You've heard the term "the hubris of Man" before. Basically, the bias of us smart apes to think we "got this" ahead of actually "having it" and assuming (which, as we all know, just makes an ass out of u and me) that we know what we're talking about. And how often we love to apply this falacy to the "science" of elections.
Here we go again. Another well-worn catchphrase. But let's hope it doesn't so aptly apply here this time.
If you remember, just ten years ago to almost the day, we were at another very pivotal election in this country. One in which lines were being drawn in the sand far deeper than we could have ever have imagined then. And in the ultimate act of misguided hubris, the bulk of traditional news outlets, and even the then upstart "new" media of then-named Twitter and pre-Meta Facebook, all predicted (except FOX, of course) that the Democrats would bathe the nation in a blanket of blue. Hillary Clinton would hand Donald Trump his proverbial hat and become the first woman president of the United States. But, more importantly, she'd continue to champion the hard won efforts of President Obama, thwart the hatred and lies of The Don and deny the niche kooks (aka The Basket of Deplorables) who gravitated to him like hapless and ignorant moths to a flame and usher in a New Age of Sunshine and Rainbows for America and The World!
I mean, here's how CNN saw the electoral college breakdown on November 7, 2016, just 24-hours before the election.
The article on the CNN.COM website cache that I just now pulled up via the Internet Archives Wayback Machine for 3:10 pm on that date does concede that the latest polls do show the gap between the two candidates slightly narrowing, but the overwhelming majority of opinion, of all their polling data, point to an easy Clinton win, a humiliating Trump loss and a Blue Wave over all.
As we all now know, that all came crashing down within a few short hours.
2016's Bluebris
Now, as seen in the top photo, we have our latest contest. And the pundits are, again, saying... no worries... Dems will sweep. In the pic, we see a potential Senate change of the guard where it flips from red to blue... and, as can be garnered from the puffed chests of our presenters, they needn't bother pulling up a House map (House seat chart map since a geopolitical map wouldn't work since House districts don't work like the Senate with only two per state) but of course, anyway, it'll be Deep Ultramarine.
Again, hopefully I'm just being paranoid. It's just if you live through a shock like 2016, you never forget it. And the same tricky dicky is in play still, kinda. At least his influence... and his Deplorables.
My personal opinion is that all these pre-election "predictions" are based largely on the "shit people say." What they say in social media, what people hear other people say about shit, and, most glaringly, what people say in polls. Well let me tell you something about people. They love to fucking lie. They love to say things to appease, to cajole, to manipulate, to obfuscate, to confuse, to self-confirm shaky biases, to spew what they think they're "supposed" to say. So what a person says they'll do and what mark they put on paper can be two different things, and many, many times that's just the way it is. Then there's this problem of actual shenanigans with the votes. Could there be manipulation of the ballots? Could there be intimidation at the polls? Are mass numbers of ballots changed or lost? Then there's the aftermath if one side (you know which) doesn't like the results and refuses to adhere to them. It's not like shit like all the above hasn't happened before?
So we'll see Tuesday night if this newfound Bluebris is to be verified or not. It's not like our democracy is hanging in the balance or anything...