'This Thing Might Break': Bill Clinton Gives Democrats a Dose of Reality About Trump's Victory Over Kamala

For a man frequently labeled a “serial adulterer,” “credibly accused rapist,” and a central figure in one of the more questionably managed philanthropies of recent history — to put it succinctly — William Jefferson Clinton knows how to win elections.

And, as it turns out, he seems to have had a more grounded perspective on Vice President Kamala Harris’ electoral odds leading up to Nov. 5, even as her team remained optimistic. Not only did they believe they could maintain the so-called “blue wall” of Midwestern states, but there was also chatter about flipping a Sun Belt swing state or two.

Incredibly, there was even talk of capturing Iowa, spurred by an outlier poll showing Harris ahead. The poll, conducted by a pollster famous for uncanny accuracy, proved disastrously wrong. Trump carried Iowa by a substantial double-digit margin, and the pollster promptly retired.

Moreover, Trump didn’t just win Iowa; he swept all six swing states and added a seventh, Nevada, which was presumed to lean Harris but ultimately failed to matter in the electoral tally. Quite the clean sweep.

While Clinton may be regarded as something of a relic in today’s Democratic Party, his instincts were far from outdated. During an interview with MSNBC’s Jonathan Capehart over the weekend, the former president revealed that he had anticipated the electoral outcome long before the ballots were cast.

“I can’t say I was surprised,” Clinton said of the results.
“I had the feeling all along that, at the end, this thing might break one way or the other, and all the so-called swing states would vote together. Because the last two, three, four percent” of undecided voters, he explained, “are pretty much alike throughout the country.”

Capehart, striving to soften the blow, reminded Clinton of a line he had once written: “Our oldest demons are patient ones, always eager to manifest themselves in new clothes,” adding that, for progressives, “so many of our victories have to be refought and won again and again.”

Clinton, however, wasn’t about to let that interpretation pass without commentary.
“This time, there is no question that he won both the popular vote and the Electoral College,” Clinton stated plainly, revisiting the infamous 2016 split where Trump secured the presidency despite losing the popular vote to Hillary Clinton.

Since then, Clinton observed, “There’s been a lot of change for people to digest. A lot of economic adversity and upheaval. A lot of social developments. If you think about it, some of the votes that happened in the last election were people who were just exhausted by uncertainty and tired of carrying it around. That also helps the right.”

For those brave enough to endure eight minutes of Clinton's reflections, the full interview offers glimpses of his blend of pessimism and pragmatism. Despite his notorious past, the man occasionally manages to articulate a few hard truths.

Clinton’s assessment of “economic adversity” politely sidesteps the details: persistent inflation, soaring housing costs, supply chain issues, and a volatile economy—all indicators that the Biden-Harris administration's economic policies failed to deliver.

And “a lot of social developments”? That phrase encapsulates a wave of wokeness, the adoption of fringe causes, and cultural shifts that would have seemed unthinkable even two decades ago.

As for “exhausted by uncertainty,” the description resonates. A president grappling with visible cognitive challenges and a vice president who struggled to complete interviews without faltering hardly inspires confidence.

Yet, within the Harris camp, optimism abounded. Buoyed by media blitzes and high-profile endorsements, her team felt untouchable. From Oprah appearances to millions poured into voter outreach efforts, they believed the path to victory was paved. Even Barack Obama pitched in, offering targeted messages to voters. What could possibly derail them?

Perhaps they should have consulted the dinosaur. Yes, a flawed, morally ambiguous dinosaur — but one wise enough to notice the incoming meteor hurtling toward them.