You can thank me or curse me, depending on your political persuasion. But I am taking full credit — or blame — for the outcome of the presidential election.
Regular visitors to this Saturday space may recall that this past Aug. 3rd, I made a formal and official prediction that Donald Trump would lose the election. “Trump is toast,” to quote myself.
That conclusion was based on his losing record since he won in 2016, his continued insistence on appealing to his base rather than moderate his behavior in order to appeal to the critical swing voters and his inability to not be himself — “himself” being an abrasive, boorish, crass and often profane jerk. To be succinct. And, by comparison, polite.
“Meanwhile, Kamala Harris will utilize her relative youth and the perception of a fresh approach,” I continued. “Her ‘We can’t go back’ line has a nice forward-sounding ring to it that will appeal to those swing voters … unless of course, they actually think about what they might be able to go back to. Like a controlled border, low inflation, energy independence, coercion on what kind of car or stove to buy and a world in less turmoil. But I’m betting they won’t.”
You may also recall that I prefaced this prediction with a review of my stock-picking and sports-betting prowess — more accurately, my lack thereof. My curse worked. For better or ill, history will tell us.
But one must understand that I had to be sincere in my prediction. Speaking from experience, a contrary prediction solely to get my team to win or my stock pick to work simply doesn’t work. I sincerely expected Trump to lose up until the first returns came in from Georgia and New York, one of which showed Trump with a definite lead and the other displayed him losing but by a far narrower margin than four years ago.
As mentioned before, I am a fan of George Will’s talent in getting to the core of issues and how he words it. We published what I think are among his all-time best efforts last week: his final pre-election wrap-up (“The worst presidential choice in U.S. history”) and his post-election summary, “ Republican self-degradation” and “Democratic self-sabotage” being a part of that headline. If you did not read them, I recommend going back through our e-editions to last week’s Tuesday and Thursday opinion pages. But I digress.
My prediction’s one caveat, that Trump could only win if he stopped being Trump, was equally wrong. Trump continued to be Trump. Swing voters, I felt, were already experiencing “Trump fatigue” and would, by Nov. 5, have “Trump exhaustion.”
At one of his final rallies, he not only pointed to the bank of reporters as “the fake news,” but said “To get me, somebody would have to shoot through the fake news. And I don’t mind that so much. I don’t mind that.” Exhausting.
But despite the numerous and too-often onerous flaws of this person, swing voters in (I think) every state looked at the last four years of inflation, open borders, world chaos and far-left cultural weirdness, and then looked at the annointed — as opposed to elected — candidate to carry that torch, and said “no, thanks.” Frankly, that gives me new hope for our country. Which is not be interpreted as an endorsement of the alternative. And I would maintain that a not insignificant portion of those swing voters don’t either.
I don’t mind being wrong. Am I glad I was wrong? You will hear no predictions on that bet. Some of his proposed nominations to his cabinet are worrisome — terrible, to be succinct. The final result, methinks, will rest on who the Senate confirms and on how many of Trump’s imprudent promises — tariffs, for instance, and no taxes on tips and Social Security — will have the same fate as the “Mexico will pay for the wall” promise.
Meanwhile, on the local front, our usual post-election analysis of the returns found no particular surprises, except perhaps for the margins of victory in the two contested school board races. Neither was close.
And Wells County has swing voters as well. While there was no question that the Republican candidate, no matter who that might be, would win the most local votes, those who voted for the Democratic candidate decreased this year versus 2020 (which had increased from 2016) while the Republican candidate saw an increase. Not a lot, but it is consistent with what happened across the country.
Who saw that coming? Obviously, not me. You’re welcome. Or not.
miller@news-banner.com
