Transcription
So it has been an absolutely insane 2024 election cycle. We have seen indictments, assassination attempts, and a coup within the Democrat Party. We are now hours away from finding out where it's all going to take us. If you're wondering, like me, where that destination is, we could not have someone better equipped to tell us in the studio today than the man who is joining us, Robert Cahaly. I call you the Oracle, the man who predicted the 2016 election on the nose, one of the best pollsters in America, somebody who's been following this stuff—living, eating, breathing this stuff. Robert, thank you so much for taking the time to sit with us.
Well, you know, every now and again you make your way to Columbia because the Gamecocks are playing another game that may or may not win, but we're cheering them anyway. It was a good opportunity to come sit down and talk to you.
Okay, so you're going to the game?
All right, yeah. I just got back from Game 4.
Game 5?
Which game?
Game 4. I have the distinct displeasure of never seeing the Yankees lose a World Series game and having watched them play five, so they really should pay to have me go because it's insane how many times I've seen them win. That was the one game in the series they did win, and the one game they won is the one I went to.
Well, you are a sports nut. I'm glad you mentioned that because we have kind of like party gifts for our guests, and I wanted to give this to you because I know you were at the Yankee game in October.
Mr. October! There you go.
Oh my Lord, wow! That's yours, brother.
You know, the thing is I was looking for somebody else to kind of take this mantle, and if anything, I was thinking it was going to be Otani or Judge, but it's like Freddie Freeman is now the guy who kind of has this mantle. Nobody even expected this, how hard he played this season. Kurt Gibson in Game 1 with the only walk-off Grand Slam in World Series history—the second walk-off home run with two outs, both Dodgers, both Game 1—and like within hours of each other, the ironies there were just... Thank you, this is special. This immediately goes to like probably the best card I have.
There you go.
Well, let's dive into some of your history first before we dive into the election and all the questions I want to ask you about 2024. But give us a little bit of your background. Your company's based in Atlanta, Georgia.
Well, we're actually moving. You know, the thing is we're moving it back to South Carolina. Part of that is just Georgia's... I'm in Fani Willis's jurisdiction. That's enough right there. You never know. We're actually looking to get some property to build our own headquarters. Right now, we have a branch office in Clemson, ironically, because that's where my house in South Carolina is up there. You know, I've spent a lot of time in the mountains of North Carolina, just something a little more convenient than Georgia. So we're looking at probably somewhere in Pickens County, building a new headquarters there.
Well, politicos across the state, I can hear the butts clenching. Robert Cahaly back in South Carolina—they're going to be scared out of their minds. You've run a lot of races in this state. You've got a lot of history in the Palmetto State.
Yeah, I mean, back when we used to do a lot of campaigns, it was a lot of fun. Every now and then, we'll dabble in some independent expenditure and stuff like that. It's still very close to my heart, very important. I want to see people succeed and I want to see the right things happen. There's nothing like South Carolina. I tell people all the time that this place is the ultimate training ground. There's a reason so many South Carolina operatives from Lee Atwater forward have just continued to make their way onto a national stage. You see it all the time, and this is just a blood sport. We learn a lot; we get those early presidential contests, and people get the exposure as being good at what they do to national campaign folks and tend to find themselves rising. So, it's not surprising. I mean, South Carolina is where it's at. It always has been.
Yeah, the state that picks presidents, Republican and Democrat. Now, no one has ever lost the South Carolina primary in either party and gone on to be president.
That's right. Pivotal.
I gotta ask you this. I'm a history major, so I know a little bit about history. The Battle of Trafalgar, 1805: It was the British versus the Spanish and the French. That's the name of your company. Tell us the history of that name and why.
Well, I've always been a big fan of Nelson. Lord Admiral Nelson was the head of the British fleet, and what I liked about the Battle of Trafalgar in particular was Nelson was known for doing things differently. I mean, the admiralty hated him—kind of sound familiar? He did things differently a lot. When he took on the Spanish and French combined Armada, this was Napoleon's navy with a lot left over from the Spanish Armada. It was a battle he wasn't supposed to win; he was outnumbered. But he just totally changed the strategy. It was this idea of being outnumbered, being outgunned, but using superior strategy and tactics to build something that breaks what is expected, does the opposite of what is expected. That’s kind of what we've always tried to do in the political world—is do things differently in a way that you can prove can be successful that can only be attributed to the fact that you're using superior technology, superior strategy, and a better understanding of the lay of the land.
Well, it does translate well to politics, and I've always told anybody that listens that you're one of the smartest guys I've ever talked to about politics. In fact, I once said that nobody other than Richard Quinn was ever at the level, at least in South Carolina, that you had attained.
Yeah, there's no doubt. We've had South Carolina, you know, beyond your Lee Atwaters. I'm telling you, when you look at people like Richard Quinn and Rod Shealy, these guys were geniuses at this business. There's no question, and a lot of us learned things, even working on the other side, learn things from them. I mean, I can't tell you how many times that Rod did something that I didn’t like, but I sure learned from him.
Do you learn more going up against brilliant strategists like that, or do you learn more when you're working with them on a race?
I didn't work with a lot of them. Every now and then, I would work with some of them, but I really... You learn more when somebody beats you at something. When you're young, and you don't know any better, and you just kind of walk in there, you're a little cocky, and they remind you that you're playing in their universe—the big dogs—and they know what you're going to do before you do it. We miss those guys this cycle. Absolutely, big voids.
Speaking of this cycle, we've seen a lot of sunshine pumping from Republican operatives, Democratic operatives. Social media is full of overzealous... What was it the former Fed chair Greenspan called it? Irrational exuberance.
Irrational exuberance on both sides. But you're looking at numbers closer than anybody. You're studying the lay of the land better than anybody. Tell us, as you see it right now, what's the state of this race?
Robert, we have an unprecedented amount of Republicans voting in early voting, especially in places like Georgia. That's a place I've paid a lot of attention to. The ones that have voted are not... I mean, when you think of Fulton, DeKalb, and Cobb, these are the counties that the Democrats need to turn out big, and they have not been. The ones that were busting the norms on early voting are the other counties. I think the last number I saw on the Black turnout was 27%. That needs to be 30% for the Democrats to do what they need to do.
These are record turnout numbers. Georgia is expecting to vote more people in 2024 than in 2020 overall. So, I look at that, and I think... I start seeing the numbers here in South Carolina and other places, and those who think this election is going to have a lower turnout than 2020—I don't think. I agree with that. I think this could be the highest turnout election ever.
You know, we don't have any of the stuff that kept people from voting in 2020 with COVID and everything else, and there's a lot of enthusiasm. And it's not just positive enthusiasm; it's negative enthusiasm on the other side. I mean, you don't hear Kamala Harris's people talking about how wonderful she is as much as you hear, "We don't like Trump." Most of the Trump people—they like Trump or they don’t like Trump—but what they talk about is they don’t like Harris and they're worried about what Harris and the Democrats are going to do.
So, what I see right now is this is a competitive race in a few places. I don't think... I think North Carolina, Georgia, and Arizona are starting to look kind of firm in the Trump column. I think Pennsylvania is kind of the one that could go... It's in the balance, but I think it's probably leaning toward Trump from what I've seen. Michigan could go either way; it's kind of up in the air. Nevada—although the numbers look good—in my experience in Nevada, what they will do the weekend before the election, the unions do is masterful. They know what every one of their members' status is: would they request an absentee ballot, would they vote or not? They will put boxes in casinos and collect them. They will go to the doors of people who requested IC ballots that haven't been sent in yet and say, "I'm here to get your ballot."
Wow, they will do something that can move the election two or three points from Saturday until Tuesday. They go to the door with the pipe smacking against the ballot. It's just to go to the door and say, "It'd be really nice if your ballot's ready to go with me." That worries me as far as predicting there because that's going to be hard.
And Wisconsin—interesting fact, most people don’t know: Wisconsin has same-day voter registration. So, we pulled the numbers on everybody who's registered to vote in 2022, 2023, and 2024. Would you believe that 50%, it's like 51% of all the people who registered to vote in the last three years registered on Election Day in 2022? So there’s no way to poll that state.
You know, it was ironic; it’s like I tell people, "Yeah, and they ask, 'How did you have the best poll in Wisconsin in 2020?'" I was like, "Uh, I don't know. Blind luck on that." I mean, but the one thing is we actually did it right toward the end, and I guess people who were going to vote, who had registered, were doing the, or planned to register, whatever. Those people were saying—that’s where they were. I don't know what it was, but it's a tough state to poll. Right now, as it stands, it looks like it's neck and neck; that could skew it.
So those are the two—Wisconsin and Nevada that I’m worried about, trying to give an accurate number is difficult. And there's still things riding on the others, but you know... If I just say the person who seems to be in the best position for the Electoral College is certainly Trump. People still underestimate the Trump vote. They may have corrected it; I don't believe that because I think the biggest mistake they make is—they don't know how to poll people who have a life. People who have a life don’t answer 25-question polls.
Yeah, they just don't. You can’t explain that to these guys because to them, it’s like, "Well, you have to do this." No! They’re just not going to do it. So you're not going to get average people doing a 700 sample with 25 questions or more. That’s why we believe in nothing but a thousand sample, and we also believe in hitting people the way they best respond—whether it be a live call, a text message, or an email. Just whatever they're responding to is the way to go get them. Don't stick with this hard orthodoxy of having to break it down. This has to be this; no, it’s about getting them to respond. The more people you get to respond, the better numbers you got, and the more ideological and geographic and demographic diversity you have, the better your poll is going to be.
Well, I'm going to put you on the spot on all of those seven swing states you mentioned in just a minute, but I want to go back to... You talked about the early voting a moment ago, and I was looking at some numbers this morning from the University of Florida’s election lab. More than 72 million ballots have already been cast, among these states that track by party—there are about 36 million ballots cast. The breakdown is roughly 38% Democrat, 36% Republican—very close.
Among the states, it should be that close.
Yeah. Well, walk us through. I wanted to get your thought on those 72 million votes that are already in the bank. What can we learn from them about where the race might be going based on those?
Well, you know, Matt and I, he works for Inside Advantage poll, and we work together. We do a podcast called Polling Plus—check it out, where you get your podcasts. Type in the word polling, and that's the first one that comes up, and we talk about this a lot. Every week, we talk about what we're seeing. As we look at some of these votes, what it seems is that the Republicans have embraced this early voting a lot more than in the past.
You know, I hear all the time, "Well, doesn’t that make Trump inconsistent because Trump said early voting was bad and now he says it’s good?" Well, I don’t really agree with that argument. I think that you don’t have to like the infield fly rule, but it’s the rule, so you have to learn to play the game based on it. That actually wasn't really set up to do a designated hitter, but once that became the rules, they had to learn to win that way. Maybe if you win, you can change the rules, but you gotta learn to win the way the rules are. So you don’t have to like the rules to embrace them and win with them.
I think the Republican Party has kind of made that decision. They might not like it, but they’re going to try to learn to win with it. The other thing is, what we've seen that I think we can read by the early vote, both of our polls noted that the weekend we were both in the field, the second assassination attempt stuff was going on. What we saw from the Saturday numbers for the polls we were working on to the Sunday evening numbers was a major move toward Trump, and we have seen that since.
Whereas in 2020, Trump got a little stronger toward the end and had, you know, not so great late September and not so great early October, I think that has been the opposite this time. I think he's had a much better... I would argue that he has done much better. We’ll know more about how this week is kind of panned out when we’re finishing the field this weekend, but so far, I think he's had a good... Having that many votes in the bank this early for when I think he was doing well, I think will bode well for him.
You know, if the election had happened right after she got kind of anointed, then I think she would be doing much better. I mean, there was a point right up until about that second assassination attempt, I told you she was going to win, and she was going to win kind of easy. But I really have seen a real change, and part of this—any new candidate, everybody's like, "How can this be?" You know, remember when we used to have these huge races, and the new person would be, like, on top for a few weeks and then they’d kind of settle out?
It’s like when you're running a poll against a known incumbent and you put a generic Republican versus this Democrat, a generic Democrat versus this Republican, generics always start to win because nobody hates generics yet. There’s no reason to dislike generic. We do not elect people based on which ones we like; we elect ones we like. We make sure the ones we like the least don’t win. I mean, that’s as Jeffy Barber once told me: Your friends will work till 5 o'clock for you to win; your enemies will stay up all night to beat you. That is about the truest thing I've ever heard, and that’s something in politics that’s worth keeping in mind.
Knowing that, what we see is the more people learn about her and her inconsistencies, the more difficult it becomes for her because at first, what she was saying sounded great, and we're picking that up in the polls. But now we're picking up, "We don’t believe that she believes what she’s saying." We think that she's saying what she has to say to win, but this isn’t who she is. This poor woman has said a lot of things, and it’s difficult. I guess it’s difficult to be AG of California and to be a senator from California and not say stuff that’s California.
That San Francisco California talk just doesn’t work nationwide.
Let me ask you this: You talked about the hidden Trump vote, and I do want to get your take on how big you think it’ll be this cycle versus the last two cycles. You got any thoughts on that?
Absolutely. In 2016, it was what we called the shy Trump voter, but it was pretty much limited to the people who answered polls saying things like... polls where it was a live caller because it goes to what’s called social desirability bias, and that’s when someone caters their answer so that the person asking the question will see them in the best light.
When we first figured out—I mean, you know, back in 2016 we were still using automated calls and live calls. We figured out in 2016 in the primaries, why did Trump do three points, four points better on automated than live? Every time—every time, he was always doing better. Then when the election came, boom, boom, boom—three states in a row, the automatics were right, and the live calls were wrong. That’s when I realized we have social desirability going. I didn't know what it’s called then.
What I grew up understanding was what they called the Helms factor. That is, when Jesse Helms was only down by five, he was going to win the election. That was something I grew up understanding. I remember a couple of those Helms races like that, and they were, like, “He’s going to win” because just a certain segment will never admit they're going to vote for him. One of the things I picked up from Rod Shealy was, he said years and years ago, he talked about using the neighbor question: "How are your neighbors going to vote?" He said you've got to give people a polite way to tell you something impolite.
So the question is, “Okay, I understand that’s what you think, but how do you think most of your neighbors would vote?” On our live calls, we started doing the “How do you think most of your neighbors would vote?” What we saw is in every single state, Clinton went down, Trump went up, and we could see those differences. The biggest state then was Ohio, with an eight-point difference.
That’s when we went to Ohio, not only was it going to be won by Trump, but it was going to be won big. You’re crazy; Ohio is a swing state. It may be, but it ain't going to be this time—see you! As it turns out, Ohio was not a swing state, and he did win it very big.
Now, in 2020, there was a lot—it wasn't much of it—it was a little more subdued. In 2020, we didn’t see a huge amount of it. In 2024, it’s bigger, but it’s bigger for a different reason. It’s not shame; it is literally fear. It is fear of being on a list right now. So many Republicans who are for Trump are afraid of being kept track of. They ask, "Who are you doing this for? Who gets this information? Where does it go?" They ask that to your pollsters.
"Where does it go? Who sees this? Oh, wow." Literally, questions like, "Where do you house this stuff? Is this on Google?" They want to know everything. They’re nervous, extremely nervous. You know, when you ever talk to a really deep Second Amendment person, I know I feel this way—that the one thing they like about states like South Carolina is there's not gun registration because they always say, "If they register how many guns you have, that’s the list they use to come and get them."
So people fear this for the same reason. It doesn't matter whether they're right or not; they fear that the government will come and get them. They fear that Big Tech will cancel them; you know, they fear retribution. That’s one of the main reasons they're hesitant to talk, and they're hard to get on the phone. You get people on the phone who start waffling and giving you unsure answers—all those things.
Just when you can give them ways—and since we talked about the neighbor question, we’ve seen so many people copy it. We were the ones who thought of it; Rod told it to me, so I didn’t think of it. Nobody on the national level had been using it for years.
We have other ways we do it too, but what we’ve seen is a bigger hidden vote. I see a big hidden vote in Pennsylvania. I see a big one in Arizona and in Michigan and even Nevada.
Now, is that reflected though in your surveys that you've done, or is it going to be reflected on Election Day?
It’s not—yeah, I think it will be. I think that Trump will exceed where we are on most of our surveys if that hidden vote ends up being what I think it might be. It’s a big statement, Robert.
Yeah, I think it could. I really do. And the thing is—we sometimes are able to get people comfortable enough to come back and tell us. But sometimes we can't. If I can't get them to say they're for him, then I can't actually put that in a poll. But I could see that it’s there, and I feel like that it’s going to be—it's going to be stronger than that.
But the other thing we've learned is the Democrats are very, very good at Get Out The Vote. I mean, I know the Republicans want to stand up and give themselves a pat on the back when they put 30 people in a state, but they put 30 people in a state that Democrats have had 300 on the ground for 10 months.
So when you put 30 people in with, you know, six weeks left, that ain't the same. That’s way more outgunned than Nelson was. That’s right; that’s way more outgunned, and the superior strategies are on their side too.
When you—I mean, I got to see firsthand what they did in that Georgia runoff, those two Senate seats—it's like nothing you’ve seen. I mean, they're going to these people; they train operatives, the operatives then train to go to all these people and put some kind of program on there that harnesses all their contacts and can send them messages reminding them to vote and where.
I mean, just like this concentric circles that they can get going with very little effort—it’s amazing.
I want to ask you this question. We talked about this earlier, and you had mentioned something else that kind of clicked in my mind about all the film that’s out there on Kamala Harris. Talk a little bit about the impact of the memes, the things people are sharing that aren't media coverage, aren't advertisements—just... I feel like that's been a big part of this campaign because the Trump campaign has done a good job. The Harris campaign has done a good job. The main Trump campaign, the MAGA Inc. PAC has done a good job, and a couple of the main PACs with Harris have done a good job.
But the Trump campaign hasn’t spent near the money Harris has spent on digital—not even... It’s not even close. But what the Trump campaign has is so many of these—I can't meme. They call them digital warriors.
I mean, it’s everything from like Dilly and those guys. Yeah, I mean, everything like, you know, an old guy that sees a video he thinks is funny and texts it to all his old buddies.
Yeah! You know, men in their 70s getting these going, "Hey, AR, that’s funny!" You know? Some of the stuff is—you can tell is created by operatives out there, but some of it is just clever content creators who just do funny things.
A lot of it’s off-color. I mean, just...
Yeah, just a little mean. Not the kind of stuff that any campaign would ever want anything to do with, but it's moving around the internet. When I was talking to some of the Gen Z folks, they were telling me stuff I could not believe about some of the stuff that their age group sees. I'm like, "God! I don’t know what I would do if I got that on my phone!" Like, "Wow!"
But it’s a lot. It's so much of this stuff that’s moving around, and it’s not regulated. I guess I would call it almost like a digital, an unorganized digital militia that’s out there. They don’t really know where the battle lines are; they’re just shooting. You know, they're just shooting anybody that looks like they’re on the other side.
Where you shoot Redcoats! Poor guy wore a red coat by accident; he got shot. It’s like... You know, what a great way to describe it. I mean, it’s equivalent to the Revolutionary War; you know, poor guy just wore a red coat. Sorry, we shoot Redcoats. You shouldn’t have worn a red coat!
You know, it’s like... They don’t know! They’re just out there, this digital militia. They’re just out there doing what they can do, and everybody wants to be a part. They feel a part when they can do something, and that is one of the things that all this digital connectivity has provided people. They no longer have to feel like such spectators in politics—they feel like they're participants. And in many ways, they are participants.
Now, how instrumental to that militia has the unlocking of X been—formerly known as Twitter? Because last cycle, it was suppressing narratives; last cycle, it was blocking and censoring and silencing people. This cycle, it is wide open. How important has Elon Musk’s purchase of X been this cycle?
I think it’s been important, not just for X but for the others. You know, you look at what Zuckerberg's been talking about Facebook lately. I mean, they're doing less interfering. I think the expose about what Twitter was doing has made these guys in the digital world know there might be a comeuppance if they do it again.
Once you know, "Shame on you," but twice it starts to be "Shame on the regulators not doing something about it." I think they're all a little worried. Not to mention, whereas Trump's Truth Social is certainly much smaller, it has become a place where they can share a lot of stuff that finds its way over to the mainstream.
In many ways, by Trump doing most of what he does on Truth Social, he’s not as overexposed with everything he does the way he was on X. So, that’s been beneficial to Trump, whether they realize it or not, to be mostly on Truth.
But yeah, I think it’s made a big difference that there’s just like, "Hey! Nobody’s going to stifle what you think. You’re allowed to think what you want. You're not going to be punished for it." The feeling that if these guys get caught trying to temper stories again, it’s going to be really bad.
The other thing I think is that the guys at Facebook and the guys at Google probably know the reality of what's going on.
What do you mean by that?
The state of the race. The media can tell you all kinds of things, and we all hear all kinds of things, but they know what the real background numbers are. They know what people are talking about. They know what’s being looked at, what’s not being looked at in a way that we don’t. I think they see a very strong movement for Trump, and they don’t want that to translate into a Trump presidency and a Republican Congress that has the knives out for them.
They want to try to play face. They want to try to play fair, and I think what Zuckerberg did from Facebook is a first indication of that. They know more than we do.
One Bezos column in the Washington Post kind of calling out the media establishment.
Let me ask you this question. You talked earlier about social putting its thumb on the scale—mainstream press putting its thumb on the scale. Obviously, in this Dan H, sadly, that’s to be expected. We know that a lot of those mainstream outlets are propaganda organs. I mean, the Washington Post at this point might as well just slap a DNC label on it.
But let me ask you this question: when the election officials start to put their thumb on the scale in the form of election fraud—and again, it was alleged in 2020. Trump basically has said since that race that it was stolen, rigged against him. Let me ask you this question: as we look at what's happening in these states, we've seen ballot boxes on fire in the Northwest, we’ve seen one voter ID casting 30 votes in Michigan, and we’ve seen allegations of fraudulent registration in Pennsylvania.
How likely is it, in your estimation, that significant fraud will take place in this race? And do you think that fraud could end up being decisive?
You know, I don’t know that we'll know whether it's decisive, but voter fraud wasn’t invented in 2020. You know, I think a lot of people know a lot about 1960, and we've always... I mean, ever since the first election, there was probably somebody trying to figure out a way to manipulate it.
I mean, there’s nothing strange about this. Voter fraud in big cities like Chicago and Philadelphia has been going on for a long time. When an election is this close, that’s when it’s talked about the most. The fact that so many in the media just shut down any discussion and stifle it only makes people feel like there’s something to hide.
For example, when someone says, "Trump—let’s say any media says Trump spoke about voter fraud," you know, today in his rally, and you know the election was proven not having—anything else, they would say, “There’s the alleged voter fraud, which has not been proven.” They wouldn’t say it was proven to the contrary. But when they push so hard to say something is completely wrong, it just kind of makes people go, "Wait a minute."
It feels like there’s an official position you’re supposed to have. We know some things happened that were irregular. I mean, a lot of things happened irregular. The Hunter Biden laptop was irregular.
I'm a big believer in the Electoral College, so when people ask me, I say, “Hey, in the end, the state’s delegation. I mean, the state legislature picks the electors, and whatever the state picks is what they pick.” So if there was voter fraud in Pennsylvania and the legislature chose to leave the electors in place that the fraud elected, it’s their right as a state to do so.
In the end, it doesn't matter whether you or I think there’s fraud; it matters whether the legislators in a particular state think there’s fraud, and if so, do they do something about it? If they don’t, they have the right not to. When the electoral college has met, it is over, period. You can do about it.
I'm going to believe that Bush v. Gore was wrong. The federal government has no role—no role—in determining how electors are picked. The Constitution says the state legislature, and the state legislature only, picks the electors. The Supreme Court has no role in this.
It does, essentially, because the legislature can pick any method they want. We’ve just settled on 49 states at the popular vote and two states at congressional and the overall popular vote—but that doesn’t negate the years before. I mean, this was based on the College of Cardinals system—of learned people in a room making a decision. In the old days, the legislature picked the top whatever number of electors they had that they believed were the smartest people to send.
So whatever the legislature chooses is what happens.
So tell me why the Supreme Court has a role in that. I don't think it does. I think it never did. So that’s what it comes down to: whether there's voter fraud is determined by the state legislature, and whatever they decide is what they decide.
So as of this writing—while we’re filming this two days before the race—I want to ask you this question: We've got nine states listed on RealClearPolitics as toss-ups. Two of those—Minnesota and New Hampshire—Kamala Harris has leads approaching 5%, according to the average of these surveys. So a lot of folks are kind of putting those in her column, but the other seven states—all within the margin of error for typical polls.
I think most of your polls have around a 2.9% margin of error—all these races are within that margin.
Yeah, we're always under three.
Right, right.
So, if you look at North Carolina, 1.5% Trump. Nevada, 1.5% Trump. That’s well within the margin of error. Pennsylvania, 0.4% Trump. Then you’ve got Georgia, 2.6%; Arizona, 2.3%, starting to get up toward that upper end of the margin of error.
But then Harris is up by small margins—0.8% in Michigan, 0.2% in Wisconsin. Given how close all these races are—and we've talked about some of these earlier—I’ll put you on the spot.
Take us through your election post-election map. Where do you think those seven states fall and by what margin?
Okay, first of all, know that we're doing our final polls this weekend. So I'm going to date stamp this before the final polls come out. I do think North Carolina and Georgia easily... I think you're going to be Trump one. I'm not concerned with a win there. I think that Minnesota’s going to be Kamala. I don’t—that would really surprise me just because, I mean, even when Reagan’s landslide, he lost Minnesota.
So true.
But like I said, if I had to say right now just knowing what happens in Nevada, I would put that in her column. I’d put Arizona in Trump’s column. I would put Pennsylvania in Trump’s column, and Michigan being a toss-up—I’m, man, that’s just one that I—I don’t know for sure. I’d put Wisconsin probably in Kamala’s column, okay?
Right now, if things break that way, Trump’s the winner I guess.
Yeah, definitely would be.
So where should folks watching the early returns—you know where should they look to get a sense of how it’s going?
New Hampshire’s a great place to look. If Trump is only losing New Hampshire by a few—like two points—or winning New Hampshire, get ready. It’s going to be a big night for Trump. Big night! If he wins North Carolina by more than two and a half, three points, because their votes will come in early, it's going to be a big night for Trump.
If on the other hand, North Carolina seems tight—Virginia is blown away. If Trump loses it badly, it could be a big night for Kamala.
I don’t know that we’re going to know a lot about Pennsylvania because of how they’re going to count. That might take us a good bit longer, so that’s one we’re not going to see early.
If Florida ends up being tighter than it’s thought—because remember Florida does have abortion and recreational marijuana on the ballot—so if Florida would end up being like a one-point or two-point race, that’s going to be a good sign for Kamala.
So these are the places that I would watch. And as far as specific races, I would look to the Ohio Senate race because Ohio's pretty good about counting their votes pretty fast. If Moreno wins—and right now we have him down by 810 of a point, I believe—so it’s a very close race. If Moreno wins, that signals good things for Trump. That gives a sense of how that rejection is happening.
So these are little things that you can watch on Election Night. I mean, obviously, you can be looking at Bucks County and... How if Trump is losing in the margin he lost it to Hillary, it’s going to be a good night for Trump. If he loses in the margin he lost it to Biden, it’s going to be a worst night for Trump. If somehow he’s winning, it’s going to be a massive night for Trump.
Is there anything Biden can say between now and Election Day to further screw things up for Kamala, or has he already done his worst?
You know, sometimes you just wonder. I feel like Biden, in many ways, is the old guy that they took the car keys away from, and still is kind of mad about it. You know, maybe sometimes he just decides to throw the elbow a little bit or, you know, drain the gas out of the car—just something. I mean, I’m not even sure the trash thing—like he’s sitting over there kind of by himself doing some podcast or something, like she’s in the Ellipse, and he’s like, “Yeah, I’m going to throw a grenade in here.”
You threw a big grenade in there, you know? So I really—sometimes I think that maybe he did that. I think he did that on purpose. I think there’s a little hostility there. He doesn’t like Trump, but he doesn’t like her either.
Well, and then you’ve got Bill Clinton telling folks they were better off four years ago. That’s not exactly on brand for Kamala Harris, is it?
Yeah, I mean, Bill Clinton talking about the girl in Georgia and how that wouldn’t have happened, I’m like, “Oh my God! That’s not what you—that’s not the way you win votes.”
Yeah, that's of course the murder of the coed there in Georgia by an illegal alien.
Robert, let me ask you this question. I don’t want to get too personal. You’re obviously sitting here with us, you look great.
Well, that’s very kind of you.
Folks have been calling though—a guy called me the other day. Have you heard about Robert Cahaly? I hope I’m not invading or asking an inappropriate question, but folks have been raising questions about your health, and I just figured I’d ask you if you had anything you wanted to say about it. Walk us through.
Well, yeah. I guess this is—you know, there are a lot of people who know this. I’ve been suffering since early this year with stage four kidney disease, and I’m in the process of jumping through the hoops that are required to get a transplant. That leads to very difficult times where it zaps your energy, and this has been a particularly difficult year.
I think, if there’s a testament to anything, it’s a testament to having some very... We made some big changes in the company right around the first year—very positive changes—and I’ve got a really good team and people that have been, on days when I just don’t have what it takes to do much, you know, do some of the media stuff—to, you know, call them and kindly explain, “Hey, can we reschedule?” They’re in so many outlets that have been so kind to us. There are some of the major hosts and stuff who know about this, but it’s just... Every day is not a good day. Some days this thing zaps your energy.
I wouldn’t wish it on anybody. It's a difficult thing to go through, and I’m hopeful that everything will work out. I’m confident that it will. It’s just this has not been a regular year.
It’s kind of good that we don’t do a lot of campaigns anymore because I do not think for one moment I could have dealt with the stress of spending the entire summer and the fall doing campaign work. I just don’t know that I would have made it.
I can literally say enough good about some of the folks on our team. I mean, everything from when I’m stuck out of town because I just don’t have the energy to get back—everything from taking my dog to the vet, to make sure everything is right at my house or wherever when I’m not there. I mean, just all this kind of stuff. People really stepped up, and I don’t think I’ll ever forget the way they stepped in the gap this year.
I’ve never needed the people around me as much as I have this year, and I just can't say enough about how they really stepped up. And I won’t ever forget it.
Brother, you’ll be in our prayers, man. Please keep us posted on the prognosis if you get any info. Let us know because I know a lot of folks were asking about you.
Yeah, I’ve heard some of the really strange rumors. Somebody said you were already dead!
So hey, you're beating that curve!
It was really funny; I was on Hannity one night, and somebody literally called me and said, “Somebody told me you’re on your deathbed!” I was like, “What?!” So I don’t know. I mean, you know, there are a lot of people in this state that are just nutty and do crazy stuff.
Certainly, I’ve been on the—I’ve had those guns aimed at me a few times in life and politics, and it is what it is, and that’s okay. You know, I want to wish all my haters love—one for all the tin foil hatters out there. This is not an AI generation. This is the real deal. This is the real Robert Cahaly. If it was AI, I would make him much better looking!
[Laughter]
Brother, man, I appreciate you coming in, thank you for this. I’ve been looking forward to this. I'm so grateful. We actually teased this on our month in review—having a big special guest coming in. Prayers with you. Thank you for sharing your wisdom, and I appreciate you, brother.
Thank you.
Well, you know, it’s nice to come by and look at your fabulous new setup here. It's very impressive. So, Columbia will never be the same.
We're getting there, man! And go Cox tonight!
Yeah, go Cox! It’s about time we’ve had a couple close ones that we should have won, and I’m just looking forward to what happens when they come back up in my neighborhood and come to Tiger Town because I think it might be time to send those Tigers a message again.
Before you go, though, you bullish or bearish on Shane Beamer? Where are you on the Gamecocks?
Oh, bullish! Bullish! I mean, here’s the thing: I’m a realistic Gamecock fan; I’ve been doing this a long time. The fact that we’re in some of these games we shouldn’t be in... I mean, I was a Lou Holtz fan; we won one game in two years.
I see the improvement, and I know that he’s at the heart of it. Whereas I watch Clemson’s people turn on Dabo after one bad game, like, I’m happy that there's progression. I feel like that he did not start with a lot, and he has built very well. I’m just impressed with what he’s done and yeah, I’m very bullish on Beamer.
But I was very not bullish on the last guy.
So, unfortunately, they both have identical records at this point against top 25 teams. He’s going to have to get over the hump at some point, isn’t he?
He sure is! But you think he can do it?
I think he can because I think he’s just a better coach than a lot of people are giving him credit for. The fact that we’re in some of these games we shouldn’t have been in is impressive. I mean, that’s why nobody’s taking us like... There’s not a team out there thinking, “Oh, the Gamecocks, that’s a week off.”
And that’s new.
That's a good point. Robert, thank you.
Thank you!