Election Prediction

From the first president, to the next.

Atlanta, GA

November 4, 2024

“Politics is the entertainment division of the military industrial complex.”

- Frank Zappa

This weekend the clocks turned back. But they didn’t go far enough.

Ideally, we’d return to an era when who was president didn’t matter, and when relatives weren’t excommunicated for a politician they preferred.

How many careers were destroyed and relationships ruined the last few years because people didn’t toe the prescribed line? Eight years ago, political disagreement wasn’t considered an affront.

Now it’s an unforgivable outrage. Families and friends have severed ties because someone who’s been loved for a lifetime decided to vote for a candidate who wasn’t approved.

It’s appropriate that Washington, DC is on the edge of the continent. Politics is poison, and should be peripheral. That was the original idea, and there was such a time.

The First President

When the American states seceded from Britain, few thought a president was needed. In retrospect, they were likely right. The first executive was probably the best, because the job was designed to keep the occupant from causing trouble.

Under the Articles of Confederation, John Hanson was only president of the Continental Congress. No one today has heard of this man. I doubt many did when he was alive, which is what we should want from anyone put in power.

But that’s the point. His position had no power. Nor did the Congress he ostensibly “led”.

The Articles were established during the War for Independence. The states were busy seceding from Britain, so the last thing they wanted was a central master. Their impromptu club was deliberately weak.

Congressional decisions required consent of every state. The need for unanimity meant little “got done”. For almost two and half centuries, court historians and government schools have convinced Americans this feature was a bug.

Yet most people didn’t think so at the time. Things did “get done”. It’s just that some distant government wasn’t necessary to do them. States, towns, individuals, and families managed their own affairs. Among average citizens, there was little craving to enhance the Articles.

But there were powerful forces who wanted a strong central state. Under the loose confederation after independence, financial insiders and connected interests were frustrated that political chicanery was difficult to pursue.

A Constitutional Coup?

So they gathered in Philadelphia to set things right. States sent delegates to amend the Articles. By the time they were done, they’d proposed a new document to cement a union.

Many critics call the constitutional convention a coup. I was once among them. But it’s not as if a new government was unilaterally imposed.

The states held ratifying conventions to approve what was done. Prescient warnings advised against adoption. But ultimately, they were overruled.

And not unreasonably. Many proponents recalled difficulties provisioning the army, negotiating with diplomats, and financing debt. Their arguments proved sufficient to win approval.

After nine states offered assent, the new Constitution took effect. A Bill of Rights followed a few years later.

Presidential Precedent

By that time, the first president was already in office. George Washington had been elected unanimously, and reluctantly completed two terms. Thomas Jefferson adhered to this example, walking away when he would have won again.

Till Franklin Roosevelt refused to go away, everyone after Jefferson followed Washington’s lead by leaving gracefully (excepting those like Lincoln, McKinley, and Wilson, who had no choice).

The 22d Amendment aside, since FDR a few presidents left office of someone else’s volition. John Kennedy obviously did. But JFK’s two immediate successors were also pushed out. As was the current incumbent, who was forced to make way for Kamala Harris.

Or was he?

Hurled Grenade

Joe Biden was clearly shoved aside. But was Kamala Harris the preference of the putsch? I’m not sure.

When a party operative tweeted that the president was withdrawing from the race, few considered Kamala a serious option. And for good reason. She’s remarkably inept and extremely unlikable.

It was only when Biden “endorsed” her that her nomination became inevitable. Before that she was barely viable.

Was this a devious move by a conniving incumbent? I wouldn’t put it past him. Biden’s never been too bright. But he knows politics, and can be vicious.

Till the day “he” announced he was stepping aside, Biden was adamant he didn’t want to leave. Steaming after being displaced, perhaps he undermined his plotters by scuttling their plans.

As the conspirators contemplated an “open convention” to lend an air of legitimacy to their appointed puppet, maybe the outgoing president (or his bitter wife) decided to hurl a grenade amid the party the president allegedly led.

Who knows? As always, I certainly don’t. And even if true, Biden’s plan could backfire. Will it?

Who’ll Win Tomorrow (or Whenever)

The election season concludes tomorrow, so we should know the “winner” within a few months. But I’m willing to speculate now to engrave my guess.

A few weeks ago, I let slip my initial prediction. Or, to be more precise, my wild projection. Has it changed? What do I think will happen now?

As a wise sage once said, it’s hard to say without knowing. But we have historical precedent for who’ll be president, including this from Kiplinger…

In the 23 presidential elections since 1928, 14 were preceded by [stock market] gains in the three months prior. In 12 of those 14 instances, the incumbent (or the incumbent party) won the White House. In eight of nine elections preceded by three months of stock market losses, incumbents were sent packing.

That’s an 87% accuracy rate.

Uh oh.

The S&P 500, is up about 7% since the start of July. The Dow Jones Industrial Average and the Nasdaq have also gained during that time.

However much I wish I were wrong, this reaffirms (but isn’t the basis for) my original pick. Here it is:

I’ll change my mind if Pennsylvania goes the other way.

Make no mistake. I think Donald Trump could receive the most votes in the decisive states. And, as (too?) many people seem to think, Pennsylvania is probably the keystone of this election.

But it doesn’t matter. One way or the other…Kamala Harris will be sworn into office. It could be more lopsided than I anticipate. In either direction.

All seven “swing states” could sway the same way…which would trigger a landslide that would be contested in court. Were that to occur, the eventual avalanche would likely be “blue”.

States most inclined toward Trump are rife with suspicion. Maricopa County, Arizona is probably beyond redemption. It can’t be trusted to tally votes. The same can almost certainly be said for our next door neighbor: Fulton County, Georgia.

But Fulton’s influence on Georgia isn’t as outsized as Maricopa’s on Arizona. Likewise for Bucks County, Pennsylvania, where innumerable shenanigans are sure to occur.

A Conga-Line of Hoaxes

As I said, I hope I’m wrong. Not because I want Trump to win (I gave my opinion of him here and here). But because our horrific Establishment deserves to lose. After the carnage they’ve inflicted, electoral defeat is the least of what they should suffer.

I’ve catalogued their crimes in many earlier essays. Suffice to say, those who attempt to pass off a senile specter as a legitimate nominee, anoint a power-hungry nitwit as replacement after a intraparty coup, wield banana-republic lawfare against political opponents, wage reckless wars all over the world, accept and amplify the endorsement of the Cheneys, label eighty million Americans as domestic “extremists”, and try to coerce experimental medication into a hundred million arms should be cast to oblivion in a hellfire of fury.

But, wait…there’s more. The Biden Administration argued before the Supreme Court that they should be allowed to compel companies to censor speech. For eight years they’ve lied to our faces. This regime has spent four years propagating a conga-line of hoaxes.

They tried to convince us a sitting president was a Russian asset, that the man they’d previously befriended was a racist extremist, that he thought white supremacists in Charlottesville were “very fine people”, that his followers are Nazis, and that he wants to execute Liz Cheney.

All of this is obviously ludicrous. But the bit about killing Liz Cheney is especially ridiculous, and politically unnecessary.

As comedian Dave Smith reminds us, “Donald Trump didn’t advocate violence against Liz Cheney. There are plenty of reasons to vote for him. We don’t need to invent more.”

Apparently, some people do.

JD