The “Shy Tory Effect”: Why This Race Is Trump’s To Lose

Every Englishman knows the “shy Tory effect”: there are appreciably less people willing to declare their support for the (once) Conservative party than those who then, in the secret of the ballot box, vote for them. 1992 and 2015 were particularly strong examples of this. Another rather impressive example was the recent Brexit referendum, clearly showing (again) that when the BBC and the other media demonise or clearly disfavour one side this cowed a number of people to silence in the polls, who then provide the “surprise” on the day of election; leaving the bullying mass media to spend an ocean of words on why their own intimidation did not work as expected in the end.

Donald Trump has systematically outperformed the forecasts in the Primaries. There is no reason to believe the same is not happening in November. The strange way some American polling institutions conduct their polls reinforces this: if you call at 10:00 am in the middle of a crowded office everyone will be listening, full of excitement. Not easy to shout “make America Great again!”, at least not for some. Then there are the pollster who call private homes and ask to talk to the “youngest registered voter in the household”, thus clearly and willingly prefabricating the Hillary advantage, which will make good headlines for a day but will motivate even more “shy Trumpers” to go to vote.

I do not think the effect is secundary. I think it's huge. The Conservative victory in 2015 took absolutely everyone by surprise. Why? Because the liberal faggot machine has trumpeted itself so much, that it was in shock at being contradicted by reality. The same is happening in the US, where everything seems to indicate when the polls say “too close to call” this means “clear Republican victory”, and when they say “Clinton 5 points ahead” they really mean “the bitch might have a real chance”. And I am talking of the halfway serious pollsters here. Apparently there are pollsters out there who make national polls interviewing 4, 5 or 7% more registered Democrats than Republicans, when Gallup state they are at 28% each nationwide. Someone is cheating big time here, and it is clear that most “independent” polls have be on just another instrument of very dependent electoral propaganda.

Add to this that the Libertarians tend to hover around 7% whilst the Greencucks are down at 2 or 3%. We all know these numbers tend to reduce drastically as the moment of truth approaches. I concede a number of Greens will vote Crooklary, but I can also imagine many will just stay home out of sheer hatred for Crooklary. On the contrary, it is easier to imagine Trump will bag more Libertarian votes than Crooklary, and I smile at reading all those pundits who say “white and educated = Crooklary”. Poppycock. This is just the kind of people who shows, in their majority, a rather long finger to the Clinton machine.

I should, therefore, be very optimistic, almost euphoric. Still, I can't go beyond a cautious optimism.

Trump is prone to errors, and due to his “double down” instinct he is likely to amplify any error. He has played well in the last weeks (I loved the entire Mexico-Wall affair), but again it is only a matter of time before the next big blunder enters the scene. Has Trump learned to keep himself under control? To an extent, probably yes. Will it be enough? Hopefully yes. Will he avoid further blunders? Don't bet your pint.

Still, the “shy Trumper” effect is there. All indicators show a higher motivation among Trump voters. Trump also fares better among the independent and the older segments of the electorate, showing that he has the key to victory already in his hands if he uses it properly. He even appears to make inroads among Black Christians, and he will clearly clean up among veterans and soldiers. On the other side, Crooklary must mobilise the Black vote, but she isn't black, actually not even “tanned”: she is the very embodiment of the so-called White Privilege the Blacks are taught to hate by people like her. Those who hope in a mobilisation of the Black voters akin to the Mulatto races in 2008 and 2012 will be, methinks, bitterly disappointed.

Then there are the debates, where I suspect Trump will pulverise the woman, after which all major network will declare her the winner, and him a bully. Again, I doubt this will impress many. I think Trump will gain another point or two from the debates alone.

Please, Lord, guard the man's tongue, and spare us from a major catastrophe end-October.

We need a Christian West.

We need Crooklary as little as she needs Monica.

M