REGIME SCRAMBLES MSM TO SMEAR TRUMP OVER ARLINGTON VISIT WHILE KAMALA STAYED HOME
49:01 Share

I want to take a second to remind you to sign up for the post. So daily brief, it is completely free. It'll be one email that's sent to you every day. You can stop the endless scrolling, trying to find out what's going on in your world. We will have this delivered directly to you totally for free. Go to human events.com slash post. So sign up today. It's called the post. So daily brief, read what I read for show prep.

you will not regret it. humanevents.com/pozo, totally free, the Pozo Daily Brief. - Tonight for the first time, the DEA confirms they are looking into criminal activity allegedly committed by a Venezuelan gang. - The Tren de Aragua gang has been labeled by the White House as a transnational criminal organization. In a statement obtained by Denver 7 Investigates,

The DEA says agents have seized multi-kilogram quantities of fentanyl destined for the Denver metro area from individuals believed to be members and or associates of the gang. Overnight, the Israeli military says it killed five more militants as they continue their largest raid on the occupied West Bank in two decades. Among those killed, a local militant commander who was the mastermind of several attacks against Israel. One Kamala Harris policy getting more attention these days is the proportionality

proposal to tax unrealized gains. This is when people get taxed over investment gains that only exist on paper. The Harris-Walls ticket proposing a 25 percent tax on unrealized capital gains. And the Supreme Court has now rejected a request from the Biden administration to restore a student debt plan. The multi-billion dollar plan that would have lowered payments for millions of borrowers was rebuffed by justices. This comes as the education department works to create a

faster strategy to reduce income-based payments and provide loan cancellation. New details on an altercation involving Donald Trump's team at Arlington National Cemetery. This is someone who, according to his own former chief of staff, said Americans who died in war are, quote, suckers and losers. Apparently, this visit turned into some kind of physical incident. Is he politicizing these soldiers' deaths? Should he even be at Arlington National Cemetery if he's going to

make some politics out of this. Donald Trump is a person who wants to make everything all about Donald Trump. Well, ladies and gentlemen, welcome aboard to today's edition of Human Events Daily live from Washington, D.C. Today's August 29th, 2024. I know, Domini. Section 60 of Arlington.

Section 60 of Arlington is an honored place. It is hallowed ground, of course. It is the place where predominantly we've laid to rest the heroes, those who gave their lives in Iraq and Afghanistan. And recently, a few days ago, President Trump honored some of the very last, I believe, you should actually check that out, something to look up, were these the final

deaths in Afghanistan for the US military the 13 honored dead of Abbey Gate and President Trump was the only one who showed up at their memorial service and oh by the way he was invited to do so by the families then in accordance with the family's wishes they asked him to take some photographs with him at the grave of their fallen loved ones he honored their wishes and he did so

By the way, Utah Governor Spencer Cox was also there. Spencer Cox also running for reelection. Kind of interesting how nobody seems to mention the fact that Spencer Cox is also in the middle of an election and yet the media and now the US Army have released a statement attacking President Trump for doing so.

Now, I've watched the videos. I don't see anything there where he's holding up a vote for me in 2024 sign or a slogan or a bumper sticker or a Trump-Vance yard sign and sticking yard signs up on the graves. And if he was doing so, of course we would criticize that because it would be ludicrous. Yet none of that happened. He walked there. He placed three wreaths, the Tomb of the Unknown Soldier. Then he went over to take some photos with the family.

Now the army says that President Trump broke the law, the media says so as well, but that's very interesting to say that he broke some kind of protocol because

well we went back and checked and here it turns out that four years ago joe biden went and also did a ceremony at arlington and oh by the way he went right into section 60 and used some of the footage for political ad that he made about i'll keep in mind that

At the time he had not been elected. The election had not taken place yet. He was a private citizen running for election. He had never been the president. He had been the vice president to be sure.

and yet i don't remember anyone in the military i don't remember the army releasing anything and by the way you can see the 60 on the gravestones right there indicating that it is in fact in section 60 and he used it in a political ad that's quite strange so here we have joe biden doing the exact same thing but keep in mind folks it's not about hypocrisy no no it's hierarchy

We can do it. You can't. And at the end of the day, what they're really upset about is the fact that they didn't do their jobs. And that's why the 13 troops are lying in the ground in Arlington when they should be home with their families. And the only person in this entire country who's trying to do something about that is Donald J. Trump.

Trump because none of you people who are complaining and screaming and smearing President Trump were there with those families were there to say we're very sorry this happened. No, you're sitting there, you're looking at your watches or you're not showing up. I'm sick of this. It's disgusting. You are all demonic and you're going to you have five months left.

Ladies and gentlemen one of the best ways that you can support us here at human events and the work that we do is Subscribing to us on our rumble channel make sure you're subscribed you hit the notifications, so you'll never miss a clip You'll never miss a new live episode, and we're putting them out every single day of the week. They talk about influences these are influences and They're friends of mine Jack. You're so like where's Jack?

He's got a great job. All right, Chaprasobic back live here, Human Events Daily. Folks, let me tell you something. Four years ago, our way of life was turned completely upside down. Think about the timing and how that impacted the economy and our election. Since January now, we have seen the lawfare on an unprecedented scale. Sham trials now and attempted assassinations.

Nothing is stopping us from taking this country back, but it doesn't mean there won't be more surprise. In fact, there will be. Why the globalists keep talking about something called Disease X.

You and your family need to be prepared and that is where the wellness company comes in. The wellness company and their doctors are medical professionals that you can trust. The prescription medical kits are the gold standard when it comes to keeping you safe and healthy. From anthrax to tick bites to COVID to the bird flu, the wellness company's prescription medical kits are exactly what America needs if the unthinkable happens.

Their kids have eight scarce medications on hand, including ivermectin, Z-Pak, and amoxicillin. Fight with confidence, knowing that you have the emergency antibiotics, antivirals, and antiparasites to keep you and your family healthy. How do you get there? Go to TWC.health slash POSO and save $30 off your medical kit with promo code POSO.

Folks, the globalists are getting desperate. They can feel their grip on power slipping away. The world can fall into chaos in an instant. Prepare today. That's TWC.health slash POSO. Get on board. Promo code POSO saves you the $30 off your medical kit right now. I use the wellness company. My family uses them. Your family should too. You're going to love. Fall is coming. School is starting again. Flu season is coming right around. All the diseases, all the germs, everything, the viruses are going to be flying. And you know...

with nine weeks to go to the election anything can happen so someone who else who knows that anything can happen is rich barris the people's pundit rich we've never had an election season like this one what is going on in the numbers

Yeah, we haven't, Jack, and that's a big part of what I've been talking about since they pulled the switcheroo, as Rui called it. Yeah, and then we had an assassination attempt, right? Then we had, before that, we had the country witness a full-blown emperor has no clothes moment. Oh, my God, the media's been lying to us. The president is senile. We've been hit. Oh, and then Robert Kennedy leaves the race in it.

We've been hit with like once in a lifetime stories every two weeks in this political season. And that is something that pollsters aren't explaining to people. And, you know, that can cause a very difficult polling environment. That being said, I don't want to speak too early, but it does look like things like response biases and social bias, which is really form of response bias, are starting to iron out.

I don't know. I don't know yet. I don't want to proclaim that yet. But it does look like that response bias that I'm arguing artificially pumped Harris's numbers for a bit there is beginning to—not beginning. I mean, it is fading. And she didn't get a bounce at all from this convention. Just so people understand, in 2016, our tracking poll, Hillary Clinton got a five-point bounce. Joe Biden got a similar bounce in both cases.

It took about four or five days for the numbers to get baked in after the convention. So all of these people that you heard, you know, doing overnight polls, oh, there's a pop.

Nonsense. That's not how this stuff works. And it took almost two weeks for the entire process to play out for Hillary Clinton. It took 11 days for it to play out for Joe Biden. So now we're kind of just entering that period of where we should expect to see Harris's bump start to fall. Instead, there was no bump at all. So this is bad news for her. Let me ask you about that because

I've always wondered about this, and you and I have sort of chatted about it, but I don't think I've asked you directly. Do media polls, do these public polls, is one of the reasons that they provide these, you know, the horse race numbers is to make it appear as though the media is more important than they actually are? And I'm not saying that things like the debate didn't have an effect, but they want us to think that the day in, day out of watching the media and responding to every little thing that happens is...

has an effect on the electorate but you know honestly i i just don't see it i don't think that the the electorate is that responsive to news cycles i'm not saying that all news doesn't affect i just don't think it's that responsive but i do think that things like the fundamentals that are going on do have the biggest effect so this is probably one of the biggest things though but but let me just you know rather than go super esoteric with it i'll ask is there a i

obviously an incentive that the media has to make things look like a horse race with ups and downs on a regular basis, as opposed to what you're talking about here, these direct trends.

Yeah, I think there are a couple of things that are going on that explain that. One is it's the business model, right? I mean, they want these ups and downs. They want these horse race numbers. When in reality, that's not really how public opinion works, and that's not the reality of an election. And then two is we all like to overinflate our importance, don't we? And then three is that the media is in the bag for one party. Let's get real.

But in the America, you know, from 20, 30 years ago and how it used to conduct an election, it's just not the same anymore. We are now basically a state run media. You know, when it comes to the legacy corporate media, big media apparatus, it is essentially a state run media apparatus. And they want a certain party to win by that being the Democratic Party. So they were looking for any way to exploit that.

the environment to make it appear like Harris is doing better than she is. And they all fall prey, like most of us do, to our own biases and our own search for affirmations of our own ideals and opinions. And that's just not how public opinion works. And in 2016, we actually, it was a very volatile cycle as well, Jack, remember? And then we got hit with the Billy Bush tape in October, and they had the Hillary Clinton email scandal. The truth is,

We conducted an experiment, very different kind of polling, which now people accept and do. 25% to 33% roughly of the entire sample constantly, and it was a three-day rolling average when we got closer to the election, were repeat interviews. It was a very large sample, constantly recruiting, sure, but always 25% to 33% being repeat to try to minimize that response bias and kind of demonstrate to people that these swings are artifacts of the polling itself.

It is not a real swing in voter preference. Do people change their mind? Sure. We're talking about a tiny little slice of the electorate that does that. The rest is about who's going to vote. And that's really what it comes down to. And when you go back and you look at that project, for instance,

I mean, Jack, it was really steady compared to the other public polls and it got trashed back then. But who was right in the end and who was wrong? You know, the ABC News poll started with Hillary Clinton plus 14. By the time we got to the election, it was within the sampling era. Folks, polls don't move like that unless it's a bad quality poll. I don't know how else to explain it where

We're in a very, very difficult environment already when it comes to not everyone has landlines anymore. You know, not everyone answers the cell phone at an equal rate. So we have different modes we have to reach people with. That already is a challenge. But when you add everything else onto it and the media's desire to come up with these first race numbers, it creates a very, very difficult and I would argue fake polling environment. And by fake, I mean just artificial swings.

That's what I mean though. The swings just feel artificial because you go out and talk to regular people out there and it's like, and this is where this myth of the swing voter comes in. I'm not saying that there are people that don't swing. It's just that if you worked in elections long enough and like myself coming from Pennsylvania, I know that there's people out there who say, yeah, I'm going to vote for like...

I understand that there are people who will vote for Fetterman and then also vote for Donald Trump and that there are people who will vote for Bob Casey and will vote for Donald Trump. And with all apologies to Dave McCormick, there are definitely going to be people who vote for Casey and Trump this election. Why?

Because that's just how they are in Pennsylvania. That's just how the state is built. That's how the different constituencies are built out there. But at the same time, those groups of people are not the same. They're swing voters because they're ticket splitters. They're not swing voters sitting there. Oh, maybe this day I'm for Kamala, this day I'm for Trump. It doesn't exist. People don't work like that. No, they don't.

Then, Jack, I was just and just to bring up a good a good example of what you were just talking about. The Mid-Atlantic is a great example of where you will see that. Laura and I were just in the New York, New Jersey area. I told you I couldn't. I was over the moon. I got to go back to a Wawa. Thank God. And yeah, so. Whoa, whoa. Is that a Wawa check, Rich? Is that a Wawa check? The classic logo. Note the classic logo. OK, the classic logo. Yeah.

That's the OG right there. Yeah, I was stunned to see they changed their branding. I like the old classic one. But we're in areas in northern New Jersey and then, you know, which are working class, old Democratic areas and that border on with. Yeah, that border along with working class areas in New York, all the way from like, you know, a little bit bougier Pearl River, you know, and we're looking at these Democratic areas.

They're old school Italians, Irish, Polish neighborhoods. You know, now they're certainly Hispanic. And there are big red and white Trump or bus signs all over these neighborhoods. And guess what's sitting next to those signs? The sign for the Democratic congressman or the, you know, for the Democratic. Yes. Yes. That is exactly what happened. They were everywhere, everywhere. So, you know, Paramus, you know, Paramus, New Jersey. It's not here. Here's what people have to understand. Let me let me put it this way for folks who are.

For folks who want to understand the difference, is that people in the Rust Belt, for whatever reason, and we could get into the philosophy of it, but for whatever reason, it's not necessarily – people are not as identified with one party. The partisanship isn't as high in these areas. What you have instead is more, do I like this person?

And if I like this person, then I'm for him and I'm all the way for him. Is this person working for me? And so that's why you'll see. Right. Do they care about me? And that's that's all it comes down to. So this is why this is why, by the way, the GOP was totally losing this entire region until Donald Trump came around. Coming up on a quick break. But people have to understand there's a major difference between

the rust belt and the sun belt if you don't understand sun belt is more partisan the sun belt's going to have that partisanship more the the rust belt does not have it you have to campaign to the man you have to campaign to the it's a man defense man defense not zone in the rust belt we'll explain more when we come back with rich barris i rolled with bloods and them boys had a saying

You can't be listening to all that slappy, whack, trim out his alitzabam ship, nippy bam bam, like Human Events with Jack Posobiec. All right, Jack Posobiec back live, Human Events Daily, Washington, D.C. Folks, the world is in flames.

Kamala Harris, she's a complete and total disaster. But it cannot and will not ruin my day. Do you know why? It's because I start my day with a hot America first cup of blackout coffee. Blackout coffee, 100% America. Blackout coffee, 100% committed to conservative values. From sourcing the beans to the roasting process, customer support and shipping, they embody true American values and accept no compromise on taste or taste.

or quality. Look, I love this stuff. You guys are going to love it too. They just gave me the Blackout Coffee cold brew, multiple flavors. We love this stuff. You're going to love it too. They're family owned and they support American values. So go to blackoutcoffee.com/poso and use promo code POSO20 for 20% off your first order. Again, remember that's blackoutcoffee.com/poso.

Back to School is just around the corner. It's never too soon to give mom and those close to your heart the gift of being awake, not woke, with Blackout Coffee. That's blackoutcoffee.com slash poso. Rich Barris.

Got to ask you, man, your boy Nate Silver, you've got a different name for him, but your boy Nate Silver is out today, and his forecast seems, I got to say, it seems all right to me. It seems kind of accurate. He's saying Trump 52, Harris 47. He gives a slight edge to Trump, says it's close.

Has Trump up. And hold on, hold on. So I'll go through. He has Trump up in PA, Nevada, Arizona, Georgia, North Carolina, Georgia.

Harris up in Wisconsin and Michigan, but he's got PA, Wisconsin and Michigan. They're all they're all pretty close. Michigan, probably the furthest split there. And he added something saying that we haven't seen a lot of high quality polls with Kamala Harris in the lead in Pennsylvania in a while. And I'm looking at it saying, you know, that 50 50, basically, that's kind of how I see the election. That's how I read things. Rich, what's going on? Because, you know, Nate's not usually this good to us.

Let me just say this. Good, I mean accurate, by the way. When I say good, I mean accurate. The guy is a scam artist, Jack. The guy is a scam artist. He is a failed sports handicapper who has turned into a failed election forecaster who was fired from his own website because he's been bleeding in the red six to eight mil a year since it started. The problem with citing Nate Silver is that he's going to scam you.

OK, so you're citing it now. And then in a week from now, when he has Harris up again, he's going to take he's he's scamming credibility from everybody right now. That's what he's doing. All right. He's what he and listen to what he said in these tweets. When he when he puts out the post that his model has changed, he essentially attempts to explain away some weird thing that's going on that has given Trump the lead.

And what that really means right there is I can't fudge the numbers too soon because I just got caught fudging them by Nate Cohen a week ago and others, by the way, about how I made adjustments to the model that gave Harris more of an edge. So he's attempting to explain it away. And then that second tweet, which you just read, is a wink, wink. High-quality polls is code for the cool club. It's code for election mafia, which is –

a bunch of crappy polls who overstate, he's talking about the state of Pennsylvania. To Nate, what he's saying is he's giving a wink and a nod to the New York Times, to Quinnipiac, to others who routinely, disgustingly overstate Democratic support in these battleground states. He's telling them, hey guys, drop a Harris plus eight so I can shift the model again. That's what he's doing. High quality means garbage. The only thing that should matter about

about the quality of a poll is their accuracy and their track record. High quality means I paid too much for live caller interviews that were subcontracted in India by a person who can't even correctly speak English, so somebody in the Midwest has absolutely no idea what they're saying on the other line. And oh, by the way, not a single one is accurately predicted the state of Pennsylvania in the last two presidential election cycles. That's his code for high quality. And it's a wink and a nod. It's a dog whistle.

To those out there, you know, Fairleigh Dickinson, do me a favor and fudge another poll like you did last week so I can go ahead and put it on my average. Nobody, nobody criticized that guy for putting up that Harris plus seven. That was the most unethical thing. And I've seen a lot of unethical things. That was the most unethical thing I have seen as my career as a public pollster. They pushed those people, Jack.

The initial poll was Trump plus one. Then they pushed him on race, on age, on gender, and then reported the push as the actual number. And fraud boy, failed sports handicapper boy, puts it up on his model as a Harris plus seven and shifts it.

Take your streams that you say are cross and stick them because that isn't real, Jack. I'm telling you, it's not real. It's been a scam since the day he came out and he was rewarded for doing David Plouffe's bidding in 2008. It wasn't a model back then either. David Plouffe was leaking him his polling from the Obama campaign and he thought it was more accurate.

So he bet the farm on it because he had nothing to lose because he was already thrown out of the sports handicapping world. So he had nothing to lose. He took the data from David Plouffe. They were right. Oh, by the way, my 13-year-old son could have predicted Barack Obama was going to win. Give me a break. And he hasn't been right ever since.

I've had it with this guy. I'm telling you. He may be the single most damning person ever to hurt the polling industry.

Ever. We've got to get the mute button up like ABC. I've got to get the mute button. By the way, first time in her life that Kamala Harris has ever been muted in public. First time. She wants her... Rich, Rich, I'm speaking. I'm speaking. We need the I'm speaking. We should do that as like a soundbite whenever Rich is on. I'm speaking. I'm speaking.

But no, Rich, so that said, where do you view the race in the swing states as it stands? I got to tell you, Jack, past this prologue, which it typically is in this sort of thing, I see all the red flags in the northern Midwest that we saw in 16 and 20. I think if the election was held next Tuesday, Kamala Harris would grossly underperform and Donald Trump would win this election. And by that, I know you're used to me talking.

i it's that was tight wait wait i didn't need the mute button that time i didn't need the mute button at all no so rich this is huge and this by the way what you're saying though is the same thing that the the super pack the kamala harris super pack was saying privately they said hey our internals are much tighter than the stuff that's going out publicly also the things that you guys are putting out with having her up big time it's it's creating a problem for us on the ground because we need volunteers to go knock on doors and

And suddenly they're like, how do I get this? How do I, you know, how do I get people up? But they're saying that we've got all this momentum. We've got all this swing. Rich, what should people be looking for in the next couple of the next couple of days and weeks?

I think it's going to be a very tumultuous couple of, you know, a very, very erratic, you know, I'm talking about the media landscape and the landscape of the selection. I think it's going to be crazy. I think we have not seen the end of these big bombshells. You know, these stories. There was another indictment the other day that will move the needle. Are you ready? Exactly. Zero points. Nobody cares.

So when people get desperate, Jack, they do desperate things. And I think we have not seen the end of this. The reality is starting to set in on the Democratic side. And when that happens, you know, look at their past behavior. They lash out. And I think we're going to see something like that. And by the way, you just mentioned the internals. That translates what that, you know, that's internals means extradition.

Expensive. So, you know, as opposed to the fake high quality polls that he's talking about right there, campaigns do high quality, meaning expensive, meaning that they set these stratified quotas and they pay for them to make sure no groups are being underrepresented. And this picture has not been rosy for Harris for weeks. That's the truth of it.

It's been weeks that this has been the situation, but they're getting to a point now where maybe she had a lead in Minnesota within the margin. Maybe she had a, you know, they were bobbing back and forth in her polling between like a one point lead for her, one point lead for Trump in Michigan. And it's getting to the point now where it's a very clear direction. It's moving. And everyone knows what that means. They're afraid they're going to get Hillary Clinton's.

where all of the polls showed a rosy picture for their candidate and Donald Trump outperformed. And they do not want it to happen. I mean, the words blue mirage are now being spoken every day all through these circles. And they are afraid of that blue mirage. And that's my point. I think they have good reason to be. All of the signs. So red mirage was last time.

That's right. A few years ago when we were doing these shows and we were doing War Room, they kept saying Red Mirage, and that was the idea that they were getting us ready for what would happen at 3 a.m. on election night. So walk us through that. Explain that for everybody. What's that term? What is the Blue Mirage? So

So basically they believe the polling is going to show them in a better position than they are. They will have an advantage on early vote, although I do think Republicans are doing what they can to cut into that. All right. So on Election Day in certain states, when chunks of the early voter reported first, it's going to look like it's pretty insurmountable. Right. But it's not going to be. Or on the reverse of that, in a state like Pennsylvania, for instance, it's going to look like...

They have enough early votes banked or something, and they'll win it by a margin that they got accustomed to winning it by. And so it'll look like they'll have enough to overtake whatever the election day lead is, and that won't actually happen. That won't transpire. So it's an impression that Democrats are ahead and are winning, and Harris is ahead and winning, but it's a mirage. It's not real. You know what's interesting about that?

She's going to lose. That's what they're afraid of. I don't know if I've ever said this yet publicly, but so I was at the RNC and the DNC. And I'll tell you, the RNC, look, people definitely had that sugar high. People were super excited about

I didn't feel the sugar high at the DNC. I didn't feel the joy. I didn't notice from the people around me that they were particularly excited about their kid. They were excited to hear Barack Obama speak. They were excited when Michelle Obama spoke. They were excited for, you know, a couple of the things that were going on. But for their candidate, for their chances, I'm telling you, the, you know, for lack of a better term,

The vibe was not there. The vibe was off at the DNC in a way that, you know, the vibes were very high at the RNC. And honestly, I think that may have been may have been a little bit a little bit premature at the same time. But, you know, Donald Trump just survived an assassination attempt. So, you know, people, you can't you can't you can't really blame people for that. But, Rich, just for the last for the last last couple of seconds, do you think that they have reason to be scared on the Democrat side?

I do. When you break this down, you brought up the fundamentals before. Donald Trump has been leading Joe Biden for, it's not Kamala Harris, but it's a Democratic candidate for over a year. They trust him on all the key issues. The undecided voters, they're more male than female, and they trust him more on the issues. The fundamentals are bad for her, despite the polling high, which is, like I have argued, not real.

Rich Barris, folks, the People's Fund, go give him a follow, locals.peoplesfund.com. Jack, where is Jack? Where is Jack? Where is he? Jack, I want to see you. Great job, Jack. Thank you. What a job you do. You know, we have an incredible thing. We're always talking about the fake news and the bad, but we have guys, and these are the guys who should be getting Pulitzer's.

All right, folks, we're back here, Human Events Daily, Washington, D.C., but I'm going from Washington, D.C. I want to kick it over to David Zier, who's down in, or I should say up in, Wisconsin. He's there a couple hours before the Trump-Tulsi Gabbard town hall that's set to be held later tonight. David, tell us about the event and tell us about what's going on. First of all, there's a long line here. Hello, everybody. How you doing? Hey!

A lot of RAB viewers here and the election only 68 days away, only 32 days away. October 8th in the state of Wisconsin. Kamala doing her first interview today and has to do it with Waltz here. But we're in La Crosse County. Scenic vistas, beautiful rivers, the Mississippi, the La Crosse River, the Black River all converge here. It's beautiful. But the underlying story here, this is a Democrat county, La Crosse County here. Home ownership is at 46%.

It's at 65% nationwide for the last 58 years on average. Homelessness here, twice the property crime rate as the rest of Wisconsin. And people are struggling here and the average age is only 30 years old and to buy a home, you know, that notion is fleeting here. But they're waiting for Tulsi Gabbard to moderate this town hall tonight at the La Crosse Center. There'll be 8,000 people inside.

A lot of hot races. This is also the third congressional district where Derek Van Orden is expected to win. The Congress should keep six of the eight seats Republican here in Wisconsin.

Trump's Trump endorsed Tony weed. He won the primary in the eighth district where Mike Gallagher retired But there was a contested race here against Derek Van Orden Katherine cook who beat the Democratic Party favorite is emerging and we're gonna have to follow that closely here and Tammy Baldwin is only leading by one point against Republican GOP Senate candidate Eric hovde here. He's gaining ground on her puts Wisconsin

in play as far as the Senate race go. And all these people are suffering with high inflation, Jack. You know, there's not a lot of jobs. And we're on the Minnesota border here. It's the same thing. We're right by Rochester, Minnesota, the Minneapolis metropolitan area with 180,000 people here. And they all say in this crowd that Tim Walz, the portrait they're painting of him is not the real Tim Walz, that he's a socialistic, communistic agenda that's destroying

Minnesota. Well, David, I really appreciate that. And we'll be able to come back to you throughout the day as the crowd builds. There's some good man on the street interviews there. I bet. Thank you so much, David. Appreciate it. Thank you, Jack.

All right, I want to go now to Ryan Gerduski, bring him on. He's a political consultant, he's a writer, and he's got a new piece up in the American Conservative that I read word for word. I've been passing this around to a lot of people because it's something that Rich Parrish just mentioned a little bit earlier, and I didn't ask him to unpack it because I knew Ryan would be coming on. It has to do with this idea of response bias, and particularly regarding older liberals when it comes to

polling. Ryan, how are you? Good. Thanks for having me. Oh, happy to have you. I was joking, by the way, about the mute button that Kamala Harris is going to have for ABC. Maybe I needed one of those when we had our last debate. And you were on my team! That's true. I was a little overboard. But Ryan, it was like consistently people were like, yeah, I like the arguments, but man, that Ryan guy, I said, what can I say? He's a New Yorker. But Ryan, talk to me...

libertarians just know how to press my buttons it's true exactly exactly talk to me about this idea though about response bias and the polling and and your contention that the polling industry has been completely destroyed in the last eight years so what i what i noticed especially when trump is running there is there's been something called the quote silent trump voter we've heard about a lot it doesn't show up in polling quite a bit

that there's more support for him than polls are picking up. And then I was just wondering, I was like, let me look at Biden's numbers right before he dropped out. And Biden, I mean, the national polling was a little tight. I mean, Trump had the lead, but it wasn't a humongous lead, especially when you consider that Virginia and New Jersey and Minnesota and New Mexico were all in play.

So I noticed that there was one group that stuck out among all others that really had a huge level of support for Biden, and that was older voters. Despite the fact that Trump won older voters back in 2016 and in 2020, Biden was winning older voters in 2024, in July. This was after his horrendous debate where he said he defeated Medicaid,

Go back four years, back into 2020, and Biden had a double-digit lead on Trump among older voters. And go back to 2016, this is in the polls, not in the election results, but in the polls. In the polls, Hillary Clinton had...

a very, very large lead with older voters. And in swing states, states like North Carolina and Georgia, where Trump won older voters by close to 20 points, it was tied close to it. So in this last, in this election, 2024, the same thing is coming up. The Quinnipiac poll that was released today has it a two-point race when you consider all third-party candidates, a one-point Kamala Harris lead when you just have head-to-head,

But she's winning seniors by 10 points, and she's almost guaranteed to lose this demographic by five to six. And this 15-point poll by the most polled and answered group of voters is because liberals are answering the phones way too often. And conservatives, especially older conservatives, are not answering them enough. It's called a response bias.

Older Karens can't wait to give people their opinions, it seems like. And older guys, and especially older men, working class men, do not pick up the phone nearly enough.

Well, and, you know, that actually kind of makes sense because when you talk about, and this is exactly what we were talking about earlier in the show, was that, you know, I see the psychology of the sort of like the person who is willing to take the poll. And it just doesn't match up with when you think about the political psychology of people that you meet in the real world. And I was talking about how, you know, I've done a lot of elections in Pennsylvania. I'm familiar with the Pennsylvania voter. I'm familiar with the different pockets of voters of Pennsylvania. And they just don't,

exist in the way that the polls seem to think they do. But then when you add in what you're talking about is response bias, what it really means is people's

likelihood of whether or not they're willing to respond to a poll. Now, I, of course, love responding to pollsters whenever they reach out to me because I still have a Pennsylvania phone number. And I love lying to pollsters. I do that all the time. I'll talk to them all day long and just totally make up stuff because I'd love for there. It's so good, right? It's so good. Yeah, I love screwing up their polling day, especially when I can find out who it is.

But, you know, it's that's not how the average Trump supporter or the average conservative, certainly not that like like a working class older voter. They see the number. They see the text, whatever it is. They're not responding. But you got someone who's one of these. And I'm sorry, you're right. They are these chatty Cathy's. They love to get on the phone and tell you how much they love Kamala Harris. But, you know, it's not about loving Kamala Harris. It's about hating Donald Trump because they didn't love Kamala Harris until they were told to five minutes ago.

Yeah, it's these voters who listen to every word Rachel Maddow saying it and is like, I'm gonna pull out the 10 commandments and add them to like the first 10. Like this is like amazing. That's the person that's answering the polls. The New York Times Santa poll, which is a very good pollster. They do really good work. It's not necessarily their fault. It's just the people that are responding. In the New York Times Santa poll, they had among seniors, Harris beating Trump in Pennsylvania by 10 points. This is a demographic he's probably gonna win by 10 points.

It doesn't matter, though. These are not the ones that are answering the phone. My best friend is a Republican, middle, you know, 35, working class guy. He does not answer polls as he believes his union is spying on him. It's just that you cannot convince him to answer a poll. It's just how people naturally treat polling and the industry of polling. Some have very high trust for it and some have very, very low trust for it. But that's why I think most of these pollsters now, most of these people are analyzing polls like Nate Silver even did.

You hear him saying, well, Trump does overperform quite a bit in these pollsters. They're acknowledging there's something wrong, not necessarily with maybe how they're operating with it, but the information that they're collecting is biased.

And that's what it really comes down to. And of course, when you're talking about it, if you're a public poll, if you're not, if you're not trying to spend that much time in the field, if you don't want to know, obviously this can be controlled for, but it's going to take more time. It's going to take more money. It's going to take more responses, more phone calls, all of those things, more call centers.

And so eventually you get to the point where you say, you know what? Well, you know, maybe I'll just I'll dial it down a little bit in the data. But even then, even if they're trying to wait for it, they're still not getting to the kind of fidelity that you would have if you had actually reached out to the correct number of people for each demographic. Stay tuned, folks. We're coming right back. Fantastic story about public policy.

polling and the potential for response bias and how it skews the polls that you're looking at on a day-to-day basis with Ryan Grodowski. Right back, Human Events continues. In my ear about the boring people at your office, I'm trying to listen to the new Human Events with Jack Posobiec. All right, Jack Posobiec back live, Human Events Daily. We're all with political consultant and writer

Ryan Gerduski. We're talking about his piece on response bias. So, Ryan, earlier in the show, we were talking about this idea of the concept of a blue mirage, this idea that potentially, you know, is it possible that all this common momentum doesn't actually exist because we know in reality that she doesn't

wasn't someone that anybody wanted to be the VP. And by the way, there were people who were involved with that discussion, excuse me, about making her the nominee from the VP. There were even people who said that maybe it's not a good idea to do this, or maybe not even a good idea to pick her. And we're talking about high level Democrats, by the way, who were saying this. And now all of a sudden, right out of the gate, we just get this massive polling boost for her out of nowhere. What's going on with all of this?

Well, if you check out my article in the American Conservative magazine, I sit there and I discuss how a lot of older voters, a lot of older liberals are really throwing these polls up. But I want to say that one, it definitely, the enthusiasm sometimes can become a self-fulfilling prophecy. So go back to 2013, Chris Christie in New Jersey is running for reelection. Chris Christie wins in a huge landslide. The polls sit there and say he's going to win in a huge landslide.

Christie did win by a 19, 20 point margin, but the turnout was substantially lower because voters felt like it was already over. And it depressed Democrat turnout because they said, why bother voting? This man already has it.

That does happen when people feel like the race is not even a race. In New York City in the last mayoral election, the Democratic primary was very, very tight. Turnout was humongous. By the general election, the consensus was that Mayor Eric Adams had in the bag. Turnout was depressed significantly because no one showed up because they say, why bother? So there is something to polling. Polling does matter in the sense that the news media sits there and says,

It's a landslide one way or the other, and people don't show up. I would argue that the entire Harris, you know, huge push for Harris the media has been having and correlating with polling showing her surging has kind of fed into the entire thing. Now, as we get into November and as polls have tightened, you've already seen Nate Silver today say Trump is the favorite to win the general election. We'll sit there and maybe see a more competitive race in the polling even, which says, you know, everyone needs to go out and vote. It's all hands on deck.

But that is how it happens in many, many places, not necessarily right now, but in many places. Higher polling continuously can create the narrative and it can become a self-fulfilling prophecy when one party or another decides, I'm just going to sit it out. It doesn't really matter this election.

And this is a huge key because it can actually, so people talked about suppressive effect, but it can also have a depressive effect because it could depress your own side if your polls are too lofty. And so that being said, I really think that this election is tight. I tend to think that Nate Silver's forecast today is accurate, that it's, you know, you're looking at a couple of points one way or the other in most of the swing states, but

Michigan, as far as the Rust Belt, probably has the biggest split where Kamala would have the biggest lead. Pennsylvania is probably the place where Trump has the best opportunity right now, which, of course, pains me to say that, not because I'm from there, but because I'm always biased against good news for Pennsylvania because I just have my own personal response bias is that I reject any good news

potentially coming out of Pennsylvania. It's just that you have to- - Listen, this election will come down to working white voters. It's not gonna come down to special groups of minorities sitting there and turning out. - We need to say that every day. We need to say it every day.

It will come down to do working white people actually show up to vote. If you are a Trump person and you are an activist or you are working for the campaign, I would go to every mobile home community in every swing state and make sure they have turnout because whites without a college degree have the worst turnout of any group aside from recent immigrants. That is our self-reliance.

depressing thing. We don't turn out to vote enough. So get those people via the early ballot, people who are not reliable to show up on election day. That is how they win this election. It is the working class white vote showing up because they are not reliable, unfortunately. And if they were, Republicans would never lose another national election. I don't think that this gets enough discussion that working class whites

is going to be what swings this and that's yeah rich and i were just talking about this earlier about the rust belt how these are groups that will split their votes again working class whites will split their votes they vote the man they do not vote the party if you're not from this part of the of the country you might not get it it's just the this is the political behavior that you will always see why because they just don't care about i'm not saying partisanship doesn't exist i'm saying it's

way different though when it comes to your overall voting swath of people so it's not this idea that they're you know suddenly one day they're for kamala or one day they're for trump it's just that whichever candidate makes the best pitch for what will help them the most again in their wallets

in their wallets, not, you know, on some esoteric issue. No, the wallet issue, the economic issue, whichever candidate comes out in front of the economic issues for working class whites will win working class whites. That's how Fetterman won. That's how Casey wins, also because of his name. That's how Josh Shapiro won in Pennsylvania. That's how Trump won Pennsylvania the first time. Again, you're just going to see that over and over and over. Ryan Gerduski.

- Yes, I completely agree. And listen, the good thing is if this election is tight, I mean, Arizona is gonna take four days to count votes just the way that it is.

But the three states that will decide this election early on is Pennsylvania, North Carolina, and Georgia. If Trump wins all three, this election is effectively over and Donald Trump will be the next president. So that is what matters. Those are the three early states that matter as far as east to west goes. And it is because if the working class whites in all three states, including Georgia, where a number of districts in the southern part of the state and the northeastern part of the state, like Marjorie Taylor Greene's district, they have...

significantly lower turnout than the city of Atlanta, than the cities of Raleigh and Raleigh and near Wake County. And just like in Pennsylvania, the Montgomery suburbs, the collar counties of Philadelphia, they have high turnout. It can all be countered because the votes are there. It's just a matter of making them show up and don't believe the polling because it's really, really, really off because of the response bias. Ryan, where can people go to read your work and to get more access to what you're up to?

Well, you can go on the American Conservative magazine dot com to Amcom mag dot com to go check out the article. Otherwise, my sub stack, the National Populist Newsletter or on Twitter at Ryan Gerduski. All right, folks, there you go. Don't always trust the polls, but do pay attention to what the polls are up to. This race is going to come down to working class whites. We know that we're going to say it every day because it's true. Ladies and gentlemen, as always, you have my permission to lay a short word.