Connect with us

International

10 reasons Donald Trump is headed for a landslide victory over Kamala Harris

Published

5 months ago

12 minute read

From LifeSiteNews

By Stephen Kokx

Republicans voting early, Democrats’ dislike for Kamala Harris, and polling and gambling numbers are all signs that the former president will win the election.

There is one week left in the presidential race and by all indications Donald Trump is headed for a landslide victory.

Many people I talk to tell me that they are fearful that it will be stolen from him. Here’s why I don’t think that’s likely at this point.

First, there are more registered Republicans in battleground states like Pennsylvania, North Carolina, and elsewhere than there were four years ago. This is a built-in statistical advantage for Trump.

Second, early voting and mail-in voting show that more Republicans are casting their ballots before Election Day than Democrats this year, which has not been the case in previous presidential races.

Analyst Mark Halperin has predicted that if those trends continue, Trump will be declared the winner relatively early after polls close next Tuesday.

 

 

That fact was recognized by Barack Obama a week ago when he told the media that “the brothas” do not have the same “energy” for Harris as they did when he himself ran for president.

 

Obama’s comment did not go unnoticed. During an MSNBC town hall at a barbershop in Philadelphia, black males told reporter Alex Wagner they were “offended” by Obama lecturing them how to vote.

Left-wing MSNBC anchor Andrea Mitchell has also admitted that Harris has a “big problem with men,” as have other websites.

Fourth, if you look at where Trump is campaigning this week, you can only conclude that his internal polling indicates he has shored up enough support in key battleground states that he can afford to go elsewhere to expand the map.

To be sure, he will still be visiting Wisconsin, North Carolina, and other Midwestern states over the next seven days, but he’s also headed to New Mexico, where, according to one poll he is within the margin of error.

 

Trump’s decision is notable because New Mexico hasn’t voted for a Republican president since George Bush in 2004. Mark Halperin has said, “if Trump wins New Mexico, he’s going to win in a landslide.”

 

Trump is also headed to Virginia, another historically Democrat state. Virginia elected Republican Glenn Youngkin in 2022. He is fighting to prevent illegal immigrants from voting and has instituted a number of other reforms that will likely have the effect of ensuring the count is accurate.

Trump’s daughter-in-law, Lara Trump, appeared with Youngkin in the state last week. It’s clear the campaign believes he has a chance there.

 

Fifth, almost all polling data in recent days, even those from left-leaning organizations, shows a decisive break in Trump’s favor.

 

Harris’ decision to skip the Al Smith Dinner and her awful appearances on Fox, MSNBC, and her CNN town hall with Anderson Cooper are likely to blame.

The “vibe shift,” as Tucker Carlson has called it, has been so dramatic that even liberal outlets like CNN are admitting that Trump very may well capture the popular vote.

Michigan and New Hampshire are also states he has improved in in recent days.

At least in 2020 there was a plausible explanation for Joe Biden’s supposed victory as many polls showed he was ahead going into Election Day. This time around, that argument is not on the table.

Sixth, Democrats have no end game. They are trying to link Trump to “fascism.” This is an awful closing message, especially for a candidate who promised to “unite” Americans. This shows how desperate they are.

Hillary Clinton, for example, went on MSNBC and laughably claimed Trump’s epic Madison Square Garden rally Sunday night was a Neo-Nazi rally. Why she didn’t use the term “deplorables” is beyond me.

During its own coverage of the event, MSNBC ludicrously compared it a pro-Hitler gathering there in 1939 while failing to note that Bill Clinton himself accepted the Democratic Party’s nomination at the same arena in 1992.

Even ABC’s Jonathan Karl couldn’t deny that the rally was a pivotal moment in the campaign.

“Trump has created a movement, there is no doubt. I cannot think of another Republican figure of my lifetime who could’ve come into a Democrat city like New York and put together anything like that,” he said.

Conservative Charlie Kirk has theorized that the constant Hitler references are intentional, and that Democrats are laying the groundwork for yet another assassination attempt.

Only a campaign that realizes it is on its death bed does such desperate things.

Seventh, Democrats are admitting that Trump is doing exceptionally well.

Left-wing New York City Mayor Eric Adams told the press this weekend that Trump is not a fascist.

Progressive commentator Cenk Uygar commented that Trump “looked presidential and personable” during his Joe Rogan interview. He called Harris a robot who acts like a “talking point machine.”

Former CNN anchor Chris Cuomo, who relentlessly pushed the COVID shot and is now injured from receiving it, hosted a town hall with JD Vance on News Nation. Cuomo could not deny that Vance and Trump appeal to many ordinary voters.

If Adams, Uygar, and Cuomo are admitting this, then regular Americans, even those who have supported Democrats in the past, are thinking it too.

Eighth, the betting markets favor Trump.

Alright, so this is a pretty unscientific way to gauge an election, but money talks, does it not?

If the oddsmakers are hedging their bets and predicting a Trump win, then chances are they know what they are doing. If they didn’t, they’d be out of business. I don’t think it is realistic to think they are up to some sinister game by tinkering with the numbers right now given all the other trends mentioned above.

Ninth, there is no obvious explanation for a Harris victory if a steal were to occur, as there is no voting bloc she can point to right now that could win the election for her.

Over the past two months, Trump has enlisted a small army of politicians, influencers, and media personalities to cast as wide a net for him as possible.

While Tucker Carlson is out riling up young male voters, Robert F. Kennedy Jr. is courting moderate Democrats and health-conscious medical freedom activists.

What’s more, while Tulsi Gabbard is on the stump speaking with women, Elon Musk is making it easier for tech executives and business owners to support Trump.

What segment of the voting population is left for Harris to convince in this last week of the campaign? The sponge has been rung dry and the constant heckling of her at her rallies suggests folks have grown tired of her constant lies and evasiveness.

Tenth, there is no “October Surprise” that could derail Trump’s campaign at this point, especially with voting already underway.

Trump has been in the public spotlight for well over 40 years. He is a known entity, and the American people are preferring him — yet again — to the Democratic option, despite his personal flaws and scandals.

It is simply not possible for Harris to get the polls to go back to even and then rally not just the Democratic base but crucial independent voters next Tuesday.

As Carlson said at a rally in Georgia last week, if the Deep State does cheat and Harris is declared the winner, the people won’t put up with it this time. It will be too obvious that it was fraudulent as all the traditional indicators show she is headed for an historic defeat. I could be wrong, and I have been before, but I’m more inclined today to place a bet on Trump on one of those websites than Harris.

Related Topics:

Todayville is a digital media and technology company. We profile unique stories and events in our community. Register and promote your community event for free.

Follow Author

More from this author
2025 Federal Election / 4 mins ago

Fixing Canada’s immigration system should be next government’s top priority

2025 Federal Election / 23 mins ago

China Election Interference – Parties Received Security Briefing Days Ago as SITE Monitors Threats to Conservative Candidate Joe Tay

2025 Federal Election / 2 hours ago

Alcohol tax and MP pay hike tomorrow (April 1)

2025 Federal Election

Hong Kong-Canadian Groups Demand PM Carney Drop Liberal Candidate Over “Bounty” Remark Supporting CCP Repression

Published on March 31, 2025

By

Sam Cooper

Thirteen Hong Kong-Canadian organizations are calling on Prime Minister Mark Carney’s Liberal Party to immediately revoke the candidacy of MP Paul Chiang, alleging he “may have violated Canadian laws” after making explosive remarks that appeared to endorse a Chinese Communist Party bounty targeting a Toronto-area Conservative candidate.

The controversy centers on Chiang’s comments during a January meeting with Chinese-language media in Toronto, where the Markham–Unionville Liberal incumbent said, “If you can take him to the Chinese Consulate General in Toronto, you can get the million-dollar reward,” referring to Joe Tay, the Conservative candidate in Don Valley North who is wanted by Hong Kong authorities for running a pro-democracy YouTube channel in Canada.

The response from Mark Carney’s Liberals appears increasingly conflicted, especially in light of remarks made last year by the party’s top foreign affairs official concerning Chinese transnational repression targeting Hong Kong immigrants in Canada.

Foreign Minister Mélanie Joly issued a warning in December, stating: “This attempt by Hong Kong authorities to conduct transnational repression abroad, including by issuing threats, intimidation or coercion against Canadians or those in Canada, will not be tolerated.”

Tay had remained silent since the revelations broke Friday. But on Sunday evening, he made his first public statement in a post on X.

“This is the most challenging time in our lifetime, and we must give it everything we’ve got to protect this place we call home. A fourth term for the Liberals is not an option,” Tay wrote.

About the same time, Paul Chiang posted his own statement on social media, offering a direct apology to Tay.

“Today, I spoke with Joseph Tay, the Conservative candidate for Don Valley North, to personally apologize for the comments that I made this past January. It was a terrible lapse of judgement. I recognize the severity of the statement and I am deeply disappointed in myself. As a 28-year police veteran, I have always strived to treat people with respect and dignity. In this case, I failed to meet that standard. I know better and it will never happen again.”

Despite the apology, a Carney campaign spokesperson told reporters Sunday that the party would not remove Chiang from the ballot.

Now, leading Hong Kong Canadian advocacy groups are intensifying pressure, saying Chiang’s comments amount to a tacit endorsement of Beijing’s foreign repression network — a growing concern for Canadian authorities, especially after Ottawa’s diplomatic expulsion of a Chinese official last year over threats to MP Michael Chong’s family.

“The integrity of Canada’s democratic elections has been damaged,” the groups wrote in a joint statement. “Paul Chiang’s actions may have violated Canadian laws, including the Foreign Interference and Security of Information Act and the Canada Elections Act.”

Meanwhile, as the chorus of political condemnation grew beyond criticism from Conservative Party leaders, NDP MP Jenny Kwan — herself a victim of targeted Chinese interference, according to testimony at the Hogue Commission — stood with NDP leader Jagmeet Singh and several candidates in Vancouver and addressed the Chiang scandal directly.

“He is a police officer, and he ought to know that when the CCP [Chinese Communist Party] went out and put a bounty on anybody, including Canadians, that cannot be acceptable. That is intimidation at its worst,” Kwan said.

“And yet, he played right into it. He advocated for people to bring [Tay] to the Chinese consulate to collect the bounty. In what universe is this normal?”

Kwan added the remarks are especially damaging while Canada is facing “active, sophisticated foreign interference activities targeting Canada’s democratic institutions.”

The Hong Kong Canadian groups described Chiang’s apology as “insincere” and “a tactic to downplay the seriousness of his outrageous comments.” They argue that any politician “truly sympathetic to oppressed Hongkongers” would never suggest delivering a Canadian citizen to a hostile foreign government’s diplomatic outpost.

“Chiang’s remarks legitimize foreign interference and potentially threaten Tay’s safety,” the statement reads. “This is not just about an offhand comment — it’s about whether our elected officials are willing to stand up to transnational repression or not.”

The joint release also cites findings from a national survey showing that 85.4% of Hongkonger-Canadian respondents are deeply concerned about transnational repression and infiltration in Canada, while 40.9% reported reducing public political engagement due to safety fears.

“Chiang’s remarks exemplify how foreign interference continues to cast a shadow over Hong Kong immigrants’ lives in Canada,” the groups said, emphasizing that more than 60% of respondents are alarmed by Canada’s handling of relations with China, particularly the influence of Chinese diplomatic institutions operating within Canadian borders.

“The Liberal Party must send a clear message that intimidation or threats against political candidates will not be tolerated,” the statement continues. “Canadians — particularly those who fled authoritarian regimes — deserve a democracy free from foreign interference.”

The Bureau has contacted the Liberal Party for further comment. This is a developing story. More to follow.

The Bureau is a reader-supported publication.

To receive new posts and support my work, consider becoming a free or paid subscriber.

Support a public interest startup.

We break international stories and this requires elite expertise, time and legal costs.

Continue Reading

Censorship Industrial Complex

Welcome to Britain, Where Critical WhatsApp Messages Are a Police Matter

Published on March 30, 2025

By

logo

By Cam Wakefield

“It was just unfathomable to me that things had escalated to this degree,”

“We’d never used abusive or threatening language, even in private.”

You’d think that in Britain, the worst thing that could happen to you after sending a few critical WhatsApp messages would be a passive-aggressive reply or, at most, a snooty whisper campaign. What you probably wouldn’t expect is to have six police officers show up on your doorstep like they’re hunting down a cartel. But that’s precisely what happened to Maxie Allen and Rosalind Levine — two parents whose great offense was asking some mildly inconvenient questions about how their daughter’s school planned to replace its retiring principal.
This is not an episode of Black Mirror. This is Borehamwood, Hertfordshire, 2025. And the parents in question—Maxie Allen, a Times Radio producer, and Rosalind Levine, 46, a mother of two—had the gall to inquire, via WhatsApp no less, whether Cowley Hill Primary School was being entirely above board in appointing a new principal.
What happened next should make everyone in Britain pause and consider just how overreaching their government has become. Because in the time it takes to send a meme about the school’s bake sale, you too could be staring down the barrel of a “malicious communications” charge.
The trouble started in May, shortly after the school’s principal retired. Instead of the usual round of polite emails, clumsy PowerPoints, and dreary Q&A sessions, there was… silence. Maxie Allen, who had once served as a school governor—so presumably knows his way around a budget meeting—asked the unthinkable: when was the recruitment process going to be opened up?
A fair question, right? Not in Borehamwood, apparently. The school responded not with answers, but with a sort of preemptive nuclear strike.
Jackie Spriggs, the chair of governors, issued a public warning about “inflammatory and defamatory” social media posts and hinted at disciplinary action for those who dared to cause “disharmony.” One imagines this word being uttered in the tone of a Bond villain stroking a white cat.
Parents Allen and Levine were questioned by police over their WhatsApp messages.
For the crime of “casting aspersions,” Allen and Levine were promptly banned from the school premises. That meant no parents’ evening, no Christmas concert, no chance to speak face-to-face about the specific needs of their daughter Sascha, who—just to add to the bleakness of it all—has epilepsy and is registered disabled.
So what do you do when the school shuts its doors in your face? You send emails. Lots of them. You try to get answers. And if that fails, you might—just might—vent a little on WhatsApp.
But apparently, that was enough to earn the label of harassers. Not in the figurative, overly sensitive, “Karen’s upset again” sense. No, this was the actual, legal, possibly-prison kind of harassment.
Then came January 29. Rosalind was at home sorting toys for charity—presumably a heinous act in today’s climate—when she opened the door to what can only be described as a low-budget reboot of Line of Duty. Six officers. Two cars. A van. All to arrest two middle-aged parents whose biggest vice appears to be stubborn curiosity.
“I saw six police officers standing there,” she said. “My first thought was that Sascha was dead.”
Instead, it was the prelude to an 11-hour ordeal in a police cell. Eleven hours. That’s enough time to commit actual crimes, be tried, be sentenced, and still get home in time for MasterChef.
Allen called the experience “dystopian,” and, for once, the word isn’t hyperbole. “It was just unfathomable to me that things had escalated to this degree,” he said. “We’d never used abusive or threatening language, even in private.”
Worse still, they were never even told which communications were being investigated. It’s like being detained by police for “vibes.”
One of the many delightful ironies here is that the school accused them of causing a “nuisance on school property,” despite the fact that neither of them had set foot on said property in six months.
Now, in the school’s defense—such as it is—they claim they went to the police because the sheer volume of correspondence and social media posts had become “upsetting.” Which raises an important question: when did being “upsetting” become a police matter?
What we’re witnessing is not a breakdown in communication, but a full-blown bureaucratic tantrum. Instead of engaging with concerned parents, Cowley Hill’s leadership took the nuclear option: drag them out in cuffs and let the police deal with it.
Hertfordshire Constabulary, apparently mistaking Borehamwood for Basra, decided this was a perfectly normal use of resources. “The number of officers was necessary,” said a spokesman, “to secure electronic devices and care for children at the address.”
Right. Nothing says “childcare” like watching your mom get led away in handcuffs while your toddler hides in the corner, traumatized.
After five weeks—five weeks of real police time, in a country where burglaries are basically a form of inheritance transfer—the whole thing was quietly dropped. Insufficient evidence. No charges. Not even a slap on the wrist.
So here we are. A story about a couple who dared to question how a public school was run, and ended up locked in a cell, banned from the school play, and smeared with criminal accusations for trying to advocate for their disabled child.
This is Britain in 2025. A place where public institutions behave like paranoid cults and the police are deployed like private security firms for anyone with a bruised ego. All while the rest of the population is left wondering how many other WhatsApp groups are one message away from a dawn raid.
Because if this is what happens when you ask a few inconvenient questions, what’s next? Fingerprinting people for liking the wrong Facebook post? Tactical units sent in for sarcastic TripAdvisor reviews?
It’s a warning. Ask the wrong question, speak out of turn, and you too may get a visit from half the local police force.

Reclaim The Net needs your help

Make a one-time donation
Continue Reading

Trending

X