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 had a quick question. What do you think it the likelihood is of Trump receiving a November 7th surprise? Something on Monday comes out from the left. Could be bombastic, totally untrue, whatever, but they control the headlines all day Monday, without giving Trump time to refute it.
RUSH: I wouldn’t be surprised at all. In fact, I’ve been waiting for a couple things to drop but they haven’t yet. A number of us have been waiting for them to drop and they haven’t. So something like that on the 7th? Look, nothing in this campaign would surprise me on either side. I’m not sure the Trump people are through, either. I think they may have some things to drop yet, to go on Hillary. I have no idea what. This is such an unusual campaign.
We’ve got somebody running for office that has no fingerprints on anything to do with public policy. We’re got a guy, Donald Trump, that’s never been in government. Whatever is going on wrong in America today, you cannot pin it on Donald Trump. He’s not been there. He has not one fingerprint. He hasn’t done one thing regarding anything policy-wise that’s happening in the country today, and I think this is why his candidacy is so shocking and frightening to both establishment and Republican Democrats.
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’t 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’t take much at all, and he, sadly, was out of there.
It was trumped up, but he’s out of there. Donald Trump has survived everything they’ve thrown at him. Everything. And not only survived it, he’s 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’s 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.
They are the ones in the uncomfortable position. They don’t really know how it’s happened to them because every traditional ways in politics that you get rid of an enemy has not worked on Trump. Trump has defied practically every playbook or blue book technique in dispatching an opponent. Not only has he survived it, as I say: In many cases, he has thrived. And so all bets are off. That’s why I think traditional polling may not be actually correct, traditional reporting, traditional analysis.
Because so much of this is unprecedented, at least in our lifetimes. Somebody that literally has no experience — and by that I don’t mean this as a negative. He just hasn’t 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’t known what he can’t do. It’s not in his vernacular. It’s not in his vocabulary. It’s not in his way of thinking what he can’t do, what you’re not supposed to do. “You can’t do it that way!”
None of that applies, and I think it’s attractive to a tremendous number of people. But, R. J., I appreciate the call. I do think the Clintons are not through. Something’s gonna drop. They’re waiting for it. I don’t 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.
RUSH: Steve in Flushing in Queens, great to have you on the EIB Network, sir. Hello.
CALLER: (bad cell connection) Hi, Rush. I want to tell you, there’s 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 —
RUSH: Wait, wait, wait.
RUSH: Where are you reading this from?
RUSH: Where were you reading it from?
CALLER: Right now I’m 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’m reluctant to give you the reference over the air ’cause I don’t want the Democrats to get it. But Donald Trump is clearly the more optimistic candidate, and if he uses the (unintelligible) rating criteria —
RUSH: You don’t want the Democrats to get it? That’s why you’re not mentioning the name of the shrinks that did this ’cause you don’t want the Democrats to find it?
CALLER: I’m sure they monitor you show. If you want me to, I’ll tell you.
RUSH: Everybody monitors this program.
RUSH: That’s exactly right. Wait. Wait just a second. This is fascinating, though, because you are assuming that in this campaign it’s Trump who is the optimist; is that right?
CALLER: Yes, clearly.
RUSH: Well, now, if you listen to Obama, if you listen to Hillary, they’re portraying Trump as this deep, dark, dividing, dank presence that sees America as dwindling away and failing and everybody’s in bad shape. They think they’re the paragons of optimism.
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’s why they’re trying to stop it, because the more optimistic candidate, as measured by the criteria these psychologists used —
RUSH: Okay. Well, look that’s all fine and dandy, but I’m 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’s wrong with it. So the Clintons have harped on that. Obama’s saying, “He’s always focused on what’s wrong with America.” And the Democrats —
RUSH: Now, wait a minute now. Hear me out. The Democrats have always owned the pessimism. It’s just the way it’s worked out.
RUSH: They have always been known as the party that’s negative and look at everything wrong. And they have relished the opportunity — in their minds, in this campaign — to be the uplifting, optimistic party because they think Trump is just pure pessimism. You don’t see it that way, huh?
CALLER: Well, his appraisal of the current situation is more pessimistic, but optimism is future oriented. And for him it’s very simple. The problem is we’ve got stupid people running our government, incompetent ones. They can be replaced in a few days, so this is gonna be a temporary situation.
RUSH: All right.
CALLER: And once he comes in… And it’s not just making good predictions. It’s how you explain problems.
RUSH: Right. No, no, I got it.
CALLER: And it’s how much ruminating you do.
RUSH: Yeah, I got it.
CALLER: It’s a simple scoring system and by that system Trump is clearly the winner, but he’s gotta get his message out.
RUSH: Well —
CALLER: He’s gotta say what’s bad and then get on to how great he can make it.
RUSH: All right, let me run another theory by you.
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 —
RUSH: — if the National League team wins, the Democrat wins. In every recent World Series that went to seven games —
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?
CALLER: Uh, I think it’s irrelevant, because that has nothing… You know, when they made these predictions, first these psychologists went through all the campaigns through ’84, 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.
RUSH: Right. Okay. Well, for every —
CALLER: So it’s a very powerful concept, but you have to measure by their criteria.
RUSH: Yeah, but you won’t tell us who it is ’cause you’re afraid the Democrats are gonna steal it. So we can’t really assess it. I mean, it’s not that we don’t like taking your word for it, don’t misunderstand, but if it’s out there but we can’t go look at it ourselves then we have to keep it at arm’s distance. Look, there’s all kinds of theories and formula, like Allan… Is it Lichtman? He pronounces his name Lichtman. He’s got a formula that he claims has predicted every presidential winner in the last 30 years. His formula is…
I forget what his formula is ’cause I’m confusing it with somebody else’s, another. He predicts Trump. I can’t remember what his formula is. There’s no question about it, Trump wins based on the way he analyzes these things, and he’s never failed. Then there’s 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’s nobody in either party that had anywhere near the enthusiasm in the primaries that Trump did, and a close second would be Bernie.
Hillary didn’t have any. Hillary didn’t 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’s a legitimate question to ask: Where are Bernie Sanders’ supporters today? They were openly toyed with and defrauded.
Where is Bernie? Why is Bernie even helping her out knowing now what happened? And they’re not denying it anywhere. They’re not denying anything that has popped out of the WikiLeaks dump. Oh. Speaking of that, I don’t think WikiLeaks is through, either. I know nothing, folks. We had a caller at the top of the hour asking me if I thought that the Hillary campaign would unleash something on Trump Monday, November 7th.
I said, “I wouldn’t be surprised.” I’m waiting. We’re all waiting. We think they’ve gotta have something. Hillary doesn’t 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’ve 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.
She’s out there actually introducing Hillary. That’s 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’s 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.
I think if they go back to that well again, if that’s what they have to drop, if they’ve got another woman that’s gonna come forward, that’s gonna just drop like a lead balloon, so I don’t think it’s that. But WikiLeaks, I don’t think they’re through, either. And I’ll even tell you what I’m waiting on with WikiLeaks. And it’s a semi-educated guess. It’s based on semi-credible things that we’ve run across. And that is somebody has the 33,000 emails that Hillary claims she deleted.
You know, the emails that have to do with yoga and Chelsea’s wedding reception and registry and all of that, 33,000 emails. Somebody has them. They are somewhere. She sent them to somebody. So I’ve been thinking at some point we’re going to get maybe not all 33,000, but we’re gonna get something significant from that trove that will come in through WikiLeaks. And I’m thinking the Trump campaign has something in reserve, too. I think both campaigns do. And who knows when it’s gonna drop. Something dropping Monday, trying to search my memory banks. The advantage of dropping something Monday, if it’s something big, is that whoever you’re dropping, if Hillary’s dropping on Monday, there’s no time for Trump to react to it.
I wouldn’t put it past them. There’s also — (interruption) Well, it’s 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’re close to their limit with it on the Democrat side.
More likely, if they have something they’re 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’s gonna happen tomorrow. Monday, risky, extremely so.