Top 12 Predictions for 2025

One hazard of predicting the future is the world only remembers the clunkers.  Accurate forecasts are forgotten as fast as New Year's resolutions. Look no further than 100-year old predictions to validate this theory.  Can you name one prognosis from 1925 that was 100% correct?  Thought so.

English writer H.,G. Wells in 1925 forecast the following:"In a hundred years, there will not be numerous nations, but only three great masses of people--the United States of America, the United States of Europe and China."  Not bad for a fiction writer.

Dr. A.R. Wentz, a professor at the Lutheran Theological Seminary in Gettysburg, Pennsylvania, anticipated that people would use a pocket-sized apparatus for communications to see and hear each other without being in the same room.  He was proven prescient with the advent of the iPhone.

Of course, history remembers only the duds.  A scientist at the Pasteur Institute in Paris believed in 100 years people would live to the age of 150 because society would be free by then from the ravages of germs. He obviously never foresaw the worldwide COVID scourge of 2020.

Perhaps the ugliest prediction about the future belongs to Albert E. Wiggam, an American psychologist, who surmised: "If we keep progressing in the wrong direction, as we have been doing, American beauty is bound to decline and there won't be a good-looking girl to be found 100 years from now." Ouch!

With modest expectations in mind, your writer offers these predictions for the New Year, acknowledging readers will heckle the embarrassing flops:

1. The economy roars past expectations of a consensus 1.9% expansion.  The Gross Domestic Product (GDP), a measurement of economic output, grows by 2.6% on an annualized basis.  The economy is spurred by an extension of personal and corporate tax cuts, reductions in government regulations and increased exports of oil and natural gas.  Consumers spending increases as sentiment rises based on the tax cuts, abolishment of taxes on tips and the elimination of taxes on Social Security.

2.  Stocks shake off early volatility and end year with new records. An erratic market rules in the first quarter as traders assess the ability of President Trump to deliver on economic growth without igniting a crippling trade war over tariffs. The S&P index continues its record run, climbing 15% as the performance of stocks not included in the Magnificent 7 post better than expected gains after a modest selloff in the golden seven.  The NASDAQ leads the stock momentum, reaching new record closes.  The Dow lags but manages a modest 5% gain. A boost in merger-and-acquisition activity under the Trump Administration juices stocks in some categories. Meanwhile, Bitcoin soars to $200,000 on the promise of limited use of the crypto currency for some financial transactions,

3.  The job market, after tailing off in late 2024, experiences a modest uptick.  Most of the job growth last year was in healthcare, hospitality and government.  The Artificial Intelligence race fuels growth in jobs in IT, cloud computing, data centers and robotics.  Remote work continues to decline, replaced by a hybrid model.  Generative AI accelerates in replacing tasks performed by humans, ramping up productivity. Monthly job gains average 130,000-170,000 for the year, beating the second half of 2024. 

4.  Inflation cools by mid-year, ending 2025 at 2.2%.  The No. 1 threat to a return of heated inflation is a full year of wage hikes negotiated least year by major unions representing communications, airline flight attendants, postal workers and autoworkers.  In the new year, the pressure on wages will be contracts for freight railway workers, Boeing, the longshoremen and smaller airlines. But costs of groceries, fuel, raw materials, new efficiencies in supply changes and productivity improvements help bring down inflation.

5. The Federal Reserve takes a wait-and-see attitude for the first half of 2025 before reducing interest rates by 100 basis points (a full percentage point)  Fed Chairman Jerome Powell, miffed by jawboning by President Trump for steep rate cuts, resists the political pressure. Several fed governors break ranks and the case for rate cuts gains momentum on the Federal Open Market Committee (FMOC), leading Powell to reverse course and support lowering rates.  The DOGE effort slices $750 billion in spending to trim the deficit for the year, but more drastic cuts are derailed by Democrats and the entrenched bureaucracy. However, the reduction reduces the federal deficit for the year, giving the Fed more reasons to cut interest rates. 

6.  President Trump's promise of mass deportations falls short of "mass" after hundreds of  thousands of illegals are returned to their countries of origin.  Border Czar Tom Howland picks the low-hanging fruit during the first year, deporting illegal immigrant criminals and suspected terrorists.  However, Democrats and their allies in the media highlight exaggerated contributions of illegal immigrant workers, causing some Republicans in vulnerable districts to waiver in supporting the president. Early on the Trump administration ends the Biden era flights of immigrants from Cuba, Venezuela, Nicaragua and Haiti into the U.S, while also reducing border crossings to a trickle. 

7. Multimodal Artificial Intelligence and AI agents are the latest technological developments.  Advances in AI processes create breakthroughs in the generation of content, predictions and insights from multiple forms of data.  AI Agents act autonomously to achieve goals, adapting to changing circumstances and seamlessly working with humans.  These breakthroughs have applications in healthcare, education, communication services, supply chain management and product development. 

8. Once viewed as novelties, AI powered robots graduate from mundane, repetitive tasks to public-facing functions.   Robots already are deployed at warehouses, hospitals and in automotive industries.  In 2025, generative AI will enable robots to plan and replan their tasks, including the ability to understand objects they have never seen before. The new frontier will be creating robots that understand human commands, instead of relying on coded instructions.  Watch for robots to be deployed in fast food chains, where diners will be able tell the machines their order without using a keyboard on a kiosk.

9.  Investments in quantum computing and AI data centers accelerate as the global contest for dominance in those two technologies become nations' priorities.  The field of quantum informational science is critical to national security as the federal government continues to fund research and development. Goggle's parent Alphabet is among the leaders in the quantum field. Powering sprawling AI data centers, the nerve centers of the digital economy, is an issue demanding development of hyper-efficient, liquid cooled structures. The power conundrum is being tackled by  some of the world's biggest data users: Amazon, Microsoft, Google, NVIDIA and Meta.

10.  Electric vehicle sales stall after President Trump and the Republican Congress end the $7,500 tax credit.  In anticipation of the termination of the tax credit, sales of electric vehicles rose 12% in the fourth quarter 2024 compared to the same period in 2023.  Estimates of total EV sales in yearend 2024 are expected to hit 1.3 million, up from 1.2 million in 2023.  Eight percent of all new vehicles sold in the U.S. were electric in 2024, a high-water mark.  Hybrids gain traction with consumers as auto firms churn out more of these vehicles.

11.  Staggering battlefield losses convince Russia's Putin to consider a peace deal to end to the war in Ukraine. By at least one unofficial estimate, the Russians have lost 700,000 soldiers since escalation of the ongoing conflict in 2022. President Trump begins negotiations by challenging European nations to increase their NATO contributions and military support for Ukraine.  In return, he pledges more natural gas shipments to Europe to make up for the loss of Russian resources.  The moves bring Putin to the negotiating table with Ukraine.  Hostilities cease and Europe and the U.S. pledge billions to help Ukraine rebuild its infrastructure.

12.  There is another assassination attempt on the life of President Trump with evidence linking the incident to Iran.   The president places the harshest restrictions ever on Iran and gives Israel the green light to eliminate Iranian nuclear facilities. Under tariff pressure from the U.S., China decreases its purchase of Iranian oil, robbing the regime of one of its key sources of export income.  The Iranian regime teeters on the brink of collapse as protesters take to the streets. 

Clip and save these predictions for 100 years.  Then send an email to your writer about the accuracy of his prophetic abilities.  By then you will be living to the ripe old age of 200, according to this journalist's last prediction for the new year. 

Election 2024: A Historically Unconventional Race

The presidential race is thundering toward the finish line in the most inconceivable American election.  Donald Trump has been the target of two assassination attempts.  Kamala Harris carries the Democratic Party banner without the benefit of being elected by primary voters.  

Acts of political violence are a stain on American politics since the assassination of President Abraham Lincoln.  Through the decades, three presidents have been killed and there have been seven presidential assassination attempts and the murder of Democrat candidate Robert F. Kennedy in 1968. 

Another distinction of this election, Trump is the only presidential candidate who is a convicted felon.  Although even Democrats have dropped the reference because independents and Republicans are convinced the verdict was produced by a sham trial, it hovers over the presidential race. 

Vice President Harris holds the Democratic Party distinction of the only nominee to not receive a single primary vote since Vice President Hubert Humphrey in 1968.  Humphrey's nomination at the Democratic National Convention ended with his defeat to Richard Nixon.   

President Joe Biden after campaigning for more than a year dropped out on July 21, barely four months until election day.  A humbling debate performance cleared the way for Harris to assume the mantle.  Theories continue to ruminate about what prompted Biden's abrupt about face.

With the election in the homestretch, the polls continue to show the outcome will likely be decided by hundreds of thousands of voters in a few so-called swing states.  On the bellwether list: Arizona, Michigan, Pennsylvania, Wisconsin, Georgia and Nevada.  

In 2020, Biden's victory in those states cleared the way for his election. He won those six states by a total popular vote of 312,362.   In Pennsylvania, the Democrat won by 81,660 votes out of more than 3 million ballots case.  He carried Wisconsin by a slimmer margin, 20,682 votes and Nevada by 33,596.

Razor-thin vote margins in Arizona (10,457) and Georgia (11,779) benefited Biden.  Even Michigan, a charter member of the Big Blue Wall named for traditionally voting Democrat, gave Biden a comparatively slim edge of 154,188 votes out of more than 5 million ballots.  

Consider that the 2020 race was decided by less than 400,000 votes out of 158 million ballots cast.  Turnout was seven percentage points higher than the 2016 election.  A record 66% of citizens voted in the election. Some experts are forecasting higher turnout this cycle.

The two candidates are crisscrossing paths with each other ending up in the same state on the same day as they deliver their closing arguments in swing state voters.  A shift in a scintilla of votes could end up titling the election to Harris or Trump.  Dueling camps have bombarded the air waves with attack ads.

What started out as an election about issues, has descended into the junk yard politics mantra: Negative sells.  Trump is painted as Adolf Hitler, who murdered six million Jews and started a world war.  The caricature has been responsible for fueling a toxic political divide that threatens to rupture the country.

Trump has branded Harris a socialist and critiqued her intellect in demeaning language.  His early reference to Harris' racial ethnicity cringed even his supporters.  Both candidates are covered in mud and the voters are left in the quandary of selecting the person with the fewest smudges.  

Unsurprisingly,  national polls reveal the race is deadlocked with less than two weeks until Election Day.  Looking under the hood of the polls, there are positive and negative signs for both campaigns.  Polls agree on one point: Harris and Trump both have above average unfavorable ratings. 

Worrisome for the team Harris is that she is underperforming with key demographics that were responsible for Biden's narrow win.  She has lost support among Hispanics, African-Americans, Asians, particularly men in those demographics.  If the trend continues, it will not bode well for Harris.

Trump is behind with college graduates and suburban women.  Abortion is proving to be an issue that still moves the needle with swaths of voters across party lines.  It was a crucial wedge issue in the 2022 midterms and could once again cleve Trump support among independents. 

Mail-in voting, a tool used extensively during the Covid-era election of 2020, is trending lower.  It turned out to be a boon for Democrats, but at least early signs don't indicate it will be as robust this year. However, early voting is on pace to break records, galloping ahead of 2020 and 2016 levels.

Political watchers are noticing early voting among Republicans is outperforming Democrats, a once unthinkable outcome. Republicans have traditionally preferred to cast ballots on Election Day.  

On election night, the early results in Pennsylvania will offer a clue to the remainder of the evening.  Biden banked 36.2 percent more early votes than Trump in 2020 to offset Republicans voting advantage on Election Day.  If Harris falls below 25%, it will be a clunker of a start to a long agonizing evening. 

The final tally could take days, since Arizona and Nevada are notoriously slow reporting results. Whatever the outcome, expect fireworks from the losing side.  Candidates have accused each other of being a threat to Democracy. There will be no gracious concession speeches.

Adding to the turbulence is revelations by U.S. spy agencies that foreign actors are using covert influence campaigns to interfere in the election. Intelligence indicates Russia, Iran and China are sewing discord and disinformation. Expect the losing candidate to point to election interference as a factor in their defeat.  

Campaign rancor and the divisive cultural chasm have the makings of a potential power keg in the election aftermath. The nation's temperature is north of 98.6 degrees. Let's pray for decorum in the name of saving democracy.  We should all want a peaceful end to this fractious election.  

Frolicking Your Way To Prescription Happiness

Exposure to pharmaceutical company advertising may leave you shaking your head.  Never have people looked so giddy about having a serious health issue.   Do these folks recognize disease is nothing to sing and dance about? Turns out, one little pill is a prescription for profuse jubilation.    

Pharmaceutical firms spent $1.1 billion on advertising in 2023, most of it on television to convince Americans to gulp more medications.  It must be working because Big Pharma racked up $722.5 billion in sales last year in the U.S., peddling more than 20,000 FDA approved drugs.  

Statistics show most of us are taking a prescription drug.  According to the Centers For Disease Control and Prevention, 60% of adults are on at least one medication and 36% are swallowing three or more drugs. Pillboxes are the new must-have vanity item.

The names of the medications are designed to be catchy and memorable.  Take Skyrizi, a prescription for moderate to severe plaque psoriasis.  Sounds like the name for a sky diving outfit.  Picture yourself parachuting into luxurious skin.  The sky's the limit with this medication.

The fanciful name Cymbalta sounds like an Italian dish.  Or an orchestral instrument. But the prescription drug is used to treat depression and anxiety, so the brand name has to be uplifting.  No one wants to take an anxiety medication with a name such as Doomstics.

The Food and Drug Administration (FDA), which approves mediations, insists brands cannot be viewed as overpromising on a cure.  For example, the FDA rejected the name Regain for an Upjohn company drug that helps regrow hair.  Upjohn changed a single letter and won approval for Rogain.

Big drug manufacturers use focus groups, consumer testing and a phonetic formula to create evocative names for their products.  In an average year, the FDA approves about 60 new drugs and the makers want each one to sound different than every other prescription.  With 20,000 drugs, it's getting harder.

Apparently, someone at Sanofi, a consumer healthcare firm, ran out of clever names for medications.  The company slapped the moniker Xyzal on its allergy drug, which promises 24-hour relief from scratchy throats, running noses and itchy eyes.  Did a marketing person throw a dart at an eye chart?

But today it takes more than fetching names to sell prescription drugs to consumers.  Television ads featuring dancing, singing actors are how you stand out in the crowded prescription space. Drugs to treat type 2 adult diabetes feature Broadway worthy productions.

If you ever seen a Mounjaro commercial, chances are you rushed to your doctor and pleaded for a prescription.  Overweight people suffering from diabetes look awfully happy about their battle against disease. They can't stop grinning, swirling and clapping on television.

Similar drugs in the same category--Wegovy, Ozempic and Jardience--are trying to outdo Mounjaro on the blissful meter.  They feature practically intoxicated adults, dressed in loose fitting clothes with perky demeanors.  They are canoeing, hiking and flitting.  No one is ever eating cake in these ads.

Even mirthful drug names cannot mask the side effects.  The killjoys over at FDA mandate the drug companies mention the possible downside of the medication.  After the onscreen celebration of the medication, an off camera narrator delivers a somber warning.

It usually goes something like this: taking XYZAB may cause weight loss, blurred vision, rapid heartbeat, acute kidney injury, increasing or worsening chronic renal failure, diarrhea, nausea and vomiting.  Who would sign up for those side effects?  

A benign drug this writer has taken for years contains this WARNING: "A very bad reaction called angioedema has happened with this drug. Sometimes this may be life-threatening."  Say, what? How often is "sometimes"?  Twice a week? Once in a millennium?  Just asking. 

The key for selling the drug is for the announcer to whiz through the side effects at hyper speed, hoping the rhythmic performers distract the consumer.  It would be fun to once hear the narrator make this claim to see if folks are paying attention to this gibberish:

"Taking this medication may cause you to lose four toes, soil your pants, call your wife by your exes name, provide your  computer password to a complete stranger, sprout long hair on your nose, leave your new iPhone in a seedy bar and drop your expensive Patek Philippe watch in a airport toilet."  

If that sounds entertaining, imagine showing up in your doctor's office with a list of every drug advertised that encourages consumers to ask your physician about taking this medication.  Innocently inquire: "Should I be taking..." and then reel off the entire list.  

I tried it and found out primary care doctors have no sense of humor. The doctor fixed me with a quizzical look and folded arms.  He didn't appear amused.  There's a reason you won't find humor in a medical dictionary.   

Make America Venezuela

Venezuela's thuggish regime hardly inspires imitation. But the South American country's overhaul of its highest court is eerily similar to the plan outlined by President Biden.  Venezuela's dictators hoodwinked voters into believing reforms would strengthen the Supreme Tribunal of Justice.

In 1999, Hugo Chavez outlined a string of proposals to promote democracy.  The strongman proposed laws making it easier to remove sitting justices. His plan included 12-year term limits. As part of the scheme, he expanded the court by 12 members, packing it with cronies.

Nicolas Maduro, who succeeded Chavez, now oversees a tribunal that does the president's bidding. The International  Court of Jurists (ICJ) calls the tribunal nothing "but an instrument of the executive branch." It no longer serves as a grantor of the "rule of law, human rights or fundamental freedoms."  

In a speech marking the signing of President Lyndon Johnson's Civil Rights legislation, Biden unfurled his party's masterplan for remaking the Supreme Court.  He argued a president should appoint a justice every two years for an 18-year term. He pushed for enforceable conduct and ethics rules.

Biden claimed his proposals were to "restore faith in the Supreme Court."  However, his plan is nothing more than a presidential election year ploy to juice Democratic Party turnout.  His ire has been raised by court decisions he labeled as "not normal."  

Forget the Constitution's separation of powers clause which spells out three distinct branches of government: legislative, executive and judicial. Evidently the Constitution is seen as an "existential threat to democracy" by Biden.  There's nothing normal about changing Supreme Court terms.  

If Biden wants to bolster rules of conduct, he should start with Congress.  One member of his party--New Jersey Senator Bob Menedez--still serves in the Senate despite a conviction one 16 felony charges. Democrats need Menedez in a closely divided Senate, so personal ethics are fungible.  

Another Democrat, Texas Congressman Henry Cuellar and his spouse have been charged by federal prosecutors with participating in two schemes involving bribery, unlawful foreign influence and money laundering.  Cuellar remains a member in good standing in the House of Representatives.

If the president has a serious concern about ethics, he should be leading an effort to strengthen the Code of Ethics for members of Congress. Why is he silent on that issue, yet indignant on the travel of Supreme Court justices?

Following Biden's effort to undermine the Supreme Court, press secretary Karine Jean-Pierre marched to the podium at a press briefing to declare surveys show "the American people" want term limits for justices.  In her view, America should be governed by polls not by the Constitution. 

Since she is a proponent of rule by polls, perhaps Karine's boss will now shill for term limits for Congress.  A poll by Pew Research finds 87% of Americans support term limits.  Nearly eight in ten (79%) favor age limits too.  Less than half (46%) agree on term limits for high court justices.

Nancy Pelosi has served 19 terms in the House, a number matched by Frank Pallone, a Democrat from New Jersey.  However, they are eclipsed by Republicans Christopher Smith and Harold Rogers; and Democrat Steny Hoyer. Each has served 22 terms in Congress.

Seven senators have served a total of 223 years: Democrats Patty Murray, Jack Reed, Chuck Schumer and Dick Durbin; Republicans Chuck Grassley, Mitch McConnell and Susan Collins. Each has been elected to six-year terms ranging from four to five times. 

Biden and his party also point to the age of the justices, a shot aimed at the oldest sitting jurist Clarence Thomas, who turned 76 this year. The president and the Democrats had no such qualms about Ruth Bader Ginsburg, who died at age 87.  She served 27 years on the highest court.

The Constitution doesn't mention age limits for justices, but if age is on the table, what about Congress? There are 11 current members of Congress who are 80 or above, including 90-year-old Republican Chuck Grassley.  Justice Thomas is a youngster by comparison. 

The truth is Biden's "bold plan" to reform the Supreme Court has nothing to do with ethics, age or terms limits.  This is a scam to make the court an adjunct of the executive branch, bending it to the political will of Democrats.  It worked in Venezuela.  Why not in the U.S.?

Court packing was tried under another Democratic Party President, Franklin D. Roosevelt.  His motivation, like Biden's, was FDR's displeasure with SCOTUS rulings. The court struck down key components of Roosevelt's New Deal, drawing criticism from the president. 

He secretly developed a plan to appoint additional justices for every sitting justice over the age of 70.  It would allow FDR to appoint six additional justices to the court. Sound familiar? Once Roosevelt revealed his plan, it was met with stinging opposition, even from Roosevelt's Democratic Party. 

Roosevelt's court packing scheme suffered a resounding defeat.  The Biden court "reforms" deserve the same fate.  America's democracy calls three separate branches of government.  It's worked for 248 years and there are no Constitutional grounds for Biden's election year contrivance.     

Why You Can't Trust Political Polls

Historians generally trace presidential polling to the 1824 election.  A straw poll conducted by the Harrisburg Pennsylvanian newspaper predicted Andrew Jackson would win.  In what would become an all too familiar outcome, the poll was inaccurate. John Quincy Adams was elected president. 

Since that oops moment, there have been a procession of presidential polls that have spectacularly failed. In 1936, The Literary Digest polled its two million subscribers and concluded Republican Alf Landon would triumph over incumbent President Franklin D. Roosevelt.  Oh-Oh.

In 1948, the prestigious Gallup Poll reported that Thomas Dewey would beat President Harry Truman. Gallup predicted the margin of the vote would be 45% for Dewey and 41% for Truman.  The poll secured its place in infamy as Truman won 50% of the vote compared to Dewey's 45%.

A more recent whoops moment occurred in 2016 when polls showed Donald Trump trailing Hillary Clinton in 2016.  Two poll modelers put her chances at 99%.  Trump's stunning win left Clinton to claim the Russians had influenced the outcome. Hillary's problem was putting too much stock in polls.

The 2016 election has been the subject of an analysis by the Berkeley Haas School of Business at the University of California-Berkeley.  Their study found a steady decline the in accuracy of early polls.  Only 60% proved to be accurate including those conducted up to 10 weeks before the election.

Their analysis of 1,400 polls from 11 election cycles found the outcome lands within the poll results only about half the time. The Berkeley Haas study documents many reasons the election outcome could be different from polls, including the way pollsters compute confidence levels in their results. 

Confidence levels only take into account a sampling error, a statistical term that quantifies deviations from polling large voting populations. But Berkeley Haas concludes that it does not include other kinds of error, such as surveying the wrong set of voters.  As a result, there is more opportunity for errors.

Nonpartisan Pew Research Center has studied polling in depth for decades, shedding light on presidential surveys.  Pew has researched surveys from Gallup, Fox News, Associated Press and others, that conduct polls by telephone or online from randomly selected samples of adults. 

Pew documented the influence of party affiliation in national polls. There are 7% more registered Democrats than Republicans. Pollsters generally attempt adjust their data to compensate for this disparity. Surveying more Democrats would reflect a bias in results.

Pew researchers admit that is no single "correct" adjustment to the ratio of Democrats to Republicans for national polls.  Pollsters use their own modification, which explains why there can be differences between national polls.  The absence of a standard ratio explains why polls are often wrong.

As Pew points out, there is also a bias in people who register to vote. Compared with the public in general, registered voters tend to be older, wealthier, more likely to be non-Hispanic whites and homeowners, according to Pew.  

"Evidence suggests that the Democratic advantage is somewhat narrower among registered voters than the general public--and often even narrower among actual voters," Pew found.  What this means is that polls often have a sampling prejudice that tilts toward an oversampling of Democrats.

Democratic likely voters are also clustered geographically, more so than Republicans. Since national polls are designed to reflect geographic population centers where the majority of likely voters are located, polling will underrepresent the candidate preferences of Republicans. 

Sampling for "likely voters" is also less science than the polling organizations confess.  Pollsters screen for registered voters on the assumption they will cast ballots.  However, Pew has reported that in each election there are a myriad of factors that determine whether registered voters turnout.  

In some elections, Democrats have outperformed the 7% advantage in registered voters.  In others, robust Republican turnout has erased the registration margin. Turnout is the most difficult number to calculate yet it is most critical factor in determining the election outcome. 

Polling methodologies are also subject to variances.  Different polls may have sampling errors, different weighting practices for Democrats and Republicans, variations in the wording of questions and differences in the survey mode--whether by telephone or online, notes Pew. 

One flaw never mentioned in news coverage about poll results is telephone surveys, a staple of many polls including the Gallup Poll.  An estimated 73% of Americans, including most under the age of 40, do not have a landline telephone.  Those with landlines skew older, distorting results.

Pew reveals that all national polls use weighted data rather than raw data.  In other words, the actual survey numbers (raw data) may show one presidential candidate leading by five percentage points.  However, the data is adjusted to reflect the general population's age, race, gender and region. 

Most Americans have no idea that the polling numbers they are reading are subject to so many alterations, which have the potential to influence the outcome of the polling. 

Pew Research's extensive analysis of national polling uncovered another prevalent defect in surveys.  Pollsters often claim their polls have a three percent margin of error.  Pew found the real margin of error is often double the one reported.  That makes a huge difference in closely contested battleground states. 

Remember national polls reflect voter preferences from a sampling of states.  However, U.S. presidents are not selected by popular vote.  The tally of votes in the Electoral College determine the presidential outcome.  That makes national polls an unreliable predictor of the final Electoral College vote. 

State by state polls might potentially paint a true picture of  the electoral outcome.  However, those polls are often conducted by newspapers or state organizations. There are wide disparities in the quality of methodologies used at the state levels, including those by professional polling organizations.

Despite these cautions, polls are already popping up reflecting the head-to-head matchup between Vice President Kamala Harris and former President Trump.  In one poll, the election is a dead heat.  There are more than 100 days until the election.  As noted, early polls are notoriously wrong.

These polls are fodder for campaigns and the media.  But they are practically useless as predictors of the outcome of the election.  So much has happened in just the last few weeks--an assassination attempt on Trump; President Biden bowing out; and, the coronation of Harris as the Democrat nominee. 

The public has not had time to digest all these developments to form an opinion about voting in November.  The race is just beginning. And convulsions in the political landscape are likely to jolt the campaigns, including a Manhattan judge's ruling on presidential immunity.  

Even with overwhelming evidence, America's pollsters remain in denial about the accuracy of their predictions.  They owe Americans the truth about how the polls are conducted, including a breakdown of respondents age, gender, party affiliation and geographic representation. 

If pollsters election forecasts go south this election, they will rush in with a clever spin.  Their revisionist narratives will assert their polling was misrepresented or they were within the margin of error.  Don't fall for their phony excuses.  Put your faith in election returns not polls.   

Opinion: Will Political Hate Speech Ever Cease?

An attempted assassination of presidential candidate Donald Trump plunged the country into a political abyss.  Never again the country swore after President Ronald Reagan was wounded 43 years ago.  And yet, here we are again--the collision of violence and politics that saps the soul of a nation.

In my nearly eight decades, I have witnessed the assassination of President John F. Kennedy in 1963.  In a single year--1968--the United States suffered through the killing of civil rights leader Dr. Martin Luther King and the murder of Senator Robert F. Kennedy, leaving the nation stunned.

Former President Trump was holding an outdoor rally in Pennsylvania when a gunmen armed with a rifle squeezed off eight shots, wounding the candidate in the right ear, missing his face by millimeters. When this blog was written late Sunday, questions are swirling around the assassination attempt.

How was a gunmen able to secure a perch on a building roof within 150-yards and a clear line of sight to the former president? Did the Secret Service do a proper site survey of that building prior to the rally?  Were Secret Service snipers surveying the building during the event?  

In the aftermath of high profile shootings involving politicians, the FBI has always immediately assumed responsibility for the crime and held on the spot briefings, answering reporters questions.  Why has it taken so long for the FBI to provide transparency? Why the delay? What are they hiding? 

Why didn't Homeland Secretary Alejandro Mayorkas, who is in charge of the Secret Service, honor a Trump campaign request for more protection?  Why did Mayorkas refuse to provide a Secret Service detail to candidate Robert F. Kennedy Jr., whose family has been targeted twice by assassins?

Were political considerations factors in the decisions by Mayorkas? And why is the Secret Service already admitting it has no plans to beef up security for the Republican National Convention in Milwaukee on Monday?  Biden's security detail also should be bolstered.  

Too many unanswered questions remain, which is fueling conspiracy theories, anger and distrust.  President Biden's statements in the aftermath have been admirable.  But the agencies in charge of protection and the investigation need to stand for a public briefing accompanied by media questions. 

There is no excuse not to do so, even if all the facts are unknown. 

President Biden called for lowering the temperature of political discourse.  He is right.  However, in the two years leading up to the shooting,  the media and Democrats have compared Trump to Adolph Hitler, who murdered more than six millions Jews.  Incendiary rhetoric always proceeds assassination attempts.

Biden also has mocked Trump as a "dictator" and has over and over reminded supporters that the former president is an "existential threat to democracy."  He regularly calls Trump a convicted felon and five days before the shooting said  "it was time to put Trump in the bullseye." 

Many Democrats have used similar language without weighing the impact of their pejorative words.  

Attorney General Merritt Garland is quick to condemn "hate speech" of administration critics and opponents.  But he has been strangely silent in the wake of continuing comparisons of Trump to Hitler.  Garland also has tacitly sanctioned the harassing lawsuits against the former president.   

In an effort to cover their tracks, the media is accusing the former president of tapping into Hitler "vibes" as The New Republic magazine claimed. An unrepentant media can be expected to ramp up the anti-Trump vitriol with the kickoff of the GOP convention.

Want to understand the deep vein of Trump hatred in the country?

Your journalist tracked social media posts on Facebook and X, formerly Twitter after the assassination attempt.  Here is just a representative sample of the scalding temperature of the political climate.  

"Trump can't run his mouth off and expect not to pay for it."

"This (shooting) was obviously a set up by Trump.  The guy loves attention."

"Next time the shooter needs to spend more time at the range."

"This is classic Trump.  He's losing the election so he arranges to get nicked with a bullet."

A staffer of Democrat Rep. Bennie Thompson, a rabid Trump critic, huffed the shooter needed "lessons so you don't miss next time." Thompson fired the staffer.  

Colorado Democrat Rep. Steven Woodrow was despondent because "the last thing America needed was sympathy for the devil, but here we are."

This represents the state of American politics. Politicians, the mainstream media, social platforms, candidates and the two political parties own the inferno.  They need to preach civility as well as practice it.  Healing a nation always takes longer than plunging it into the abyss. 

Abraham Lincoln, before he was brutally assassinated, shared advice for times such as these. "I have been driven many times upon my knees by the overwhelming conviction that I had no where else to go.  My own wisdom and that of all about me seemed insufficient for that day."

Amen, Mr. Lincoln. 

Conspiracy To Cover Up Biden's Cognitive Decline

A political earthquake rattled the Democratic Party after President Biden's debacle in the first presidential debate.  A growing schism in the party over the president's cognitive fitness is roiling Washington. Biden's handlers and family are circling the wagons, hoping to stave off a party revolt.

A growing chorus of Democrats went public urging the president to gracefully exit the race in the face of plummeting poll numbers.  But a defiant Biden in an ABC interview made it clear he is pressing on, stubbornly insisting he was the best Democrat to beat former president Donald Trump.  

Amidst the turmoil, the lackey Biden mainstream media did the unthinkable. They turned on the president after propping him up for four years, despite a spate of public episodes offering evidence that Biden was neurologically impaired.  

Editorials and opinion pieces in The New York Times called for the president to bow out of the presidential race.  The Washington Post published a column with suggestions for a speech tailor made for Biden's  campaign withdrawal.    

The Times reported that at last month's G-7 meeting in Italy observers were said to be "shocked" at Biden's state.  Another unnamed official confessed Biden appeared to be "out of it," according to The Times. Other media felt emboldened by The Times reporting to pile on. 

A string of articles based on administration insiders painted a picture of an out-of-touch president, who is shielded by his staff from bad news in fear of igniting Biden's temper tantrums.  His handlers limit his schedule to a 10 a.m. to 4 p.m. to avoid sapping the 81-year-old's mental and physical energy.

The media's sudden about face is prompted by a realization they can no longer lie about Biden to Americans who witnessed a decrepit president with their own eyes. The president's halting speech, raspy voice, nonsensical word salads and non sequiturs were on full display.   

Former New York Times executive editor Jill Abramson undressed journalists covering the president for failing to "hold power accountable," while participating in a "massive coverup" with the White House to shield Biden's obvious mental decline.

"It is our duty to poke through White House smoke screens and find out the truth," Abramson said.  "The Biden White House clearly succeeded in a massive coverup of the degree of the President's feebleness and serious physical decline, which may be simply the result of old age."

Another respected liberal journalist Carl Bernstein told CNN how multiple well placed sources disclosed to him that Biden's abysmal debate performance was not atypical but increasingly representative of the president's mental fog.  Bernstein's sources reported 15-to-20 similar episodes.

The media knew.  But the powerful who control the nation's news outlets choose to deceive Americans.

Instead of independent reporting, the fawning media regurgitated press secretary Karine Jean-Pierre's talking points.  Behind closed doors Biden runs circles around his staff.  His mental sharpness amazes everyone around him.  He has the energy of someone half his age.  All lies.  

The messaging was picked up by Democrat leaders such as House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries, Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer and Vice President Kamala Harris.  Biden is fully engaged and sharp these top Democrats swore.  Other Democrats chimed in right on cue.  More lies.

You would expect as much from Democrats panicked the truth about Biden would seep into the voters' conscious.  Even when online videos and Fox News documented the president's verbal stumbles, confusing and dazed appearance, Jean-Pierre called the visual evidence "deep fakes."

But the debate ended the charade.  The cellophane wrapped president appeared on television for 90 minutes looking every bit of his 81-years, pasty-faced, staring blankly in the distance and seemingly unable to summon up talking points that had been drummed in him for six days.

Those who blame Biden for not being truthful about his mental decline should point fingers at the media. Their job is to honestly report on the occupant of the White House even when they know the truth will help the hated Donald Trump.  But they were invested insulating Biden from criticism.

For example, the White House press corps never insisted that Biden stand for a full press conference until post-debate. Consistently answering reporters questions is a basic tenant of presidential coverage. Yet Biden has held the fewest press conferences since Ronald Reagan.  

At one point in 2022, Biden went nearly 200 days without being interviewed by an American TV journalist.  Jean-Pierre claimed the president had taken more questions than his predecessors combined. There was no push back from fact-checkers.  The White House press corps never challenged the lie.

Every American should be convinced the media cannot be trusted.  They willingly, knowingly participated in a conspiracy to coverup for Biden. The media cabal's sudden interest in exposing the truth is a sign they have new marching orders from Democrats hoping to oust Biden from the ticket.

The nation deserves an answer to these questions: "Who orchestrated this massive conspiracy that involved Vice President Harris, the media, cabinet members, donors, White House staff, congressional Democrats and foreign leaders? Were power brokers pulling the strings behind the scenes?"

The fallout from the coverup doesn't just rest on Biden's decision to obstinately stay in the race.  How can a man with serious cognitive issues remain president for four more months?  Can he be trusted with nuclear codes and critical midnight decisions? The nation is at risk every day Biden clings to power. 

Democrats should remind Biden he pledged to be a one-term president when he ran in 2020.  He admitted he was no "spring chicken." Perhaps he was being honest or it was just a ploy.  This will not end well for Biden, the Democratic Party or those who knowingly fed falsehoods to voters.

What will Biden and Democrats do?  First Lady Jill Biden and their grifter son Hunter Biden are isolating the president in a cocoon to ward off detractors. No one has been able to pierce the bubble. Jill and Hunter will not allow Biden to go quietly into the night.  

There is a nuclear option.  Democrat leaders, including Vice President Harris, could meet secretly with the president and threaten to invoke the 25th Amendment, which provides for removal of the chief executive if he is incapable of serving.  

Faced with the certainty of an ouster,  Biden could choose to magnanimously resign or suffer the humiliation of being thrown out of office. 

What if Biden calls their bluff?  Would Democrats really want to hang out to dry one of their own in a messy public flogging?  The next few weeks should provide some answers.  This writer's opinion is the party is stuck with Biden at the top of the ticket.   

Joy Reid, a co-host on ABC's The View, may have been prescient when she asserted on air she would vote for a comatose Joe Biden over Trump.  That perspective may be shared by large numbers of Democrats.  That's why a Biden candidacy may yet survive the political gallows.