![](\"\/wp-content\/uploads\/2016\/11\/October-November-Surprise.jpg\"\/)
He represents something that they just cannot abide, and that would be the overthrow of their establishment on the elite ruling class. It has them really bugged, and they don\u2019t know how to campaign again him. Let me give you an analogy. Herman Cain. If you go back to the Republican primaries of, what, 2012, Herman Cain had a couple of women claiming that he had had this or that relationship or this or that grope or whatever, and he was gone. Two or three women. Didn\u2019t take much at all, and he, sadly, was out of there.<\/p>\n
It was trumped up, but he\u2019s out of there. Donald Trump has survived everything they\u2019ve thrown at him. Everything. And not only survived it, he\u2019s thrived. Donald Trump, depending on where you look in polling data today is either dead even or in some battleground states is actually ahead. Wherever this race is, one thing\u2019s for certain, and that is the Clinton side had no idea this is where it would be. They thought this was a slam dunk. They thought that Clinton was gonna be up 10, 15 points by now, and it would be all over but the shouting. <\/p>\n
Because so much of this is unprecedented, at least in our lifetimes. Somebody that literally has no experience — and by that I don\u2019t mean this as a negative. He just hasn\u2019t been involved in the, quote\/unquote, “business of politics.” He is a genuine outsider. And I think one of the things helping Trump is, he hasn\u2019t known what he can\u2019t do. It\u2019s not in his vernacular. It\u2019s not in his vocabulary. It\u2019s not in his way of thinking what he can\u2019t do, what you\u2019re not supposed to do. “You can\u2019t do it that way!”<\/p>\n None of that applies, and I think it\u2019s attractive to a tremendous number of people. But, R. J., I appreciate the call. I do think the Clintons are not through. Something\u2019s gonna drop. They\u2019re waiting for it. I don\u2019t know — and the 7th, the day before the election? It could be. It will not happen Saturday or Sunday. Well, I say that, but actually all bets are off in this campaign. <\/p>\n BREAK TRANSCRIPT<\/p>\n RUSH: Steve in Flushing in Queens, great to have you on the EIB Network, sir. Hello.<\/p>\n CALLER: (bad cell connection) Hi, Rush. I want to tell you, there\u2019s good scientific research — not consensus, but good research — to show that optimism measured by (unintelligible) scores is the single best predictor and single most important determinant of who wins in elections. In fact, the most optimistic candidate, the one with lower (unintelligible) scores won 19 of the 23 presidential elections from 1900 to 1988, and 86% of the 29 —<\/p>\n RUSH: Wait, wait, wait.<\/p>\n CALLER: (unintelligible)<\/p>\n RUSH: Where are you reading this from?<\/p>\n CALLER: Huh?<\/p>\n CALLER: Right now I\u2019m reading it from my notes, but this is reported in journals, in peer-reviewed journals and done by one of foremost psychologists in the world. I\u2019m reluctant to give you the reference over the air \u2019cause I don\u2019t want the Democrats to get it. But Donald Trump is clearly the more optimistic candidate, and if he uses the (unintelligible) rating criteria —<\/p>\n RUSH: You don\u2019t want the Democrats to get it? That\u2019s why you\u2019re not mentioning the name of the shrinks that did this \u2019cause you don\u2019t want the Democrats to find it?<\/p>\n CALLER: I\u2019m sure they monitor you show. If you want me to, I\u2019ll tell you.<\/p>\n RUSH: Everybody monitors this program.<\/p>\n CALLER: (chuckling)<\/p>\n RUSH: That\u2019s exactly right. Wait. Wait just a second. This is fascinating, though, because you are assuming that in this campaign it\u2019s Trump who is the optimist; is that right?<\/p>\n CALLER: Yes, clearly.<\/p>\n RUSH: Well, now, if you listen to Obama, if you listen to Hillary, they\u2019re portraying Trump as this deep, dark, dividing, dank presence that sees America as dwindling away and failing and everybody\u2019s in bad shape. They think they\u2019re the paragons of optimism.<\/p>\n CALLER: Well, when these researchers did their work in 1988, they made the results available to both parties. And they may already know this. But that\u2019s why they\u2019re trying to stop it, because the more optimistic candidate, as measured by the criteria these psychologists used —<\/p>\n RUSH: Okay. Well, look that\u2019s all fine and dandy, but I\u2019m just telling you: I think optimism is in the eyes of the beholder. Like a lot of people would agree with you that Trump is optimistic in the sense that he is presenting a vision of a better America, but in the process of presenting that vision he has to detail what\u2019s wrong with it. So the Clintons have harped on that. Obama\u2019s saying, “He\u2019s always focused on what\u2019s wrong with America.” And the Democrats —<\/p>\n CALLER: (unintelligible)<\/p>\n RUSH: Now, wait a minute now. Hear me out. The Democrats have always owned the pessimism. It\u2019s just the way it\u2019s worked out.<\/p>\n CALLER: Yes.<\/p>\n CALLER: Well, his appraisal of the current situation is more pessimistic, but optimism is future oriented. And for him it\u2019s very simple. The problem is we\u2019ve got stupid people running our government, incompetent ones. They can be replaced in a few days, so this is gonna be a temporary situation.<\/p>\n RUSH: All right.<\/p>\n CALLER: And once he comes in… And it\u2019s not just making good predictions. It\u2019s how you explain problems.<\/p>\n RUSH: Right. No, no, I got it.<\/p>\n CALLER: And it\u2019s how much ruminating you do.<\/p>\n RUSH: Yeah, I got it.<\/p>\n CALLER: It\u2019s a simple scoring system and by that system Trump is clearly the winner, but he\u2019s gotta get his message out.<\/p>\n RUSH: Well —<\/p>\n RUSH: All right, let me run another theory by you.<\/p>\n CALLER: (unintelligible)<\/p>\n RUSH: I encountered a theory today, and tell me what you think of this. It seems that in the last — I forgot the total — number of World Series that have gone to seven games —<\/p>\n CALLER: Uh-huh?<\/p>\n RUSH: — if the National League team wins, the Democrat wins. In every recent World Series that went to seven games —<\/p>\n CALLER: Yeah?<\/p>\n RUSH: — the winner of the seventh game, if it was a National League team, then the Democrat presidential candidate won. How does that buck up against your theory on optimism?<\/p>\n CALLER: Uh, I think it\u2019s irrelevant, because that has nothing… You know, when they made these predictions, first these psychologists went through all the campaigns through \u201984, and they made predictions based on one speech — the nomination acceptance speech that the person made — and they only went wrong on the elections of FDR and on the Hubert Humphrey loss. And pollsters say had the election been three days later, he would have won.<\/p>\n RUSH: Right. Okay. Well, for every —<\/p>\n CALLER: So it\u2019s a very powerful concept, but you have to measure by their criteria.<\/p>\n RUSH: Yeah, but you won\u2019t tell us who it is \u2019cause you\u2019re afraid the Democrats are gonna steal it. So we can\u2019t really assess it. I mean, it\u2019s not that we don\u2019t like taking your word for it, don\u2019t misunderstand, but if it\u2019s out there but we can\u2019t go look at it ourselves then we have to keep it at arm\u2019s distance. Look, there\u2019s all kinds of theories and formula, like Allan… Is it Lichtman? He pronounces his name Lichtman. He\u2019s got a formula that he claims has predicted every presidential winner in the last 30 years. His formula is…<\/p>\n I forget what his formula is \u2019cause I\u2019m confusing it with somebody else\u2019s, another. He predicts Trump. I can\u2019t remember what his formula is. There\u2019s no question about it, Trump wins based on the way he analyzes these things, and he\u2019s never failed. Then there\u2019s another guy out there, and he has never failed in his own reporting, and he judges primary enthusiasm. Whichever candidate had more enthusiasm and more votes in the primary ends up being elected president. Well, there\u2019s nobody in either party that had anywhere near the enthusiasm in the primaries that Trump did, and a close second would be Bernie. <\/p>\n Hillary didn\u2019t have any. Hillary didn\u2019t have to have any. The game was rigged. We now know that the Democrat National Committee, Debbie “Blabbermouth” Schultz and everybody, Donna Brazile, the whole shebang rigged the entire Democrat presidential race, the primary race for Hillary Clinton. And it\u2019s a legitimate question to ask: Where are Bernie Sanders\u2019 supporters today? They were openly toyed with and defrauded. <\/p>\n I said, “I wouldn\u2019t be surprised.” I\u2019m waiting. We\u2019re all waiting. We think they\u2019ve gotta have something. Hillary doesn\u2019t have much left. I mean, if Hillary is having to open her rallies with Alicia Machado, who is now a three and a half week old story — (interruption) Oh, you\u2019ve even forgetten who she is? Alicia Machado is the former Miss Universe that gained a lot of weight and Trump made mention of the fact I guess to her when he owned the pageant. And Hillary used her to try to illustrate that Trump hates women and is not nice to women and all that. <\/p>\n She\u2019s out there actually introducing Hillary. That\u2019s what Hillary has left in the tank. Polling data from yesterday that Trump is scoring big with white non-college educated women. That goes against every theory that all the professionals had, that Hillary was gonna clean up with women no matter where they come from, no matter their gender, because Trump is such a reprobate. That\u2019s not playing out. So Hillary is reduced to bringing out Alicia Machado to once again talk about what a bad guy for women Trump is. <\/p>\n I think if they go back to that well again, if that\u2019s what they have to drop, if they\u2019ve got another woman that\u2019s gonna come forward, that\u2019s gonna just drop like a lead balloon, so I don\u2019t think it\u2019s that. But WikiLeaks, I don\u2019t think they\u2019re through, either. And I\u2019ll even tell you what I\u2019m waiting on with WikiLeaks. And it\u2019s a semi-educated guess. It\u2019s based on semi-credible things that we\u2019ve run across. And that is somebody has the 33,000 emails that Hillary claims she deleted. <\/p>\n You know, the emails that have to do with yoga and Chelsea\u2019s wedding reception and registry and all of that, 33,000 emails. Somebody has them. They are somewhere. She sent them to somebody. So I\u2019ve been thinking at some point we\u2019re going to get maybe not all 33,000, but we\u2019re gonna get something significant from that trove that will come in through WikiLeaks. And I\u2019m thinking the Trump campaign has something in reserve, too. I think both campaigns do. And who knows when it\u2019s gonna drop. Something dropping Monday, trying to search my memory banks. The advantage of dropping something Monday, if it\u2019s something big, is that whoever you\u2019re dropping, if Hillary\u2019s dropping on Monday, there\u2019s no time for Trump to react to it. <\/p>\n I wouldn\u2019t put it past them. There\u2019s also — (interruption) Well, it\u2019s a question, would it be effective. It depends on where Hillary thinks she is. I mean, these things also could be seen as signs of desperation. I believe that the Clinton campaign is actually close to this stuff backfiring on them. This is not who Hillary has been presented as. And this kind of dirty trick stuff, I think they\u2019re close to their limit with it on the Democrat side. <\/p>\n More likely, if they have something they\u2019re gonna drop it tomorrow, giving their buddies in the media all weekend to massage it, to amplify it, to focus on it on the Sunday shows. And they will balance that by, “Yeah, Trump will have a weekend to deal with it, but we own the media, and we can deny Trump as much coverage as we want.” So I would think if they have something, it\u2019s gonna happen tomorrow. Monday, risky, extremely so. <\/p>\n<\/section>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":" RUSH: Let me grab a quick phone call here because I want to bounce off this. This is R. J. in Olathe, Kansas. R. J., great to have you on the program. How you doing, sir? CALLER: Hey, thanks, Rush. Thanks for taking the call. RUSH: You bet, sir. CALLER: Longtime listener, first-time caller. I […]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":70,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_et_pb_use_builder":"","_et_pb_old_content":"","_et_gb_content_width":"","ngg_post_thumbnail":0},"categories":[1],"tags":[],"yoast_head":"\n![](\"\/wp-content\/uploads\/2016\/11\/TrumpHillary-arrows-polls-2-1.jpg\"\/)
![](\"\/wp-content\/uploads\/2016\/11\/TrumpHAPPY.jpg\"\/)
![\"large\"](\"\/wp-content\/uploads\/2016\/11\/620149358_large.jpg\"\/)
![](\"\/wp-content\/uploads\/2016\/11\/620870636_large.jpg\"\/)
![](\"\/wp-content\/uploads\/2016\/11\/HillaryBernieFIGHTING.jpg\"\/)