RUSH: Now Hillary has pulled out of Ohio, and the New York Times dutifully says, “That’s okay! Ohio doesn’t matter anymore.”  I’ve got it right here. “Ohio, Long a Bellwether, Is Fading on the Electoral Map.”  You know why?  ‘Cause it’s too white.  

Ohio is no longer the great predictor. Ohio is no longer the great indicator.  It used to be that you couldn’t win the presidency without winning Ohio, because Ohio had collectively a microcosm of the country’s population.  But now? Now Ohio doesn’t matter, since Hillary is not doing well there — and they say (paraphrased), “It’s just too white.  It’s too white.  There aren’t enough illegals there, there are not enough minorities, and so we can’t use Ohio the way we have in the past.”

BREAK TRANSCRIPT

RUSH:  Ladies and gentlemen, I neglected to tell you something about the New York Times and this Ohio story.  The story today, which is September… Well, it ran last night.  It was dated September 30th.  “Ohio, Long a Bellwether, Is Fading on the Electoral Map.” The New York Times headline July 4th, a couple of months ago when Hillary was thought to have Ohio in the bag? “Trump Finds Himself Playing Catch-up in All-Important Ohio.”  Just two months ago, when Hillary was leading Trump in Ohio, the New York Times headline was, “Trump Finds Himself Playing Catch-up in All-Important Ohio.”  

The New York Times headline yesterday, now that Trump has pulled ahead in Ohio is, “Ohio, Long a Bellwether, Is Fading on the Electoral Map.”   That quickly?  Back on July 4th it was the all-important bellwether, it was the single most important indicator, and now two months later it’s “fading in importance on the electoral map”?  Hmm.  How does that happen?  How…? Seriously, how in hell does that happen?