December 22, 2017

"As a public service, I put together a list of predictions that various people made about Trump that you can use to evaluate your own predictive powers."

"Count the number of items on the list that you once predicted would be true. I’ll tell you how to evaluate your score at the end."

Scott Adams has a test.

I'll put my score below the jump so it doesn't influence you. Take the test first.

2. The first 2.

144 comments:

Ken B said...

Same 2.

Big Mike said...

That’s three of us who got the first two wrong and rest mostly right. I did predict that Trump’s tweeting would cause problems and I think it did. I also think he really is developing better self-discipline, which bodes well.

Fernandistein said...

Zero.

I generally don't make predictions about anything more complicated than the car starting.

traditionalguy said...

That was an easy none. Just apply the power of positive thinking. And Martial Chauvin was right about Napoleon, too.

mockturtle said...

The only one I got wrong was #2 because I figured crooked Hillary would prevail. Never have I been so delighted to be wrong.

Michael K said...

Yeah, I did not think he would get the nomination but began to wonder by spring.

I was surprised that he won the election.

I never thought, except in a few moments of fantasy, that I would be able to say that.

I have been interested in Trump as a phenomenon all year.

In an interview with MSNBC’s Chris Hayes, Wilson conceded that “Trump is still a very powerful force right now” because he appeals to part of the of the conservative base that Wilson said was activated by his “nativist” message. Wilson insisted that the donor class “can’t just sit back on the sidelines and say, ‘oh well, don’t worry, this will all work itself out.’”
“They’re still going to have to go out and put a bullet in Donald Trump,” Wilson said. “And that’s a fact.”

Wilson is an alleged GOP consultant. Trump may be fatal to many GOP consultants as they were not only mistaken but disloyal to the team they were supposed to belong to.


The left has not yet recovered. A big loss next November might bring them to their senses but I wonder.

Richard Dillman said...

I didn't believe any of them, although I reserved judgement on the first two. Always thought the first two were possible, but not necessarily
probable.

Richard Dillman said...

I didn't believe any of them, although I reserved judgement on the first two. Always thought the first two were possible, but not necessarily
probable.

BDNYC said...

4. The first 2, and also:

Right after he won, I had this thought -- Trump's skills as a "con man" might get him elected but it won't transfer into doing the job of president.

And this thought -- Trump is incompetent.

I acknowledge he's been able to do many things, but that's largely due to the fact that he has GOP majorities in Congress. And he still manages to alienate them with his idiotic, undignified behavior and his countless self-inflicted wounds. So yes, I still believe he's incompetent and his skills don't translate well to doing the job of a president.

jnseward said...

I didn't get any of them wrong, but that's partly because I was listening to Scott Adams.

Dude1394 said...

I picked these three I must admit:

Trump’s tweeting will cause huge problems.

GOP will never embrace Trump.

GOP senators will vote against GOP priorities because of President Trump’s mean tweets.

Michael K said...

" So yes, I still believe he's incompetent and his skills don't translate well to doing the job of a president."

Let's talk after November 2018.

Professional lady said...

Two also. I didn't think that Trump would be nominated or elected. Other than that, I didn't know what he would do. But I knew what Hillary would do and I thought it was worth taking a chance that Trump would appoint a real jurist and not a political hack to the SC. He did.

Limited blogger said...

I'm not gloating. I didn't get any wrong.

I've been Trump's biggest backer since he alighted the mezzanine of Trump tower via the escalator.

tcrosse said...

The test question should be "Do you still believe" rather than "Did you once believe".

Matthew Sablan said...

I'm still shocked he won. The more I hear about how incompetent Clinton's campaign was that shock goes away. If you have the link to the Althouse threads around post election that would be some interesting retrospective reading.

BDNYC said...

In addition to tax reform, President Romney would've been able to pass healthcare reform. Just saying.

I will give Trump some credit though: the one area where his weirdness offers some real hope is immigration. I disagree with Trump's views on immigration, but it's clear that the Republican/Democratic logjam was leading nowhere. Tossing in a third view that's more extreme and in control of the executive branch ... I believe that should jolt Congress into enacting something far more comprehensive and durable in the long-term. Whatever solution they hash out is probably going to be fine with me. We just need to end this strange situation of lawlessness, and disrespect for the law.

Drago said...

BDNYC: "So yes, I still believe he's incompetent and his skills don't translate well to doing the job of a president."

We just had the most conservative year in governance in our nation since 1981. If this is "incompetence" and demonstrative of skills that haven't translated well into the job of a president, then I'll happily announce that I embrace "incompetence" & "skills that don't translate well" every single day.

Every. Single. Day.

rhhardin said...

If you're going predict elections you have to take into account women voting.

So all bets are off.

Drago said...

BDNYC: "In addition to tax reform, President Romney would've been able to pass healthcare reform. Just saying."

Any other make-believe scenarios you'd like to offer up to compare with actual reality and real-world results?

Rance Fasoldt said...

Not one. Although, like Adams, I thought he would win in a landslide. Election night I didn’t watch TV until I heard my wife celebrating in the wee hours.

Drago said...

I mean, if you are going to go full "make believe", why not go all the way: Romney would have passed legislation guaranteeing everyone was beautiful and we all get to live forever?

rcocean said...

Given the stone cold idiocy of the Republican voters I never thought Trump would win the nomination until March 2016. And I never thought he would win the POTUS, since we have too many Yellow Dog Democrats and Dumbos in the USA.

Nor did I think the GDP would rise more than 3 percent. Everything else I got right.

tim maguire said...

3--the first 2 plus "his con man persona would be ineffective in office." Mostly because I stopped making predictions after I got the first 2 wrong. Now I just watch and wait.

Drago said...

First off, Romney would not have repealed obamacare. He would have been "convinced" by the combined force of the establishment/Dems/media to "save" obamacare. In other words, he would have gone Full Kasich.

And probably started lecturing republican base voters while he was at it.

Just as HWBush was convinced/fooled/bamboozled by those very same forces to raise taxes instead of cutting them which violated the single most important promise he made as a candidate.

Ignorance is Bliss said...

Strictly speaking, his immigration ban was found unconstitutional, by the district judge. It wasn't found unconstitutional by the Supreme Court, which, in the end, is the court that matters. Of course, the constitutionality of his original ban was never assessed by the Supreme Court, since it was replaced before things got that far.

John Borell said...

Sense a theme here?

First two for me, too. I never thought he'd be nominated. Never thought he'd win. Even after I started hoping he'd win.

Once he won, I assumed everything would be fine. Verily, it was.

Bill, Republic of Texas said...

4.

The first three and Trump's tweeting will get him in trouble. Which I think has proved out. His tweeting has been very effective but it has backfired a few times.

rcocean said...

BTW, Trump had better STOP listening to Turkey McConnell and Ryan or the Republicans will lose the House AND the Senate.

So far he's given us the Jeb Bush agenda. Tax cuts and failing to modify Obamacare.

If all he's does before Nov 2018 is pass some sort of Amnesty and stupidly try to cut back Medicaid and Social Security - it'll be a Democrat blow up. Its all about turn out in the Midterms - and Democrats are incredibly motivated by their hatred of Trump.

If you want to win - don't listen to Ryan and McConnell. They're losers.

BDNYC said...

If anything, I think Trump got in the way of conservative governance much more than he helped it along. He seems to be improving, but wow he's done a great deal of damage to the conservative brand. As much as I enjoy watching the Left hyperventilate and so forth, I worry about the divisiveness and the widespread cynicism about government and the media and our neighbors, etc. People screaming "Fake News" and "Deep State" and "Literally Hitler" and so on ... it's not healthy.

Anyway, largely because of him, the GOP has to worry about losing Congress in 2018. So whatever conservative governance we get could be very fleeting, and if that happens I will have to hope that Trump wins in 2020 just to play defense against whatever the Democratic Congress wants to do.

Luke Lea said...

I missed two or three for sure. Gave myself credit if I wasn't sure, which covered most of the rest (best I remember). Hard to tell the difference between hoping and predicting.

rcocean said...

"Just as HWBush was convinced/fooled/bamboozled by those very same forces to raise taxes instead of cutting them which violated the single most important promise he made as a candidate."

I don't believe for a second that a Yale Graduate, CIA director, and VP was "Fooled" by the Democrats. In 1988 HW Bush just did what he did he many elections - he lied and told the American public what they wanted to hear. He never had any intention of keeping his "NO NEW TAXES" pledge.

Nor did Romney or McCain ever intend to repeal Obamacare or stop Amnesty. They're both liars who count on the Boobs never remembering what they say from day to day.

Drago said...

BDNYC: "If anything, I think Trump got in the way of conservative governance much more than he helped it along."

Trump is the ONLY reason why we have conservative governance at this point in time.

There is zero chance any other republican candidate could have gotten all those midwest voters who had voted for obama once or twice or hadn't voted in many years to the polls.

Without Trump, Hillary is sitting in the oval office.

Failure to recognize that most fundamental of realities can lead one to a cascade of follow-on logic and assessment errors.

Matthew Sablan said...

Romney was literally Hitler and Paul Ryan who the left wishes Trump would listen to as a moderating voice was depicted literally throwing an old woman off a cliff. It isn't the right with a civility priblem, and it isn't Trump's fault.

Lyle Smith said...

I am guilty of 1. and 2. as well. Ooops.

Those of you saying you know his tweeting hurts him or that he doesn't have the skills to be President... you need to understand this all in your mind. It is just your perspective. The reality is Donald Trump is the fucking President of the United States of America and he has made it through year one... BIGLY (in my mind)!!!

Balfegor said...

4 for me. The first two (GOP nomination and then presidency), but also:

"Trump’s decision to recognize Jerusalem as the capital of Israel will cause huge problems." -- I was honestly surprised that it didn't trigger riots and assaults on American embassies, tourists, etc. The Arabs are more civilised than I gave them credit for, and

"GOP will never embrace Trump." -- I thought that the fact that Trump was basically running on a repudiation of the principles that have dominated the GOP since the mid-90s (no trade barriers, open immigration) would prevent the GOP from cooperating effectively with Trump. And I think it has to some degree -- the leadership of the party still seems bent on undermining his central campaign promises. But I failed to recognise that there were still many areas of common interest (e.g. reforming taxes), and underestimated the degree to which Democrats would be driven crazy by their defeat. I'd thought Trump was going to lean a lot more heavily on Democratic support for things like infrastructure upgrades and maintenance, but there's been no movement on that at all.

dreams said...

I judged Trump extremely well and I even predicted he would win, the stock market predicted his win too. Some of us just aren't very good judges of character, specifically the liberals. Liberals are invariably wrong but don't seem to ever learn.

Drago said...

Mathew: "It isn't the right with a civility priblem, and it isn't Trump's fault."

Indeed.

I'm afraid BDNYC, like the entire republican establishment, have still not adjusted to the new political realities "on the ground".

Although, to be quite fair, BDNYC appears much more conservative than the establishment AND some members of the establishment/Never Trumpers have begun to come around based on their revised analysis of what is actually happening in the country.

Roger Simon published an interesting column today on this.

R.J. Chatt said...

I never believed any of those predictions, nonetheless I was completely amazed by his victory on November 8. Maybe astounded and relieved are better words for how I felt that night. I still am surrounded by hysterical liberals (who also believed Trump could never give a real speech and he would start a nuclear war and end the world) but I no longer feel the need to explain Trump or dissuade them of their views.

Richard Dillman said...

I read Adam's "Win Bigly" and thought that he had some intersting insights, but his implied argument that his experience
with hypnotism made him a better predictor is rather flimsy. His notion that Trump is a master persuader is his idiosyncratic explanation for some traditional rhetorical strategies. I think his best insight is the idea that Trump is playing
a kind of 3 dimensional chess that is at time both nonlinear and disruptive. He seems to think that Trump is causing massive outbreaks of cognitve dissonance (e/g., Trump derrangement syndrome). He might be right about that.

Matthew Sablan said...

No matter what Republican won, they'd have been othered as much as Trump. And with how effective it was against Romney and Bush and McCain, I don't think we should expect that to change.

BDNYC said...

I say this fully recognizing (with hindsight) that Trump may have been the only Republican who could've won the general election. His particular message about trade and immigration, which turned me off as a voter, is what won him the election. I don't think any other Republican could have flipped Michigan, Wisconsin, Minnesota and Pennsylvania. Kasich could have won Ohio and maybe had a chance in some of the other Midwestern states, but I doubt he could have won as many as Trump.

The fact that Trump flipped those states and also took Florida and North Carolina, which could easily have gone the other way due to his nationalist message ... it's impressive. It's also a testament to the incompetence and/or arrogance of Hillary Clinton.

Dan Hossley said...

One. Trump's tweets will cause huge problems.

Chuck said...

Five.

And I am not sure who I hate more; Trump or Scott Adams.

I got the first two wrong:
"Trump will never win the GOP nomination."
"Trump will never win the presidency."

Now Adams says I got this wrong:
"Trump’s skills as a 'con man' might get him elected but it won’t transfer into doing the job of president."
I think Scott Adams got that one wrong! As David Frum tweeted, Donald Trump's core competency is in duping gullible people, not dealing with powerful counter-parties.

Adams says I got this wrong:
"GOP will never embrace Trump."
Scott Adams isn't in the GOP; how does he know? What's the metric on "embrace"? Adams is just making this shit up.

I got this wrong?
"Trump is incompetent."
Flynn, Scaramucci, Jared Kushner, Don Jr.; Comey's firing; the Lester Holt interview; the Tweet that John Dowd had to claim was his; the Gorsuch nomination kerfuffle with Blumenthal, etc., etc., etc.

Althouse I hope that Scott Adams gave you an autographed copy of one of his books, for driving all this traffic to Adams' wretched blog.

dreams said...

And I was correct on all the predictions on the list.

Drago said...

"Jen Rubin Republican" Chuck: "And I am not sure who I hate more; Trump or Scott Adams"

They have been right.

You have been completely exposed as politically and analytically incompetent.

You hate that you have been exposed, so you hate them.

We get it.

Henry said...

1, 2, and the Trump is Incompetent one.

1 and 2 are predictions. Trump is incompetent is an opinion, and not one that is easy to score. For the record I think every president in my lifetime was incompetent for the most part and most of those before. We had a better-than-average competency run with Reagan, GHWB, and Clinton, but through age and injury, Reagan trended toward incompetent in his second term, GHWB was a competent doorstop, and Clinton's competency was undercut by his personally mendacity.

Matthew Sablan said...

Mind you. I'm not a Trump fan. But after Romney and McCain I acknowledge that my preferred approach is not what the party wanted. They wanted a fighter, and that meant Cruz or may be Christie. Then came Trump.

Chuck said...

Wait; six. I forgot about "Trump's tweets will cause huge problems."

But again, by my own count I got 2 wrong (the first two) and Scott Adams got 4 wrong.

Matthew Sablan said...

Clinton had the good luck to be president when smart people revolutionized the world and made lots of money. For the most part, he was average at best.

Henry said...

That would have been a better story if Adams had footnoted each prediction with the "expert(s)" who made it.

Michael K said...

If anything, I think Trump got in the way of conservative governance much more than he helped it along.

I disagree but see how you could think that in good faith. I just think McConnell is much more interested in his own personal agenda, whatever that is, than the GOP agenda.

Why did McConnell block Mo Brooks from a fair shot at the Senate nomination ? Because Brooks is a member of the House Conservative Caucus. Instead we got Moore, then Jones. That CANNOT be blamed on Trump.

Our principle problem in this country is that taxpayers and voters are not the same group and only overlap at the margins.

Romney would have had to get elected before he could do any of the things you fantasize. I remember the discussion of why the south Ohio voters turnout was so poor. They came out for Trump.

Ray said...

4 Wrong :-(

I did not expect Trump to get the nomination or win against Hillary, and I thought stocks would drop. I thought some GOP Senators would continue to vote against anything Trump related (Corker, John McCain, etc). I did not think anything helpful to Trump would get through congress.

I am AMAZED at how well everything is going. This tax reform is going to get GDP above 4%. Wow.

Truthfully, the Democrats would have been in much better shape if Romney had won. He would have fixed what they put in place, and not rolled it back. Trump is actually rolling Obama's achievements back, while making the Democrats and their allies look like extremist out of touch, mean spirited, pandering fools. Trumps war on regulations is something I never expected a President to ever do.

Now if he can work on fixing the dysfunctional legal system...

Matthew Sablan said...

My fix to the legal system: defendants stop plea bargaining. Force everything to trial. Work to rule is the best medicine.

rich hahn said...

Zero.

I have a theory about Trump. He knew he had to control the story. His tweets and colorful language were how he disrupted the story the media and Democrats were trying to tell. Every time the media started on a negative track about Trump, he would say something outrageous to disrupt it.

One might argue this resulted in more negative stories, but it resulted in stories of Trump's choosing which he largely controlled.

There is a video on youtube of Tony Robbins called Suicidal Man Red Shoes. Lots of profanity, but watch that video and tell me that is not the strategy that Trump used to get elected.

Michael K said...

I'd thought Trump was going to lean a lot more heavily on Democratic support for things like infrastructure upgrades and maintenance, but there's been no movement on that at all.

I don't think anyone anticipated the insanity of the left.

The Tip O'Neill Democrat Party is gone.. What is left is the Chavez Democrats Party.

Drago said...

Michael K: " I remember the discussion of why the south Ohio voters turnout was so poor. They came out for Trump."

They came out screaming like Banshee's to vote for Trump.

No other republican candidate could have done that. Certainly not my first choice in the primaries, Cruz.

After the Colorado primary debacle it became clear on the ground what was happening and Trump was the reason for the energy and excitement.

Of course, the establishment types would have been happy to allow a President Hillary consolidate complete federal power and put it at the permanent disposal of the democrat party forever.

Freeman Hunt said...

Also the first two.

Chuck said...

Adams is bloviating about people who might get as many as "fifteen" wrong.

Anybody know who Adams has in mind? I wonder who would have gotten 15 wrong? I know of not one NeverTrump Republican who'd have gotten 15 wrong.

Drago said...

"Truthfully, the Democrats would have been in much better shape if Romney had won. He would have fixed what they put in place, and not rolled it back. Trump is actually rolling Obama's achievements back, while making the Democrats and their allies look like extremist out of touch, mean spirited, pandering fools. Trumps war on regulations is something I never expected a President to ever do"

And the establishment and lifelong republicans HATE Trump for doing that.

Drago said...

"Anybody know who Adams has in mind? I wonder who would have gotten 15 wrong? I know of not one NeverTrump Republican who'd have gotten 15 wrong"

LOL

Oh yes. We know precisely who he has in mind.

Precisely.

AlbertAnonymous said...

One.

dreams said...

After signing the tax bill this morning, Trump said he would look to the Dems and try for their help on the infrastructure.

wwww said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Drago said...

dreams: "After signing the tax bill this morning, Trump said he would look to the Dems and try for their help on the infrastructure."

It's a good opening gambit.

Chuck said...

Scott Adams: "Trump will win, and it will be a landslide."

Wrong. Trump won, in one of the closest races of our time. Trump won, with an almost freakish threading of the needle, through Pennsylvania, Michigan and Wisconsin. The national polls that predicted Hillary Clinton with something like a 2 percentage point lead on election eve, were right.

madAsHell said...

The first two.

Lucien said...

Off Topic: If a manufactured dossier was used to obtain a FISA warrant, and information obtained via that warrant was used as proof that Flynn lied to the FBI, isn't that fruit of a poisonous tree?

Big Mike said...

@Ray (12:32), the word "achievements" should have been in quotes.

Drago said...

wwww: " I don't think Growth will get much above 4%. That's not because of Trump."

LOL

Gee, I wonder what might have caused us to go from "2% GDP or less is the new normal!!" just 11 months ago to now poo-pooing 4% growth.

I wonder what might have occurred to change that paradigm.

I tell you, I can't think of anything. Really. Maybe the moon changed phase or someone slaughtered a chicken.

Drago said...

"Jen Rubin Republican" Chuck: "Wrong."

LOL

You just worry about figuring out your own state there smart guy.

We won't be holding our breath.

jwl said...

I thought Trump was finished when he attacked John McCain's war record, Trump only like people who don't get captured or something like that?, and the base didn't seem to mind his comments.

I thought something strange was happening after that, Trump could win because of mood of republicans and working class democrats.

Drago said...

Lucien: "Off Topic: If a manufactured dossier was used to obtain a FISA warrant, and information obtained via that warrant was used as proof that Flynn lied to the FBI, isn't that fruit of a poisonous tree?"

Yes. Turley and Dershowitz have been discussing this quite a bit lately.

Although, I'd be willing to guarantee right now that our "accidental leftist" will come up with some reason why some lunatic lefty analysis is totally correct about it not being fruit of the poisonous tree.

rehajm said...

I wrongly predicted he would be Romneyed by the msm. I predicted his campaign message would resonate with people in the upper midwest- did that one come true? Other than that I didnt try...

rcocean said...

"There is zero chance any other republican candidate could have gotten all those midwest voters who had voted for obama once or twice or hadn't voted in many years to the polls. Without Trump, Hillary is sitting in the oval office."

Exactly. The Midwest and Pennsylvania weren't going to vote for unlikable Texan Cruz ro some Establishment Wimp like Jeb or Rubio.

If Romney had been elected, we'd have had Amnesty for 20 million illegals, 'reaching across the aisle" for some minor tweeking on Obamacare, and not much else. He would've been Obama's Third Term.

exiledonmainstreet said...

I remember how glum I felt when it became apparent that Trump would be the nominee because I was sure that meant Hillary would win. It also meant I would have to vote for Trump in the general and that was not a vote I wanted to cast.

I've never been so happy to be wrong about something in my life.


Blogger Matthew Sablan said:

"I'm still shocked he won. The more I hear about how incompetent Clinton's campaign was that shock goes away"

Actually, the more we learn about how the Deep State colluded with the Democrats and the media to sink Trump, the more I think it was a miracle the man won.

I believe many Democrats realized what a terrible campaigner and how unlikable Hillary was - but they thought that was completely immaterial. No matter how wooden and awful her speeches were, how poorly attended her rallies were, she had all the Important People on her side, and so those little people, those nobody Trump voters and their hopes and concerns and opposition to progressive programs, could be dismissed as easily as a horse shakes off a deerfly. The fix was in and Hillary was not, could not lose. And then she did.

Leslie Graves said...

The same two.

Drago said...

rcocean: "If Romney had been elected, we'd have had Amnesty for 20 million illegals, 'reaching across the aisle" for some minor tweeking on Obamacare, and not much else. He would've been Obama's Third Term."

With the "Jen Rubin Republicans" cheering him every step of the way while with their dem allies to lectur the Deplorable republican base voters every single day.

Just like McCain has done for years.

BTW, that's why Trump's attacks against McCain didn't cost him anything. The entire republican base was literally burned out by 8 years of McCain attacking them on MSNBC and elsewhere and by his playing kissy-face with the dems who were also calling the republican base voters Nazi's and racists.

McCain chose his team, and it wasn't the republicans. So when Trump attacked him, it was like he was attacking a democrat.

Just like certain posters here....

wwww said...

Those of you saying you know his tweeting hurts him or that he doesn't have the skills to be President... you need to understand this all in your mind.


Disagree. The tweeting is turbo-charging people. Who is it turbo charging? Will people come out to vote that don't normally vote in 2018? The special elections suggest maybe so. we'll see.

He's like -48 with people under 40. That's a brand problem.

Bubbles go both ways. Some don't understand the extent to which leftists, moderates, and millennials hated Hillary Clinton.
A lotta people had something better to do on election day. But if they're turbo-charged, they're willing to crawl over broken glass to vote.

tcrosse said...

One proposition left out of the test is "I thought the Access Hollywood tapes would finish Trump off". Quite a few people subscribed to that one.

second try
third try

Kevin said...

Shorter Chuck: I fucking hate Scott Adams, and its not partisan because I am a lifelong lover of cartoons!

Drago said...

exiled: " No matter how wooden and awful her speeches were, how poorly attended her rallies were, she had all the Important People on her side, and so those little people, those nobody Trump voters and their hopes and concerns and opposition to progressive programs, could be dismissed as easily as a horse shakes off a deerfly."

LLR Chuck completely bought into that.

Reading Chuckie now talking about what a close race it was is hilarious when you consider our "Jen Rubin Republican" was predicting a hillary wave election.

Chuck likes to pretend that his Hillary prediction was a close call. But he didn't just predict a Hillary win. He predicted a Hillary landslide. Even in his own state.

LOL

Kevin said...

I like how Adams predicted Trump would win the nomination and the Presidency, yet his detractors feel free to assert their superior predictive abilities.

Perhaps we need a tag for Adams Derangement Syndrome.

Gahrie said...

My fears about Trump was precisely the fact that it was impossible to predict what would happen if he was elected. Trump has been a Leftwinger all of his life, and is more comfortable on the Left. I bet Trump would make the remark that the Democratic Party moved too far Left for him. I firmly believe that the only reason he ran was the way he was treated at the White House Correspondent's Dinner, and that he made the decision that night. He campaigned as a populist demagogue. Since I live in California, I had the luxury of indulging myself, and I wrote my own name in for president.

However I am pleased that my fears have been groundless. Trump has done an amazing job his first year. The true history of these years will treat him well.

The sweetest thing of all is watching Trump crush his enemies, drive them before him, and hearing the lamentations of the Left.

Kevin said...

I predicted Trump would eat breakfast, lunch, and dinner yesterday.

Those three predictions about Trump leave me ahead of Adams who only predicted he'd win the nomination and the Presidency!

Sense of self restored.

Chuck said...

Chuck likes to pretend that his Hillary prediction was a close call. But he didn't just predict a Hillary win. He predicted a Hillary landslide. Even in his own state.

I did not. I knew Michigan had grown to be a really tight race because of all of the attention we were getting in the last week of the race.
Earlier, I predicted a kind of an electoral college landslide for Clinton. Because I believed that Trump would lose all of the swing states. (I was aware that he had Ohio in the bag, and I knew it, and therefore I should really have backed off my earlier prediction.)

Original Mike said...

I got 4 wrong. The first three and that his tweets would get him trouble (which may still happen).

Drago said...

wwww: "A lotta people had something better to do on election day. But if they're turbo-charged, they're willing to crawl over broken glass to vote."

By all means, lets have the conservatives just shut up, crawl back into their shells and take it.

You know, like W did at the end.

It's the only way to save the republicans!!!

You don't get it. If what the dems did with the IRS, CFPB, FBI/DOJ, EPA, BLM etc can't convince you, I don't know what will.

We are in a fight over the very nature of this republic and whether or not conservative views will be essentially legislated and executive ruled out of public square as they already are in every lefty controlled institution.

I get that sheep like Chuck are willing to lick the boots that kick him, but the rest of us are not.

We wanted a fighter, and we got one.

Did that fighting back wake up the left from their comfortable progressive slumber where they were sleep-walking to eventual victory?

Yes. It did.

But it was unavoidable.

Can we still lose? Yes. Ane we probably will, eventually.

How about we not go gently into that good night?

Sebastian said...

His tweets hurt and will hurt. I like many of them, but women vote.

Kevin said...

Trump won, in one of the closest races of our time.

I didn't realize you weren't alive for Bush v. Gore.

SteveR said...

I’m a zero. Starting early in 2016 it became clear that people were crazy and social media would not be a good indicator of voting . Add I the utter corruption and incompetence of HRC and I was able to see what would happen.

Original Mike said...

"Adams is bloviating about people who might get as many as "fifteen" wrong.

Anybody know who Adams has in mind? I wonder who would have gotten 15 wrong"


Inga.

David said...

3 wrong. Early after his announcement I thought it was just an ego play. Not exactly sure when I changed that view but it took a few primaries before I said Oh!

Drago said...

LLR Chuck: "Because I believed that Trump would lose all of the swing states."

And why did you believe that?

Because you cannot survive a moment outside the penumbra of what the MSM/dems/lefties tell you.

You'd have to think for yourself. Simply look around. Simply accept as "new facts" what your eyes were telling you.

No one was showing up for Hillary. Tim Kaine was drawing 15 people at some events!

But no. All the "smartest", "most informed", "educated", "connected" "insightful" people you worshiped were telling you something and not for a minute would you ever even consider not accepting their "genius" wisdom as TRUTH.

And along with the lefties, you decided it was time to "stone the Outsiders!" who dared offer up opposing viewpoints which would have completely destroyed your sense of the way the world works.

Scott Adams for one.

It's why even now you hate him.

Tell us Chuck, do you hate any of the lefty MSM people who have been lying to you for over 18 months?

LOL. Not a chance.

exiledonmainstreet said...

Sebastian said...
His tweets hurt and will hurt. I like many of them, but women vote.

12/22/17, 1:07 PM

I think the tweets which hurt him are not the ones concerning policy or targeting the media, but the ones directed against people like Rosie O'Donnell or Arnold S. There is a difference between tweeting out something which corrects the media version of things and focusing on trivia and celebrity idiots. I cringe at those tweets myself. Trump knows that he won the presidency by not behaving like a traditional politician but people do see the presidency differently.

Matthew Sablan said...

"Early after his announcement I thought it was just an ego play."

-- I look back on the video of Obama and others making fun of Trump, back when he was still a nominally liberal Democrat, and making fun of him for wanting to run for president. I wonder if they look back on it and think, "If only we had held our peace."

exiledonmainstreet said...

Drago wrote:
Chuck likes to pretend that his Hillary prediction was a close call. But he didn't just predict a Hillary win. He predicted a Hillary landslide. Even in his own state."

That can be proved or disproved quite easily. The blog archives are in the sidebar,including the posts and comments written in November 2016.

Kate said...

I can tell from this list that Adams didn't vote Trump for president because he left out the most important item. The first hurdle was always, "Am I really going to vote for DONALD TRUMP for president??!" After jumping over that one, believing the rest of the list was easy.

exiledonmainstreet said...

tcrosse said...
One proposition left out of the test is "I thought the Access Hollywood tapes would finish Trump off". Quite a few people subscribed to that one."

I was one of them.

Matthew Sablan said...

I hated all the Hillary's victory was really close that did things like move part of a city into a neighboring state and the like. It was stupid analysis that reminds of the guy who always loses at board games talking about how he should have passed for an earlier spot in the rotation on turn 2 or 3. It was just pointless whining about how the rules were unfair disguised in an attempt to seem smart.

AJ Lynch said...

What Mockturtle said at 11:55AM.

Original Mike said...

"Adams is bloviating about people who might get as many as "fifteen" wrong.
Anybody know who Adams has in mind? I wonder who would have gotten 15 wrong"


I just took the test for Inga. She got 19 wrong.

wwww said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Francisco D said...

Chuck,

Trump might have won the popular vote in a landslide if not for precincts like the ones in Detroit that went 105% for Hillary.

You never saw anything shady in your time as a Michigan election observer/judge, did you Sgt. Schultz?

Mark Daniels said...

I predicted ten of them and the jury is still out on eight of them. I did not think that he would be impeached and removed by the end of 2017, by the way.

Bob R said...

Same 2 as Althouse.

John Lynch said...

Same 2. The others are a test of exposure to media.

Joshua Barker said...

Not only is Trump a fighter with animal cunning and gut-instinct, he's also glad-handing showman, a billionaire business man who knows how to schmooze... someone who has been up and down inside the seedy belly of NY real-estate development for 40+ years, and a quasi-celebrity who knows how to deal with the viper's nest that is the MSM... I'd say Trump was uniquely qualified to successfully attack and bring down the crumbling facades of the status quo... He is playing 12th dimensional chess, but I doubt he thinks of it that way... The guy has a 6th sense intuition about what needs to be done to achieve his goals, and I'm just glad he's on our side and not theirs...

And for everyone talking about his mistakes and blunders, just remember that this guy has accomplished more in his life than probably anyone else on this board... and now he can add President of the USA to his CV...

"It is not the critic who counts; not the man who points out how the strong man stumbles, or where the doer of deeds could have done them better. The credit belongs to the man who is actually in the arena, whose face is marred by dust and sweat and blood; who strives valiantly; who errs, who comes short again and again, because there is no effort without error and shortcoming; but who does actually strive to do the deeds; who knows great enthusiasms, the great devotions; who spends himself in a worthy cause; who at the best knows in the end the triumph of high achievement, and who at the worst, if he fails, at least fails while daring greatly, so that his place shall never be with those cold and timid souls who neither know victory nor defeat."

eric said...

I got 1 wrong.

And I'm not convinced her I'm wrong. I think the media and Democrats will sink this market and this economy to bring Trump down.

Bob R said...

I should admit that I didn't predict that the rest of the list would NOT happen. I just gave up trying to make predictions after getting the first two wrong.

AJ Lynch said...

Original Mike at 1:35PM.

LMFAO! Thanks

The Cracker Emcee Activist said...

The first two, natch.

Frankly, anyone dumb enough to have their vote swayed by a tweet probably didn’t vote for Trump in the first place.

Night Owl said...

I only got #2 wrong. I knew Trump had the potential to win, since the percentage of undecided voters could swing the election either way. But I thought that the ability of the Dems to "find" lost ballots and their effective "get out the dead vote" drives would drag Hillary to victory.*

A quibble about "GOP will never embrace Trump". I don't think they do. They'll vote with him because their constituents demand it. But I wouldn't say they "embrace" him, in the sense of being enthusiastic and/or affectionate. He pisses off (and has pissed on) too many of them, IMO.

_____
*I woke up on election day from a dream that Trump had won in a landslide, so maybe I was only half wrong, since my subconscious knew he'd win. ;)

Steven said...

4.

But anyone who thinks a President Romney would have done better for Republicans is on drugs. Sure, he'd have managed to "repeal and replace" Obamacare -- with a "bipartisan" monstrosity entrenched forever. The House Freedom Caucus and a handful of Republican Senators (Flake, Cruz, Paul) would have been standing outside railing against the Schumer-McConell-Romney "Socialism with a Corporate Patina" Comprehensive Health Unprintable Act.

Instead, well, hell, we finally got rid of the mandate.

Balfegor said...

Re: Night Owl:

I only got #2 wrong. I knew Trump had the potential to win, since the percentage of undecided voters could swing the election either way. But I thought that the ability of the Dems to "find" lost ballots and their effective "get out the dead vote" drives would drag Hillary to victory.*

I was swayed by my perception that the Clinton campaign had done a lot of prep work and organisation to ensure that their targeted voters knew when the election was being held and would actually show up and vote. My perception of the Trump campaign, on the other hand, was that their get out the vote plan was:

1. Do a lot of rallies
2. ????
3. WIN!

To my, ah, surprise, that worked. It really wasn't as complicated as all the experts had been pretending.

Steven said...

And, by the way, based on what happened earlier this year, the same thing would have probably been put through by Trump if he could have. But he's so personally toxic to Democratic voters that the congressional party can't work with him even to forward policies they'd like. The hostility is forcing Trump to come up with majorities that don't include any Democratic votes, and thus govern well to the right of his personal beliefs.

exiledonmainstreet said...

OK, so I went to the Althouse archives and read the Election Night thread from 2016, which is almost as much fun as watching the Young Turks and MSNBC coverage from that night.

The very first comment on the thread was Shiloh (remember Shiloh?):

Fired up! Ready to Go!

And then there was Inga:

"Hi Althousians! I dropped by in honor of election night and to celebrate the first woman President."

Inga also made a funny about rape, which is amusing when it happens to conservatives:

"Don't be grumpy conservatives, it will all be OK, lay back and enjoy it."
11/8/16, 7:17 PM

My, how they were looking forward to gloating and pouring salt in the wounds!

They sounded quite different 2 hours later.

But we should listen to Inga's predictions now, because she knows that Trump is on the ropes!


eddie willers said...

One proposition left out of the test is "I thought the Access Hollywood tapes would finish Trump off". Quite a few people subscribed to that one."

Of all the ones that would "sink" Trump, I thought this was the one. Mainly because Althouse herself went apoplectic.

But it turned out they shot that bullet too soon.

Once Althouse calmed down and realized there is a whale of a difference between "locker room bragging" and real misogyny. So from the reactions of this board I went from landslide, to defeat, to winning in a squeaker.

This run of Ann's 2015/2016 blogs were the best predictors of all.

JaimeRoberto said...

2 1/2 wrong. The first two. The half comes from the Twitter prediction. It depends on what the definition of yuge is.

Kevin said...

Here's one thing I got wrong: I thought Senators like Manchin and McCaskill who faced tough reelection odds would strategically break ranks and vote their personal interests from time to time.

But no, we get this:

“There’s some good in this bill. I acknowledge that,” Manchin said, when West Virginia radio talk show host Hoppy Kercheval asked the senator why he opposed legislation that will benefit the “vast majority” of taxpayers and businesses in the state.

“The things that you mention are correct. Initially people will benefit and see some changes in their taxes,” Manchin admitted.

Manchin blamed his opposition on projections from some analysts that the tax overhaul would increase the national debt, and that cuts directed at individuals and married couples is temporary and sunset in 2025 without further action from Congress, versus the corporate cuts, which are permanent.


The Dems seem more interested in what states they may pick up and are doing nothing but hope the entire country is so anti-Trump in 2018 that they won't lose any.

I don't think that's going to work.

John Tuffnell said...

#first2
#metoo

Bruce Hayden said...

Missed the first two. Sometime in the spring, I saw him getting the nomination, but that was after knocking some of the other Republicans out. The bigger surprise was that he won the general election. It wasn’t by much - I am convinced that Crooked Hillary could have won those critical swing states if she had put as much energy and resources into them as Trump did. Wouldn’t have needed that many votes in each of them. But by election time, she was running on maybe two cylinders, to his supercharged eight. And that, plus misunderstanding the status and risks in these states is why, I think, that she lost them. Maybe, or she might have lost them by bigger margins, after hearing her Whitney shrieking. The cheating that we have seen documented recently by the Obama Administration in her favor just reiterates how well Trump ultimately did to beat her.

We both went into election eve expecting a Clinton win. Just too much on her side, starting with the obnoxious amount of bias shown by most of the MSM. My partner went to bed, expecting the worst. I stayed up late enough that I knew the good news, and was able to tell her the next morning before she turned on the TV (one of the few times that I could gloat and rub it in that I knew something important before she did.

None of the rest were surprises to me. They one surprise that I did have was how badly the Democrats and the rest of the left took the election. That they would do whatever it took, sacrifice whatever moral stature they had, to try to take down Trump. I knew that they were bad losers, and willing to cheat to win, esp after Gore tried to steal Florida, and thus the Presidency from Bush. But even then, they eventually accepted his legitimacy. We are better than a year after the election, and the attempts to delegitimize Trump, and force him out of office, continue unabated. With no apparent understanding of how that harms the country, and degrades our better than two centuries of peaceful transfer of power. They don’t care. Winning is everything for them, and that delegimizes them and their politics for many millions in this country.

Drago said...

exiled: "My, how they were looking forward to gloating and pouring salt in the wounds!"

Who can forget "Jen Rubin Republican" Chuck talking about how he was going to rub Trumps epic defeat in all our faces?

Of course, you'll never ever catch LLR Chuck talking about rubbing anything in any lefty faces.

Ever.

You should feel free to draw obvious conclusions.

Bruce Hayden said...

“I was swayed by my perception that the Clinton campaign had done a lot of prep work and organisation to ensure that their targeted voters knew when the election was being held and would actually show up and vote. My perception of the Trump campaign, on the other hand, was that their get out the vote plan was:

1. Do a lot of rallies
2. ????
3. WIN!

To my, ah, surprise, that worked. It really wasn't as complicated as all the experts had been pretending.”

I agree that that was my impression too. But part of what I, and a lot of others, seemed to have missed at the time was that Trump did have a very sophisticated electronic micro-target marketing campaign going on under the surface, run by his son-in-Law. Apparently much more sophisticated than the one being run by his opponent, Crooked Hillary. But she was doing what politicians tend to do, which was to hire a bunch of consultants and outspend your competitor, who is supposed to be doing just the same thing. So, who wins and who loses comes down to who is better at fund raising. Which she clearly was. But, Trump didn’t buy into the conventional wisdom, and instead used techniques from the business world to rapidly figure out what worked and what didn’t.

Kevin said...

that the Clinton campaign had done a lot of prep work and organisation to ensure that their targeted voters knew when the election was being held...

Yes, when your target demographic has no idea when Election Day is, that should be a source of worry.

Daniel Jackson said...

Made some money on most of these questions, especially the first two, the economy, and now on Jerusalem.

Unfortunately, most liberals did not want to pay up.

Moreover, no one will bet with me anymore about such matters. "That's because you like Trump," they tell me. "No; it's because I know something about American Sociology (the subject matter; not sociologists--they're hopeless).

Michael K said...

But part of what I, and a lot of others, seemed to have missed at the time was that Trump did have a very sophisticated electronic micro-target marketing campaign going on under the surface, run by his son-in-Law.

The story is in the Lewandowski book. Facebook helped them a lot.

Michael K said...

Again, about the Lewandowski book, they used facebook ads to raise money, often recording the video on an iPhone. The return from these low cost, low tech ads was immense and served as polling.

Every time they had a real crisis, as opposed to fake news, their donations would drop several days before the polls showed a change.

That's how they decided to put the Clinton accusers in the audience for the October debate.

Michael K said...

With no apparent understanding of how that harms the country, and degrades our better than two centuries of peaceful transfer of power.

Nixon declined to contest the 1960 election result, which he could have overturned in Texas and Illinois, because he did not want to cause the trauma to the country.

Hard to remember when politicians cared about the country.

The majority of Democrat voters are not taxpayers.

M Jordan said...

I got ‘em all right. I can prove it: the Friday before the election I plunked down a hundred smackers on Trump when he was sitting at 25% on the betting market. My son, who actually placed the bet for me, also plunked down a hundred. On election night at 7:00 he called and said Trump’s down to 8%. We can dump now and salvage a little.

What? I said. We should buy more. He’s gonna win. Despite the gloom of the news folk (glee, actually), I had been following Florida county votes. I thought he would take it. We didn’t bet any more but we did both make $300.

Sorry to gloat but I just knew. And I also know many more victories lie ahead for Trump. He’s only just begun.

Unknown said...

After I saw him with crowds I knew he was going to win and told people so. I did think "GOP will never embrace Trump" and right up until the tax vote this was true. I knew he was savvy in business but did not guess just how achievement oriented he is. He has gotten so much done (so much winning as they say).

Gahrie said...

The majority of Democrat voters are not taxpayers.

Hell, a large percentage of them aren't even citizens!

rcocean said...

Is there anything more absurd, or pathetic, then some Anonymous guy on the internet boasting that he made "Millions, millions, I tell you" betting he was right, when everyone else was wrong?

Yeah, anonymous guy, tell your real name and give a screen shot of your 'Bet'.

Otherwise, its just hot air.

BTW, did you realize on the internet everyone is at least 6'5"? I didn't realize how many TALL men there were, till I got on the intertubes.

wildswan said...

The first two (but I changed my mind on 2 before the election.)

I never heard of Trump before the primaries and I supported Walker, Bush, Rubio, and then Ted Cruz until Trump wrapped things up. After he became the candidate, I thought he was going to lose badly to Hillary, then I began to think he was going to win. But I thought Hillary would cheat - and I'm sure she did - and perhaps suceed in stealing Trump's victory. I stayed up late and heard Trump win. And after that, I always knew he'd win in the end. And he will, until a Democrat runs on helping capitalists create jobs or until hell freezes over and Satan is holding skating parties on the ice - which ever comes first. And even then I still think Trump might win and it will be a thousand laughs, just like now. Have you heard the New York voters raging that they cannot deduct their taxes? Remember how self-righteous they were about being happy to pay high taxes to help their fellow citizens? Well, now we know that they got back what they paid. And now they sound like the Tea Party - give us back our money, don't tread on us, we'll get you at the polls.

iowan2 said...

Lots of people thing President Trump's tweets are a problem. I think not. His enemies would be relieved. That alone tells me the President's tweets are a feature, not a bug.

Yancey Ward said...

The only one I got wrong wasn't really all that wrong on Election Night- stocks did drop, but I never believed they would stay down, though, for that reason alone.

Of course, the problem with people who got 15 or more of them wrong is this- they really believe they got them all right. They will continue to think they got them all correct until Trump leaves office in January 2025. Nothing can penetrate that level of stupidity- nothing.

Yancey Ward said...

His tweets sometimes cause him unnecessary trouble, but overall they are extremely effective. I wish he could figure out how to eliminate the bad ones, but doing that means to stop it altogether- what the media and the Democrats really want- then I say tweet away indiscriminately.

Tim at large said...

I think the list is sort of loaded, but it took me a while to fear, not think, fear, that he was going to get the nomination, and after I voted for him, extreeeemly reluctantly, in swing-state Florida, I didn’t watch the returns for the first time in my whole, long life. I was instead spent the time preparing myself for the soul crushing fact of Hillary being president.

I did peek in after the tide had turned, and when the networks were desperately trying not to call Pennsylvania for Trump. “You know the returns from Skunk Hollow and Shartlesville aren’t in yet! Lots of Democrats there!” Of course I had driven through Central Pennsylvania a week or so before the election, and the fact that people were proudly displaying Trump signs on their BUSINESSES, where, were they could potentially cost them money, doubts about the certainty of Hillary’s ascension to the thrown were sown, but I just figured that fraud in Philly would overcome on the ground feelings. Florida too, seemed far more Trump friendly that on could even imagine from being in Vermont. But still, I was stone cold convinced he would lose.

After that, once in a while, after a fake news story early on, I began to wonder about the Russian Collusion, but then as the actual facts came to light behind the accusations that led to the whole thing, I began to realize that it was far beyond wildly speculative extrapolations from the known facts to sheer fantasy cooked up by a bitter loser.

Tim at large said...

Plus there was a Trump sign in Vermont on what passes for a major highway there that kept getting vandalized, yet put back up again or fixed then next day. That was some dedication.

iowan2 said...

Has anyone considered that the next Republican that runs for President is going to have a cakewalk with the media? All of the most vile smears have been used up, in a futile attempt to remove President Trump from the Oval office. And, it is all they have. The next Republican can assert with authority, that what the media is trying to say about them is fabricated and use President Trump as an example of how they lie and distort, in the face of reason and facts. The media refuses to report accurately. All of their predictions have proven to be nothing but wishes, based on raw emotion, devoid of reason.
I hope that the Republicans have learned that no matter what they do, the media will lie about them. The media will NEVER respect them. No matter what they do, so the need to stay the course, tweet their message, by-pass the old guard gate keepers of information and spin, is the ONLY path to success.

Tim at large said...

Has anyone considered that the next Republican that runs for President is going to have a cakewalk with the media?

Yeah sure, just like McCain did. They liked him, they really liked him!

Chuck said...

Michael K said...
...

The majority of Democrat voters are not taxpayers.

Wow, if you figured out a way to avoid sales taxes, FICA taxes, gas taxes, taxes on tobacco and alcohol, state and local taxes, and property taxes, I might think about becoming a Democrat!

Paul said...

I'm a zero!

See folks, just as my family saw Obama coming and we paid off all our debts (yes debt free!!) I saw Trump coming! I felt he was going to win it. Even in the primaries all the other Republicans looked like stuffed shirts with nothing to say and the Dems had only a crook and a weird old man.

And Trump's tweets? Dang savvy idea! I've been around this big dirt ball for over 60 years and I've seen all kinds of knuckleheads for politicians. Trump isn't perfect but he was well ahead of anyone else for that election.

Bad Lieutenant said...


Chuck said...
Michael K said...
...

The majority of Democrat voters are not taxpayers.

Wow, if you figured out a way to avoid sales taxes, FICA taxes, gas taxes, taxes on tobacco and alcohol, state and local taxes, and property taxes, I might think about becoming a Democrat!
12/23/17, 7:44 AM


Chuck, I hate to break it to you, but if you are not in fact actually a Democrat, you probably should be. Your changing parties would increase IQs on both sides.

The only difference you seem to have with the Democratic Party is your fulsome external show of loathing for homosexuals (as sincere, as deep as your much touted LLR leanings themselves), which they will be happy to indulge as long as you don't publicize it where their donor base can hear you.

Yes, I think the best thing would be for you to "leave" the Republican Party.

P.S. If you are a rich enough closet case, they will privately find you boys, and you can still fag-bait publicly.