Read Ebook {PDF EPUB} Winning in a Landslide by J.M. Cartwright Opposition party wins landslide election in Turks and Caicos Islands. Businessman Charles Washington Misick led the Progressive National Party (PNP) to a landslide 14 to 1 victory over the incumbent People's Democratic Movement (PDM) in the Turks and Caicos Islands general elections on Friday, February 19th, 2021. Supervisor of Elections Dudley Lewis confirmed on Saturday January 20th that the PNP won 9 of the 10 electoral district seats and all 5 of the At Large seats. PDM leader Sharlene Cartwright-Robinson, who was elected the country's first female premier in 2016, lost her seat. Former health minister Edwin Astwood who won the Grand Turk South seat was the only successful PDM candidate. The 70-year-old Misick is a former chief minister and brother of former premier Michael Misick. During a pre-Election Day virtual rally on the night of Thursday, February 18th, Misick said "every survey in the last two weeks points to a PNP victory". He told viewers he will be sworn in as the next premier on Monday, then on Tuesday he will submit the names of Cabinet ministers to Governor Nigel Dakin and have a "fully-functioning" PNP government by Wednesday. "I can feel victory in my bones! I can appreciate, and I am thankful, for the confidence that I see that you the people of TCI are willing to place in my leadership and the PNP," Misick said. "We are about to witness the end of an ineffective government whose meandering has left you demoralized, but take courage because you have a reason now to hope and that hope is because of the vote that you will mark for the Progressive National Party (PNP)," he said, adding that Monday, February 22nd, 2021 will be a "red letter day" for the Turks and Caicos Islands. It will be the day in the life of a new government, a new PNP and this new PNP government will bring new hope to our people." The PNP leader continued: "You've heard us for the last couple of months. We've invested a lot of time i putting together a winning team, a performing team. The PDM has out maneuvered themselves, they've overstayed their welcome and betrayed your trust and now it is time for them to be paid back. I want you to go to the polls and with coldness and boldness, vote the PDM into oblivion. We come for this work. We know the work is difficult, but I promise you we are prepared. We come for this work to ensure that none of you are left behind. We plan to turbo-charge this economy to ensure that jobs are created." Report: Rupert Murdoch predicts Biden landslide. President Trump’s influential supporter Rupert Murdoch is telling close associates he believes Joe Biden will win the election in a landslide. The Australian-born billionaire is disgusted by Trump’s handling of COVID-19, remarking that the president is his own worst enemy, that he is not listening to advice about how best to handle the pandemic, and that he’s creating a never-ending crisis for his administration, according to three people who have spoken with Murdoch. In response to an email inquiry for this report asking him if he believes Biden will win in a landslide and his thoughts on Trump’s handling of coronavirus, Murdoch responded, “No comment except I’ve never called Trump an idiot,” referring to a 2018 report that the media mogul called the president a “fucking idiot” following a chat about immigration. While Murdoch believes the outcome of the election is a fait accompli, his New York tabloid has been doing everything in its power to help Trump’s re-election chances, publishing a screaming page 1 story on Wednesday under the headline, “Biden Secret E-Mails.” The supposed “smoking gun” emails purported to show that Hunter Biden had introduced his father to a Ukrainian businessman when he was vice president, though the Post relied on unverified documents given to them by Trump’s attorney Rudy Giuliani. (Biden’s team denies that such a meeting took place.) Fox Owner Rupert Murdoch Thinks Biden Will Win in a Landslide. Australian billionaire Rupert Murdoch has long been a supporter of American Republican politics. Murdoch not only Fox News, but also the New York Post and the Wall St. Journal. All 3 news outlets lean to the right and have ardently backed Donald Trump’s presidency. US President Donald Trump (L) is embraced by Rupert Murdoch, Executive Chairman of News Corp, during a dinner to commemorate the 75th anniversary of the Battle of the Coral Sea during WWII onboard the Intrepid Sea, Air and Space Museum May 4, 2017 in New York, New York. / AFP PHOTO / Brendan Smialowski (Photo credit should read BRENDAN SMIALOWSKI/AFP via Getty Images) But Murdoch did not become a powerful business magnate by not seeing which way the wind was blowing. And he doesn’t have high hopes in Donald Trump’s 2020 chances. According to the Daily Beast, Murdoch is telling people that he expects Joe Biden to win in a landslide. Lachlan Cartwright reports, “The Australian-born billionaire is disgusted by Trump’s handling of COVID-19, remarking that the president is his own worst enemy, that he is not listening to advice about how best to handle the pandemic, and that he’s creating a never-ending crisis for his administration.” The Daily Beast also reports that Murdoch has been so unhappy with Trump that he considered backing Mike Bloomberg’s 2020 unsuccessful 2020 presidential bid. The billionaire also reportedly told one associate, “after all that has gone on, people are ready for Sleepy Joe.” What A Clinton Landslide Would Look Like. We’re going to spend a lot of time over the next 87 days contemplating the possibility of a Donald Trump presidency. Trump is a significant underdog — he has a 13 percent chance of winning the election according to our polls-only model and a 23 percent chance according to polls- plus. But those probabilities aren’t that small. For comparison, you have a 17 percent chance of losing a “game” of Russian roulette. But there’s another possibility staring us right in the face: A potential Hillary Clinton landslide. Our polls-only model projects Clinton to win the election by 7.7 percentage points, about the same margin by which Barack Obama beat John McCain in 2008. And it assigns a 35 percent chance to Clinton winning by double digits. Our other model, polls-plus, is much more conservative about Clinton’s prospects. If this were an ordinary election, the smart money would be on the race tightening down the stretch run, and coming more into line with economic “fundamentals” that suggest the election ought to be close. Since this is how the polls-plus model “thinks,” it projects Clinton to win by around 4 points, about the margin by which Obama beat Mitt Romney in 2012 — a solid victory but a long way from a landslide. But the theory behind “fundamentals” models is that economic conditions prevail because most other factors are fought to a draw. In a normal presidential election, both candidates raise essentially unlimited money and staff their campaigns with hundreds of experienced professionals. In a normal presidential election, both candidates are good representatives of their party’s traditional values and therefore unite almost all their party’s voters behind them. In a normal presidential election, both candidates have years of experience running for office and deftly pivot away from controversies to exploit their opponents’ weaknesses. In a normal presidential election, both candidates target a broad enough range of demographic groups to have a viable chance of reaching 51 percent of the vote. This may not be a normal presidential election because while most of those things are true for Clinton, it’s not clear that any of them apply to Trump. A related theory is that contemporary presidential elections are bound to be relatively close because both parties have high floors on their support. Indeed, we’ve gone seven straight elections without a double-digit popular vote victory (the last one was Ronald Reagan’s in 1984), the longest such streak since 1876-1900. As with other theories of this kind, however, there’s the risk of mistaking what’s happened in the recent past for some sort of iron law of politics. Historically, the U.S. has ebbed and flowed between periods of close presidential elections — such in the late 19th century or early 21st century — and eras in which there were plenty of lopsided ones (every election in the 1920s and 1930s was a blowout). These patterns seem to have some relationship with partisanship, with highly partisan epochs tending to produce close elections by guaranteeing each party its fair share of support. Trump’s nomination, however, reflects profound disarray within the Republican Party. Furthermore, about 30 percent of Republican or Republican-leaning voters have an unfavorable view of Trump. How many of them will vote for Clinton is hard to say, but parties facing this much internal strife, such as Republicans in 1964 or Democrats in 1972 or 1980, have often suffered landslide losses. Perhaps the strongest evidence for a potential landslide against Trump is in the state-by-state polling, which has shown him underperforming in any number of traditionally Republican states. It’s not just Georgia and Arizona, where polls have shown a fairly close race all year. At various points, polls have shown Clinton drawing within a few percentage points of Trump — and occasionally even leading him — in states such as Utah, South Carolina, Texas, Alaska, Kansas and even Mississippi.