The Horserace – November 1, 2016

November 1, 2016 Hunter Wallace Politics 28

National Tracking Polls

LA Times – Trump +3.6
People’s Pundit Daily – Trump +2.4
UPI/Cvoter – Hillary +1
ABC Tracking – Hillary +1 (2-way), Trump +1 (4-way)
IBD/TIPP – Hillary +0.8 (2-way), Hillary +0.9 (4-way)
Rasmussen – Tie (4-way)
Reuters/Ipsos – Hillary +5 (2-way)
National Red Oak Strategic – Tie (4-way)
NOLA/Lucid – Hillary +2

State Polls

Arizona – Data Orbital – Trump +4 (3-way)

Texas – KTVT – Trump +13 (3-way)

Missouri – Monmouth – Trump +14 (2-way)

Maine – Emerson – Hillary +4 (4-way)
Maine 2nd District – Emerson – Hillary +2 (4-way)
Maine – MPRC – Hillary +5 (4-way)
Maine 2nd District – MPRC – Trump +3 (4-way)

North Carolina – Elon – Hillary +0.8 (4-way)
North Carolina – SurveyUSA – Trump +7

Virginia – Emerson – Hillary +4 (4-way)
Virginia – Washington Post – Hillary +6 (4-way)

Michigan – FOX 2 Detroit – Hillary +6 (4-way)

New Hampshire – WMUR – Hillary +7 (4-way)

Pennsylvania – Franklin & Marshall – Hillary +11 (4-way)

Illinois – Emerson – Hillary +4 (4-way)

Note: The state polls popping in Indiana, Missouri, Georgia, Texas and Arizona show unambiguously that the electoral map is shifting toward Trump.

About Hunter Wallace 12392 Articles
Founder and Editor-in-Chief of Occidental Dissent

28 Comments

  1. An MSM article this morning admitted a virtual tie. If her media supporters are saying that I conclude she’s in bigger trouble than they’ll admit. In 1980 they said too close to call right up until the polls were closing. The rest is history.

  4. So many revolutions or transformations were made possible by foreign affairs.

    Romans over-extended and eventually lost not only their empire but their own core domain(to barbarian hordes).

    The French Monarchy’s greatest triumph also paved to way for its tragic downfall. French Monarchy got deeply involved in the American Revolution and bankrupted itself to defeat the British. It succeeded but soon was brought down by a revolution far more frightening than anything that happened in the British colonies.

    Ottoman Empire fell with the defeat in World War I.

    WWI led to downfall of both German monarchy and Russian monarchy.

    The Tokugawa Dynasty fell from power due to foreign intervention, mainly by Americans and British.

    Without foreign involvement or intervention, a political system can be remarkably stable, resilient, and long-lasting, even if stagnant(or precisely because it is so), oppressive, corrupt, and etc.

    Most political orders are dominated by a few centers. It’s like whatever happens in New York(center of finance and news media), Los Angeles(center of entertainment), Washington D.C.(center of government), and San Francisco(center of high tech) pretty much determines what happens in the rest of the country. A few centers lead and dominate; and all others follow.

    Before the Meiji Revolution, the Tokugawas in Edo(now Tokyo) ruled Japan. Whatever happened there shaped the rest of Japan. It’s like ‘flyover country’ doesn’t matter to those in the centers of American Power. (In a larger sense, whatever happens in Washington DC and New York also defines whatever happens in all the vassal-nations of the US.)

    So, how did the Tokugawa lose its grip? During its long reign, rival clans submitted to Tokuogawa authority and only quietly maintained a degree of independence and autonomy. As long as the Tokugawa Shogunate seemed invincible, the other clans went along. They were fry-obah kantry. But when the Tokugawa order was finally shaken by the arrival of foreign naval power, the rival clans saw an opening. Tokugawa lost its legitimacy in having failed to defend Japan from foreigners. So, the Japanese Revolution, aka Meiji Restoration, was made possible by foreign intervention. Even though the rival clans were just as anti-foreign(possibly even more so) as the Tokugawas, they were empowered by the opportunities presented by crisis brought about by foreign intervention.

    So, for would-be revolutionaries, nothing is as useful as foreign matters. Sometimes, revolution is the product of over-extension of empire or foreign wars. Russian Empire over-extended itself and lost in WWI. Soviet Empire also over-extended and fell.

    In the case of China and Japan, foreign invasions gave an opening to revolutionaries and rebels who’d effectively been suppressed in ideas or power by the ruling elites.

    Without the foreign threat to destabilize the system, the few key centers of power could keep a firm grip on the entire kingdom or state almost permanently. But when foreign matters shake those key centers of power, everything becomes possible.

    The rise of Putin and consolidation of Russian nationalism couldn’t have been possible without the foreign-aided disasters of the 1990s.

    If the Soviet Union collapsed due to foreign pressures of capitalism that created more wealth and power, the Russian order of the 90s collapsed from foreign exploitation via pirate-capitalism.

    Revolution or Reaction, it results when the effective centers of power are shaken. Even though they can be shaken entirely by domestic factors, it is far more likely that the key impact will be supplied by foreign affairs or foreign forces. (Even the social revolutions of the 60s had a much greater impact due to the Vietnam War.)

    Look at North Korea and Cuba. Miserable as those nations are economically, the tight political control of Pyongyang and Havana prevents fundamental change to the system. They keep foreign influences out.

    But in Iraq and Libya, where US was able to remove central authority, everything fell apart. (Gaddafi’s fate was sealed when he got too close with and trusting of Western powers that were secretly using their newfound access to plant the seeds of strife all over Liyba.) And there are powerful forces in the US that wants to see the fall of Assad for the same reason. Now, might not the fall of such leaders pave the way for rise of new even more fearsome and troublesome leaders? After all, the fall of Old Japan led to rise of New Japan that was a threat to Western influence in Asia. And the fall of Imperial Germany eventually led to rise of Nazi Germany.

    But US elites aren’t so worried about such prospect in Middle East and North Africa because the demographics are so different there. When the old order fell in Japan, Japan was still all Japanese, and all these Japanese would be behind the new order, if anything even more so since it gave more voice to the people. Same with Germany and Turkey. Even with the fall of the Kaiserian order, Germany was all Germany and could reconstitute itself into a great German power. And with the demise of the Ottoman Empire, the Turks in Anatolia could rebuild themselves into a united nation-state.

    In contrast, Middle Eastern and North African nations are too diverse. A ‘Libyan’ or ‘Syrian’ has no great historical sense or meaning as identity; they are ‘ancient’ identities long lost to conquests by Arab clans and tribes; they were retroactively reapplied by ‘Orientalist’ Western forces. (It’d be like Chinese conquering Mexico and renaming everyone there — white, mestizo, mulatto, indigenes, etc — as ‘Azteca’.) So, if the center of power is destabilized in MENA, division and distrust will prevent the rise of a new unified order. Iraq can never be put together again. Same with Libya, and same with parts of Syria.

    This may seem like a great triumph for the globalist forces in the US, but it has a destabilizing impact on the West as well. All those ‘refugees’ unloosed by wars and crisis in Middle East and North Africa have sent shockwaves throughout Europe, and this may lead to the rise of ‘far right’ politics. Merkel’s government has been weakened by the fateful decision to bring in all these foreigners. Again, foreign forces are making revolutionary conditions possible. Revolutionary conditions that were once thought of as unthinkable have become thinkable due to these massive foreign invasions.

    And Trump wouldn’t have a campaign if not against globalism that opposes the invade-invite strategy of the globalists who expend too much of America’s resources on foreign wars & intervention and undermine the American electorate with massive infusions of immigrants who will fundamentally change the character of the nation.

    Win or lose, Trump’s candidacy heralds a new kind of politics in America: Racial Reaction-Revolutionary Politics. Whites are beginning to think, “If the globalist elites who rule over us bring in all these non-whites and encourage their tribal pride and anti-white animus, why shouldn’t we whites recover and reignite our racial identity and pride?”

    Foreign Forces are the main impetus to revolution, reaction, and/or transformation.

    Foreign Influence/Intervention inspires revolutionary release or ignites reactionary resistance. Sometimes, the two, revolution and reaction, are fused into one, as in Vietnam when Revolutionary Communists waged a reactionary-nationalist war against the foreign French and Americans.

    Foreign Forces are the fire that makes the forging of the new order possible. The smart revolutionary or reactionary uses this fire carefully and sensibly, as Kemal Ataturk did in exploiting foreign crisis to create modern Turkey.

    But the dumb, reckless, or crazy revolutionary or reactionary uses this fire stupidly and gets burned in the process, like Hitler and Tojo in WWII.

    American Reaction-Revolutionaries need to look to Choshu and Satsuma clans when Tokugawa rule was shaken to the core by foreign powers. Even though Choshu and Satsuma forces were just as ‘xenophobic'(if not more so) as the Tokugawas, they could not have moved against the Tokugawas if not for foreign intervention of Americans and British. It wasn’t isolated domestic uprising that drove Tokugawas out of power. As long as Japan was isolated, the key centers of power had a tight grip on everything. It was foreign forces that diminished the power of Tokugawa Dynasty, and that gave an opening to the other clans whose aspirations had long been suppressed. Even so, the coming transformation of Japan was so huge that it went far beyond the domination by the new clan as the new boss. Even the new rulers were subsumed by transformations that overtook every corner of society and gave opportunity for success and achievement to any individual in the nation.

    Now, US is very different from Tokugawa Japan in this sense: Whereas Tokugawas were threatened by a power far greater than itself, US is the most powerful nation on earth. If anything, it is in the business of threatening and destroying other nations.

    But there are many contradictions in America that may make this kind of globo-imperialism ever more risky for the powers-that-be. For starters, the American conservatives and the Right, traditionally the most supportive of the US military, are moving into anti-war position, much like between WWI and WWII. They no longer see the US-homo-and-female-and-diverse-military as their own. And they no longer identify with the Neocon interests that say white Americans should kill white Russians. So, there is a contradiction on the Right.

    But there are also many contradictions on the so-called Left. Democratic Party is supposed to be ‘progressive’ and dove-ish, but it is now led by the most hawkish person since who knows when. It is into saber-rattling, and etc., and this makes many progs feel uneasy, even queasy. Even though Progs support Hillary as ‘lesser of two evils’, the fact is she is by far the greater evil even by the basic standards of leftist politics. Her policy is that of a foreign imperialist warmonger, and her brand of anti-Russian paranoia makes Joe McCarthy seen like Eugene McCarthy. So far, globalism has morally justified US globalist power on the basis of spreading homomania — just like Western Imperialists morally justified past aggression on the promise of spreading the light of God and Jesus. Western Imperialism once hid behind the notion of Saving Souls; today, it hides behind the fruity crusade or fruitsade of Poofting Holes. This has been effective in getting the progs onboard, but it is also fraught with dangers. Once people began to realize that homomania is really a cynical tool for neo-imperialism, globalism will lose its moral advantage and justification. Today’s progs feel it was wrong for the West to invoke Christianity to conquer and dominate other peoples. So, they will feel shame once they realize that they do exactly the same thing today, the only difference being that their imperialist and aggressive religion is homomania.

    Once, there was a time when ‘democracy’ was a rare commodity in the world, and that alone made the West appealing to much of humanity. The West stood for democracy, the Soviets stood for communist repression, and Third World stood for dictatorship. But democracy has spread all over the world. Most Latin American nations are democratic(and oftentimes, democracy leads to anti-Americanism, as with Duterte in Philippines). Even Iran has elections, and Russia is nominally a democracy too. So, invoking ‘democracy’ hardly makes the US and the West seem so special anymore. For the US and West to seem more special and ‘more evolved’ than others, it needs a new theme, and it’s been ‘diversity is our strength’ and homomania. (Granted the main appeal of the West today is material wealth than moral themes. People would be flocking to the US even if it had no elections cuz they just want a better material life. Americanism has thus become totally crass.) Diversity is both appealing and unappealing to the world. Many people suffer because they have too much diversity in their own nations, and if anything, they want to move to the West cuz of its relative lack of diversity. Even with rising diversity in Canada, Europe, Australia, and US, they are less diverse than messy Latin America, messy Middle East, and messy India(where there are so many ethnic groups who can’t stand one another). Diversity is appealing to non-whites to the extent that white nations will accept them as immigrants. But their main reason of moving to the West is to live with large numbers of ‘superior’ whites who run a better system than diverse morons in their own nations. After all, Somalis would rather move to a part of America that is very white than to another African nation or part of US that is overrun by Mexicans, Hindus, Chinese, and Negroes.

    As for homomania, this is making the US and EU look dumber and trashier, what with the face of ‘human rights’ in America being some guy in women’s dress using the ladies room. This tranny business also undermines the politics of victimology. Progs say, in the name of feminism, that women need to be protected from stronger men who often abuse women… but now, a big guy in a dress is seen as a victim of ‘exclusive’ women who don’t want to share washrooms with cinderfellas. There is something sick and demented about globalism when Hillary attacks both ‘Islamophobia’ and ‘homophobia’. She’s with both those who throw homos off the roof and those who love to find someone to boof.

    If America’s foreign policy falls into total shambles, it might threaten the globalist project as well, and that will shake American domestic politics, and that may lead to change. America has become so globo-imperial that the fall of globalism will be like an octopus with tentacles cut off. It wouldn’t know what to do.

    Wittingly or unwittingly, foreign forces are the best collaborators for revolution, neo-reaction, or transformation.

  5. I’ve been dwelling on this KGB conspiracy stuff coming from the dems, mostly because it’s funny as hell. Seems like there’s a big logic trap right in the middle of it all…

    If the Russians are trying to sway the election by hacking and releasing emails, they only follow through with the release if there is genuinely damning evidence in the emails. If it’s all just junk about yoga lessons and wedding plans, then why take the diplomatic risk of exposing the hack? Same if it’s a bunch of smoke but no fire.

    So Dems, pick at least one of these options:

    1. The emails contain genuine damning evidence regarding Clinton; or
    2. The Russians aren’t involved

  6. It’s good to remain hopeful. I expect to win. The national polls only show general trends; the state polls are what’s important. It is 51 elections, not a national popular vote.

    Don’t forget the massive demographic changes over the past decades (Reagan’s electorate was 80% white, now it’s ~62% white) through immigration/ ThirdWorldization. Don’t ignore the incredible tolerance of corruption exhibited time and time again by Democrats.

    • He will win the popular vote but I dont see the electoral college math coming together. It’s insanely narrow. Like walking a tight rope.

      • If he keeps all the Romney states and adds OH, FL and IA as seems likely, he’ll be at around 260. Adding MI, WI, or PA does it. ( I figure VA is too corrupt, but that works, too.) A mixture of NH, ME and NV does it. CO is in play.

  7. Now that we’re getting to crunch time people are coming to their senses.

    “I don’t really want to vote for the corrupt, psychopath who wants to start WW3. I only said that so people wouldn’t think I’m ray ciss.”

    • You’d better hope Nate Silver’s not delusional right now, Sam–because he’s giving Trump about a 29% chance of winning. Sam Wang’s Princeton Election Consortium, by comparison, gives Clinton a virtual lock, namely, a 97% or 99% chance of winning.

      PS Not sure Nate Silver was wrong in that tweet, by the way. It depends what Manafort and he meant. Yes, Cruz and Kasich dropped out near the beginning of May, but not until the near-end of that month did Trump gain the 1,237 delegates he needed for the nomination.

      • Donald Trump: Presumptive GOP nominee; Sanders takes Indiana
        By Stephen Collinson, CNN
        Wed May 4, 2016

        http://www.cnn.com/2016/05/03/politics/indiana-primary-highlights/

        (CNN)Donald Trump is the presumptive Republican presidential nominee following a decisive victory in the Indiana primary and the decision by Ted Cruz to drop out of the race.

        Though Trump has not formally secured the 1,237 delegates he needs to win the nomination — and likely won’t until June — there is no serious opposition left to block his path. -end-

        Trump reached the target date of being the PRESUMPTIVE nominee even sooner than predicted by Manafort. He formally secured the 1237 number May 26.

        Silver was wrong.

        • No–as I said, Sam, it depends on what Manafort and Silver meant. It’s possible both of them were talking about the point at which Trump would be the presumptive nominee in the strict sense, i.e., the point at which he would have the 1,237 delegates. In the headline and text of the CNN article you linked, “presumptive” is being used more loosely, as it was sometimes used during the primary season, to mean something like “inevitable.” That’s fine–but as I say, it doesn’t clarify the accuracy of Nate Silver’s tweet.

        • PS At the following link, Sam, is an article that seems to support your use of the term “presumptive nominee” …

          https://newrepublic.com/article/133223/makes-presidential-nominee-presumptive

          The article includes the following:

          “Generally, it appears that a candidate is considered his party’s presumptive nominee when his last serious challenger drops out or he mathematically clinches—whichever comes first.”
          That shows I was mistaken in thinking the term has a strict sense, in which it isn’t applied until the necessary delegate-number is reached.

          That still doesn’t mean, I would add, that Silver’s math was wrong. It’s possible Silver was taking “presumptive nominee” in the supposedly strict sense in which I took it, even if that’s not a correct way to understand the term.

  11. My, oh my. Apparently, Ryan knows something about GOP internal polls and is repositioning himself.

    FOX & Friends ?@foxandfriends
    .@SpeakerRyan: I voted for Donald Trump last week in early voting.

Comments are closed.