Donald Trump is going to win the election, America’s top analyst Nate Silver has said. The Telegraph has more.
Nate Silver, the prominent statistician and writer, has said that his “gut” tells him the Republican candidate will be returned to the White House on November 5th.
“My gut says Donald Trump. And my guess is that it is true for many anxious Democrats,” he wrote in the New York Times.
His prediction comes amid growing fears among Democrats that the race is slipping away from Kamala Harris. One strategist said the party should not be feeling even “slightly optimistic” about the Vice-President’s prospects.
Mr. Silver, 46, has forecast the outcome of most U.S. elections over the past decade and a half and is one of the only polling experts to have predicted Trump’s victory in 2016. …
The polling guru dismissed the notion that “shy” Trump voters, those that don’t vocally support him but do privately, will swing the election for the former Republican President.
Instead he said pollsters were failing to reach Trump voters, therefore underestimating the true scale of his support.
“The likely problem is what pollsters call nonresponse bias. It’s not that Trump voters are lying to pollsters; it’s that in 2016 and 2020, pollsters weren’t reaching enough of them,” he said.
Democrat campaign strategists are now privately admitting that Ms Harris is losing ground to Trump in the polls, particularly in Wisconsin and Michigan, as election day looms.
Worth reading in full.
To join in with the discussion please make a donation to The Daily Sceptic.
Profanity and abuse will be removed and may lead to a permanent ban.
“They told us the vaccines were safe and effective.”
The “we were only following orders” of the 21st century. It didn’t wash then, it won’t wash now.
Where is the 21st century’s Nürnberg?
Where are the 21st century’s Allies?
Hopefully the early signs of the dam about to break – allied with the Declared International Crisis recently publicised.
Little chance of even starting claims against bigpharma in the UK, but providing there is even a prima facie case of establishing a causal relationship between injury/death and the jab (that said, this will be extremely difficult I fear) there should be no reason why cases cannot be brought against, for example, employers who mandated jabs -ie especially the NHS.
If the dam bursts due to the above, one can reasonably expect even individual medics to be in the frame.
I’d be a little bit worried if I was in a position of responsibility and were still actively encouraging the jab.
Dust off those clinical negligence policies….
What would be required would be some barristers with experience in damages claims, and some doggedly determined solicitors, so as to sue for damages against someone who coerced a victim into taking a risk. They would most likely have to be dealt with in County Courts. As an experienced litigant, in a case against a culprit that caused me a serious injury, I can say that there is no financial cap on the level of a settlement for any kind of injury. It depends on the claimant’s situation and the quality of the preparative work done by the solicitor and the associated experts, so as to persuade the judge as to the level of the settlement to satisfy the court.
It can take a while to deal with, though. The defendant will want to play a long game, especially if no-one really knows how serious the issue really is, and so on. The snag could be if the defendant is bankrupt, or uninsured, perhaps. In the case I mentioned above, the defendant had insurance, and the insurer had to shell out via my solicitor.
There will be plenty in the firing lines and not just Whitty, Valance et al. In the UK a lot of politicians will be staring down a barrel. The excuse of “we were following the science” won’t wash because there was no science and they bloody well knew that from the off.
Well said, HP! Good strong words!
I don’t share your confidence. I don’t think politicians are stupid enough to embark on preaching messages they know full well may turn out to be false, if they thought there was any chance they wouldn’t get away with it. But they know they, individually, will get away with it. All they have to do is mobilize Ofcom, social media and MSM to invoke the almighty power of censorship and they’ve magicked-away any opposition to the Religion of Vaccine!
I can remember watching Neil Oliver’s programme on GBN. There were one or two comms glitches during the programme, but did not interrupt the conversations too much.
It’s probably well understood, but the last statement that he read out at the end of the programme – as shown in the last para above, were obviously on the script to protect GBN against Ofcom’s activities. Watching Neil actually reading it told it’s own story; a picture’s worth a thousand words.
Yes, he finishes the interview with the words “… It says there”, following the Ofcom-mandated script. Paraphrased: “… or so it says.” That was a subtle but obvious hint that he believed not a word he was saying, as was his qualifying pretext comment “I’m obliged to say that…. “
Excess deaths double for Americans aged 35 to 44
https://www.conservativewoman.co.uk/excess-deaths-double-for-americans-aged-35-to-44/
TCW
Yellow Boards By The Road …. for the love of humanity …
Monday 12th September 3pm to 4pm TOMORROW
Yellow Boards
Junction A332 Windsor Rd &
A329 London Road
Ascot SL5 8FE
Wednesday 14th September 11am to 12pm
Yellow Boards
Junction A4 Bath Road &
Pound Lane Sonning
Wokingham RG4 6TB
Thursday 15th September 11am to 12pm
Yellow Boards
Junction B3408 London Road &
Wokingham Road
Bracknell RG42 4FH
Stand in the Park Sundays 10.30am to 11.30am – make friends & keep sane
Wokingham
Howard Palmer Gardens Sturges Rd RG40 2HD
Bracknell
South Hill Park, Rear Lawn, RG12 7PA
Telegram http://t.me/astandintheparkbracknell
Just why did you think the manufacturers demanded and were given indemnity?
I had a conversation with an old friend a couple of months ago about the safety of the Covid therapies. He’s an intelligent man; retired now but used to have a big job in the City. He was extremely amused by the idea that health agencies would cover up evidence of harms from the innoculations. I was clearly a nut-job in his eyes.
And yet it’s only GB news that is covering this. Not even the Israel media is prepared to touch it. I am not sure anything is going to make them.
When speaking to people like your friend, perhaps we need a different approach.
Remove the situation from your immediate environment, for example. Point out that in many other countries mortality is excess/elevated, with no explanation. Point out that it is established fact and discussed in the MSM in the Netherlands that there has been excess/elevated mortality for the last 6 months (this does not take account of the excess mortality of last autumn, which prompted a parliamentary enquiry). The health authorities admit to the sustained higher deaths, but claim to have no clue. Surely your friend can understand that if health authorities have no clue, it is incumbent upon them to get a clue? That is, after all, their jobs. Perhaps rather than you saying it is the vaxx, you could ask your friend to explain why the Dutch health authorities refuse to investigate these deaths, knowing that many people suspect a connection with the vaxx. If they know for certain that it is not the vaxx, they must be able to prove it, right? That would shut up the ‘nut-jobs’. If they really have no clue, then they cannot categorically state it is not the vaxx and before they stab any more people, they must investigate, surely your friend could not find that an unreasonable argument?
Also ask him to engage in a little ‘what iffery’ – let us suppose the health authorities, politicians, pharma companies really, truly believed the vaxx would save the day and really, truly believed it was ‘safe and effective’ and genuinely believed none of the millions of people jabbed would suffer any serious or long-term effects. Doubts have been raised all along, before roll-out, in the first stage of roll-out, after the vaxxes failed to stop infection, after people were told they needed a 3rd shot, then a 4th shot. They never wavered, but now they realise that they were wrong and that they should have slowed things down when serious doubts were first raised (e.g. the myocarditis link which was discovered in March 2021, a 3rd stab without any trials as to what benefit this would have). Ask your friend what he thinks authorities would do – just say ‘oops, we made a mistake, we lied about what we knew, we lied and refused to investigate serious side-effects, we coerced, bullied and shamed you into something about which you had doubts – soz, better luck next time’?
That is the dilemma those who pushed this stuff, even though they genuinely may have believed in its positive effects, are now facing. Add to that the fact that there may still be longer-term effects we (and they) know nothing about, with millions of people walking around with great concerns about dropping dead or not waking up – who in their right mind would want to confess to that?
It is hilariously ironic that Neil has to say that bit at the end about NHS’s claim of “safe and effective” when the very conversation he has just had offers the best proof to date that they are not!
The reason it’s not news in the mainstream papers / broadcast outlets (aside from being too busy with the royal coverage), is the same reason the Israeli MOH is shy with this information: All the MSM have, along with governments around the world, been complicit in hailing the vaccines as a miracle cure, constantly parroting the “safe and effective” mantra, so the knee-jerk response is to prefer to double-down on the previous vaccine rhetoric than to admit false reporting, opening themselves up to lawsuits and liability issues in just the same way as the Israeli ministry. The NHS, given this crucial update, will likely keep it veiled too, also for the same reason, since in all it’s vaccine literature they seemed so “sure” about this issue!