are they all going to suddenly be wrong this time?

 

I don't care who they are or what they predicted in the past. Unless they have a working crystal ball they are just making an educated guess.

Just now, thaibeachlovers said:

Trump didn't say any of it.

Your desperation is showing.

 

No idea who Lichman is or why I should care about his opinion, unless he has a working crystal ball.

You're the one who is desperate by ignoring facts. And you don't even know who Lichtman is? I'm just wasting my time by responding to your baseless babble. We are done here. 

16 minutes ago, thaibeachlovers said:

No idea who Lichman is or why I should care about his opinion, unless he has a working crystal ball.

After watching the following video you might be able to speak more intelligently on the subject the next time. He takes a scientific approach. No crystal balls. And in 40 years, he's never been wrong.

 

 

 

1 hour ago, thaibeachlovers said:

Trump didn't say any of it.

Your desperation is showing.

 

No idea who Lichman is or why I should care about his opinion, unless he has a working crystal ball.

 

"Hey...Some random comedian made a Puerto Rico joke .....We got Trump this time for sure!!!"

Trump is losing Pennsylvania by 400,000 votes, so far. It's hard to win the general election if Pennsylvania is gone.

4 hours ago, Danderman123 said:

Trump is losing Pennsylvania by 400,000 votes, so far. It's hard to win the general election if Pennsylvania is gone.

No, I don't believe Trump can win. Almost any other Republican could have sailed through the campaign to victory. But it had to be Trump.

46 minutes ago, morrobay said:

These are some hard numbers to ignore...

 

Plus the trend has been one way for the past month.  Harris is obviously scared, otherwise she would campaign on her policies and not on simply attacking her opponent.

41 minutes ago, John Drake said:

No, I don't believe Trump can win. 

You just keep telling yourself that.

1 hour ago, morrobay said:

You just keep telling yourself that.

 

Honestly, I don't think we will see people break towards one candidate or the other until the very last couple of days.

2 hours ago, morrobay said:

Tell you what, I will post voting data, and you can post polls.

2 hours ago, Hanaguma said:

These are some hard numbers to ignore...

 

Plus the trend has been one way for the past month.  Harris is obviously scared, otherwise she would campaign on her policies and not on simply attacking her opponent.

Easy to ignore polls with such a large margin or error.

 

You are trying to convince yourself that Trump will win. Good luck with that.

 

Actual voting data indicates that Harris has 270 Electoral votes in hand.

1 hour ago, Danderman123 said:

Easy to ignore polls with such a large margin or error.

 

You are trying to convince yourself that Trump will win. Good luck with that.

 

Actual voting data indicates that Harris has 270 Electoral votes in hand.

Problem with voting data is that it does not indicate the motivation of the voters. They could be new and eager voters for their side, or they could just be voting early to avoid stress on voting day.  That is why trends and polls tend to tell a better story, especially when seen over a length of time. 

Indeed like the popular vote. It seems getting close to Hail Mary time on the left. 

https://notthebee.com/article/cnn-trump-has-a-real-shot-at-being-the-first-republican-in-20-years-to-win-the-popular-vote

1 hour ago, Hanaguma said:

Problem with voting data is that it does not indicate the motivation of the voters. They could be new and eager voters for their side, or they could just be voting early to avoid stress on voting day.  That is why trends and polls tend to tell a better story, especially when seen over a length of time. 

You seem disconnected from reality.

 

What you seem to be saying is ignore the vote count and focus on the polls. I can't believe that you believe that.

45 minutes ago, morrobay said:

Indeed like the popular vote. It seems getting close to Hail Mary time on the left. 

https://notthebee.com/article/cnn-trump-has-a-real-shot-at-being-the-first-republican-in-20-years-to-win-the-popular-vote

You know that the popular vote is irrelevant. What counts is the Electoral College, and the necessary 270 votes.

 

Harris needs to win PA, MI, WI and NE-2 to get 270 electoral votes.

 

Tell me how she loses those 3 states, and you have an argument. Otherwise, Trump is finished.

 

 

Sure he can win.

Doesn't mean he will win.

He certainly has better chances than Walter Mondale did, yuck yuck. 

1 minute ago, Danderman123 said:

You know that the popular vote is irrelevant. What counts is the Electoral College, and the necessary 270 votes.

 

Harris needs to win PA, MI, WI and NE-2 to get 270 electoral votes.

 

Tell me how she loses those 3 states, and you have an argument. Otherwise, Trump is finished.

 

 

Yes Harris needs all 3: PA, MI, WI. And Trump needs to win just one of those states for 270+

1 minute ago, morrobay said:

Yes Harris needs all 3: PA, MI, WI. And Trump needs to win just one of those states for 270+

Nope. 

 

Your math is very questionable. Trump needs to win a bunch of states to win the election, and if Pennsylvania is gone, his path virtually disappears.

 

Why do you think you're not getting any talking points about early voting?

 

 

I’m quietly confident that he will win……not necessarily via the ballot box though,

 

It is staggering that a so called 'educated the nation' could end up with such a totally unhinged, despicable character as their president.