After all the counting was done, the decider of yesterday’s presidential election came down to which candidate instilled the most enthusiasm in the electorate, the most confidence in the future — former, now newly re-elected President Donald Trump, or Vice President Kamala Harris.
Accordingly, Trump handily won the Electoral College and will more-than-likely win the popular vote — possibly even by a landslide — in what has been described as the greatest political comeback in American history.
Veteran Republican strategist Alex Castellanos remarked Sunday night that enthusiasm was a factor that could create what he called a "red wavelet" that pollsters were missing and could push Trump into the winner’s circle.
"What I think they’re missing is a massive shift in voter registration underneath all of this. Thirty-one states have voter registration by party.
"Thirty of them in the past four years have seen movement toward Republicans," he said.
"I think there’s, I’m not going to call it a wave, but I think there’s a wavelet out there of Republican enthusiasm and registration.
"If I register to vote Republican, whether I’m switching or new, what am I going to do?" Castellanos, who worked on campaigns for Jeb Bush and Mitt Romney asked.
The answer to that question is quite obvious.
You’re going to vote for the party with which you recently registered and identified.
"I think the pollsters are getting this wrong. We’re all missing something, because they’re giving us the same poll over and over again. There isn’t even statistical variation," he added.
Veteran Democrat consultant David Axelrod hinted at the enthusiasm factor on CNN Sunday after "State of the Union" co-host Dana Bash asked him what concerned him the most about the then-upcoming election.
"When you have polls that are this close . . . you're not sure of anything. It really matters who shows up because these polls are not precise. So what I'm worried about is how we're telling some women who are independent that Republican women, who are independent Republican women to come out and vote for Kamala Harris," said Axelrod, who was a senior adviser to then-President Barack Obama.
"Is that going to materialize?" he asked. "So there are a lot of open questions, and they're obviously working it hard, right now.
"They're seeing it on the street, but this race is filled with uncertainties for them."
Much of that enthusiasm was centered on which candidate instilled the greatest amount of voter confidence, and on the basis of past performance Trump obviously came out as the winner.
We’ve experienced four years under Trump, and nearly four years under Biden-Harris, and the differences are stark. To mention just a few issues:
- Under Trump inflation was minor; under Biden-Harris the cost of everything has skyrocketed — fuel, groceries, housing — everything.
- Under Trump U.S. borders were reasonably secure; under Biden-Harris they’re open to bad actors that include rapists, murderers, and terrorists from nearly every country.
- Under Trump the world was safe, and the Abraham Accords kept Israel at peace; under Biden-Harris we have war in Eastern Europe and the Middle East, and China is saber-rattling in the Far East.
- Under Trump women were safe in their restrooms, locker rooms and in athletics; under Biden-Harris girls and women are denied their safe, private places, and they’re forced to compete against biological males in sports.
Given their records, which candidate instilled confidence among voters?
Which candidate promoted enthusiasm?
Harris claimed she would fix inflation, secure the border, and restore world peace.
If that were true, she would have prevented inflation, war, and open borders in the first place, or corrected them as vice president.
Conversely, she claimed that if Trump were reelected, he would govern as a dictator, ban abortion and the use of contraceptives and in vitro fertilization, and use the Justice Department to go after his political enemies.
If that were true, he would have done those things during his first term.
"Trump is literally Hitler" doesn’t resonate with voters who are struggling to afford housing, gas up their cars, and put food on the table.
Early Tuesday RealClearPolitics.com posted an electoral map in which they predicted Trump would take 287 electoral votes to Harris’ 251.
They also assumed Harris would bank Wisconsin’s 10 electoral votes and Michigan’s 15.
Early Wednesday results had Trump winning 286 electoral votes, including Wisconsin, with Michigan’s 15 and Arizona’s 11 too close to call.
At the time of this writing, the former president was slightly ahead in both.
Democrats and legacy media will eventually blame the Harris loss on racism and misogyny. But that’s not it.
It all came down to confidence and enthusiasm, and when push came to shove, Harris didn’t inspire either.
Michael Dorstewitz is a retired lawyer and has been a frequent contributor to Newsmax. He is also a former U.S. Merchant Marine officer and a Second Amendment supporter. Read Michael Dorstewitz's Reports — More Here.