Many pastors have longed for a taste of Charles Spurgeon’s preaching gifts and ministry success, but few have desired the pronounced suffering that accompanied them. Spurgeon’s published sermons show him a master of preaching to distressed souls, but he had to be distressed himself to do so. Sufferings were not coincidental or unfortunate in a pastor’s life; for Spurgeon, ministry and suffering were theologically connected, the pastoral package deal. Spurgeon argued suffering is necessary for faithful ministry, because of the distinctive relationship pastors have with Christ—they were his conduits of God’s grace to others. In preaching the gospel of Christ’s sufferings, they would become like Christ in his sufferings. Suffering is also necessary for ministers because of its benefits: it makes pastors experience the truths they preach to their people, keeps them humble, and gives them the sympathy necessary for their labors. All-Out Ministry Spurgeon’s life was filled with a mix of sufferings that came upon him in his remarkable ministry. For example, he preached more than 10,000 times, sometimes preaching while so sick that he had to be carried from the pulpit. His popularity and growing church created never-ending duties, but he did not skirt or delegate what he believed were key pastoral responsibilities. Spurgeon insisted ease in ministry is evidence of a false ministry, which will be hard to account for at the judgment seat of Christ: “The man who finds the ministry an easy life will also find that it will bring a hard death.” True ministers would have the marks of “stern labor” upon them; this was necessary, for how else were God’s people—sheep with many spiritual needs and diseases, who often rambled far and caused great trouble to their shepherds—to be adequately cared for? The pastor at ease was usually the one content to let a few sheep die! Spurgeon insisted ease in ministry is evidence of a false ministry. Spurgeon’s comments on strain in ministry must be appreciated in light of his practice of rest and renewal. For example, beginning in 1871, Spurgeon took yearly trips to Menton, France, for convalescence and recovery, usually for two months at a time. He taught and practiced rest for the sake of long-term usefulness. His strong remarks about strain in ministry are thus more related to his vision for pastoral identity than a superhuman prescription for pastoral practice. Blessings of Necessary Sufferings Aside from embracing strain in ministry, Spurgeon suffered a variety of other trials: various physical, mental, emotional, and spiritual sorrows. His gout and other ailments caused him great pain and often took him out of regular pastoral duties for weeks at a time beginning in 1867, with his health steadily deteriorating from 1879 to 1892. His mental sufferings were also deeply challenging, especially his lifelong battle with depression, insomnia, and intense mood swings that came after the Surrey Music Hall disaster. Spurgeon believed suffering could benefit believers in various ways, and he particularly reflected on the good a variety of evils could produce for pastors. In times of ease and prosperity, pastors might rely on themselves and not look to God’s promises, consider eternity, or lean on the strength that comes from the Spirit. Through suffering, pastors learn to live the truths they preach. Spurgeon asked, “Does a man know any gospel truth aright till he knows it by experience?” Through suffering, pastors learn to live the truths they preach. Spurgeon’s theology of ministry ought to be the primary lens through which we see his sufferings, rather than his sufferings being seen as a decisive factor in shaping his ministry. His view of ministry led to his sufferings, motivated him to continue despite them, and was the consistent lens through which he interpreted the trials he patiently bore. Pastors also had to suffer particularly for their particular people. The pastor was to be the epitome of his people’s lives, undergoing their temptations that he might heal them, feeling their sorrows that he might comfort them. In their spiritual experience, “God’s sheep ramble far, and we have to go after them; and sometimes the shepherds go where they themselves would never roam if they were not in pursuit of lost sheep.” Pastors should interpret their temptations and trials as fitting them for ministry to their particular people. Spurgeon’s Insights for Today What does a minister do with his seemingly random physical, mental, and emotional vexations? How should a pastor respond to what appears to be an out-of-nowhere and troubling temptation? Does an intractable group at your church aiming for your resignation mean it’s time to look elsewhere? Spurgeon wisely directs those undergoing such bewildering trials toward immensely encouraging truths about a pastor’s identity: the pastor’s suffering is fulfilling his likeness to Christ, producing his humility, helping him experience what he preaches, and giving him sympathy for his tempted and tried people. In short, a pastor’s sufferings make him more like the Master he serves and more effective in his service.

People in every generation struggle to find their identity. According to a study by Horowitz Research and Vox Media, two in five Gen Zers want to be asked who they are. This is a shift away from wanting to be told who they are by society. This generation wants to own their identity. The study also revealed Gen Z prefers labels based on personality traits and preferences rather than on society’s emphasis on gender, race, and physical characteristics. The approach is more subjective, yet Gen Z’s preferences are just another version of the pursuit of identity based on superficial characteristics. Sarah Rice’s Gospel-Shaped Womanhood: How Losing Yourself and Finding Your Identity in Christ Changes Everything offers a countercultural perspective on identity. Books, social media, and podcasts offer women endless tips on how to be better versions of themselves. The prevailing culture teaches women to pursue salvation through self-definition and self-sufficiency. In contrast, Rice points women toward dependence on the God who created them. She argues we should find our identity in Christ. Gospel-Shaped Worth At a surface level, claiming our identity is in Christ “can seem like a trite theological simplification of our unique personhood” (25). However, Rice argues, “Our quest to find ourselves is driven by two bigger questions that plague us as women: Do I possess true worth? and What are the sources and measures of my worth?” (25). These questions require deep thinking and complex answers. Why are questions about worth so common? It’s because deep down we all feel unworthy. And, in reality, we are. In some circles, feeling unworthy is the sanitized substitute for sinfulness. That leads to the lie that Christianity should be about building our confidence. Yet when we struggle with our worth, it may be that we’re being convicted of our sinfulness before a holy God. It matters where we find our worth. Christ makes us worthy through the gospel. Our worth comes from him, not from our labels, our achievements, or ourselves. Christ makes us worthy through the gospel. Our worth comes from him, not from our labels, our achievements, or our selves. We’re measured by God’s standard, but as Rice points out, “Incredibly, Christ’s righteousness is credited to us, so that when God looks at believers, he sees the perfection of his Son rather than image-bearers marred by sin. In Christ, our position is worthiness before God, and his heart is full of affection toward us” (33). In Christ, women have gospel-shaped worth. Gospel-Shaped Empowerment Feminism promises to provide more rights and opportunities for women. At one level, this is biblical. The Bible teaches that women are image-bearers of God and are equal to men in worth and personhood. We can celebrate the good things women’s empowerment has wrought. However, the focus of women’s empowerment is often not simple equality. Rice explains, Largely, feminism is a movement of women seeking to empower women for the sake of fulfilling and glorifying women. . . . Christianity, on the other hand, is a movement of God by which the Spirit empowers women to know their true identity and fulfill a mission that’s bigger and more glorious than themselves” (48). Gospel-shaped women find freedom in living Spirit-empowered lives. Female empowerment often promises more than it can deliver. Rice argues, “Women cannot ultimately right all that is wrong. Women cannot remedy the human condition or redeem the cosmos. We cannot heal all the wounds of abuse and set every captive free” (52). Instead, we’re invited to trust in an unlimited God who knows all the abuses women have suffered and will make all things right and new through the sacrifice of his Son (2 Cor. 5:21). Christ is the example for women who seek to honor him. He denied himself. Similarly, Christian women should deny themselves. But this conflicts with many modern notions of womanhood, which equate “female empowerment with autonomy—a woman’s freedom to submit only to herself. Jesus, however, says real freedom comes only by knowing him and abiding in his Word through continual trust and obedience” (51). Gospel-shaped empowerment frees us from focusing on ourselves, because we see Christ’s example of self-denial. That empowerment leads to the transformation of every aspect of life. Gospel-Shaped Self In Strange New World, Carl Trueman writes, “The modern self assumes the authority of inner feelings and sees authenticity as defined by the ability to give social expression to the same.” As we’ve seen, this conflicts with what Scripture teaches about our identity. Christ is the example for women who seek to honor him. He denied himself. Similarly, Christian women should deny themselves. Our identity isn’t ours to own or create. Our Creator defines it. Authenticating our personhood via societal approval has no place in a Christian’s notion of identity formation. Rice says, “The goal of Christian women is not to be remembered but to faithfully serve a Savior who will never be forgotten” (177). A Christian woman doesn’t seek societal approval of her actions; she seeks the approval of her Savior who has already granted this through her new identity in the gospel. This foundational theme isn’t unique to Rice, but it’s necessary in a culture that consistently pulls in the opposite direction. Gospel-Shaped Womanhood is helpful because it begins the identity discussion on the most basic level. It makes a good prerequisite for reading books like Melissa Kruger’s Growing Together, which covers a broader spectrum of discipleship topics. Rice takes a simpler theological approach than Jen Wilkin’s In His Image, which begins with God’s communicable attributes as our foundation for identity. Those looking for a ground-floor entry into questions of identity will benefit from Rice’s book. This is a resource I’ll use for discipling women, especially new believers, on the nature of the gospel and how that affects every part of life, not just eternal salvation. And as Gen Z’s view of identity transitions away from the outer self to the inner, this book can help equip these young women to love the Lord their God with all their heart and mind.

Don Carson continues his lecture on the Olivet Discourse from Matthew 24:29–44, focusing on Jesus’s return as the culmination of his reign, which began with his birth and continues through his resurrection and ascension. Drawing from Daniel 7:13–14, Carson highlights the eschatological significance of Jesus’s victory over Satan and the signs preceding his return. Given the suddenness and unpredictability of Christ’s return, believers must remain vigilant and balanced in their understanding of the second coming.

The third anniversary of the ISIS-K bombing of Abbey Gate at the Hamid Karzai International Airport in Kabul, Afghanistan- which left 13 U.S. service members dead and wounded many others, came and went with barely a mention from the Regime Media beyond Donald Trump’s observance of the grim anniversary at Arlington National Cemetery. The strongest acknowledgement of that withdrawal comes from an unlikely source. Watch as NBC Nightly News closes out their newscast with a report on the Afghan Youth Orchestra (click “expand” to view full transcript): NBC NIGHTLY NEWS 8/28/24 6:56 PM TOM LLAMAS: Finally, they come from a place where music has been banned, but after a daring escape these young people are finding harmony in a whole new place. Here's Richard Engel. RICHARD ENGEL: In the city of Braga, known as “the Rome of Portugal”, where tradition and history run deep, members of the Afghan Youth Orchestra are keeping their country's rich musical traditions alive. Because in Afghanistan now, this -- is a crime. Three years ago as U.S. troops left Afghanistan, the Taliban seized power. MUSICIAN: It was like we were dead. RICHARD ENGEL: You felt like you were dead? MUSICIAN: Yes, of course. ENGEL: For cousins Farida and Zora Ahmadi, it was a threat to their very existence. They were students at Afghanistan's National Institute of Music, established in 2010 in Kabul. The school was a direct challenge to the Taliban's extremism. For years the group tried to silence them, even dispatching a suicide bomber to a performance. So when the Taliban returned as rulers, the music stopped. The school's director, Dr. Ahmad Sarmast, orchestrated a miracle, a mass evacuation of students and staff.  AHMAD SARMAST: It’s an opportunity for our students to dream once again. ENGEL: Today, the school and orchestra live on in Portugal, and their sacrifices are being recognized with an invitation to play Carnegie hall. It was bittersweet for Zora. ZORA: We were happy and sad at the same time. ENGEL: Sad for those left behind in Afghanistan where music remains banned and girls are not allowed more than a sixth grade education. The orchestra is fighting back with instruments. This August, they made it to New York City. STUDENT: Welcome to Carnegie Hall! No one has silenced us. ENGEL: Each concert is a protest. SARLAST: Each note is a protest. ENGEL: Bringing them one step closer, perhaps, to returning music and hope to their homeland. Richard Engel, NBC News. LLAMAS: We thank Richard for that special story. At first blush, this appears to be a story about the resilience of this youth orchestra that fled their country in order to remain together and play together- a rolling act of defiance of the Taliban and their prohibitions of music. But ever present is the fact that we, the United States, allowed the Taliban to return to power. It seems like a tiny blurb within the video but that’s all it takes. Three years ago, the Biden Administration implemented a withdrawal that failed, and got many people hurt. Some of them permanently. Some of them, fatally.  That barely-acknowledged capitulation is what enabled both the Taliban’s return to power, and the displacement of the youth orchestra. That reality is inescapable, even to a Regime Media that might wish it weren’t so.  

Special counsel Jack Smith has filed a new indictment against Donald Trump over his alleged efforts to undo the 2020 presidential election. Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy said on Tuesday he has…

They were chanting a name in Chicago. Not Kamala’s. Not Barack’s. They certainly weren’t chanting Hillary’s (although she was, surprisingly, cheered). No chant rang out for Buttigieg, or Biden,…

By the end of July, it had become clear that Joe Biden was going to lose the 2024 presidential election in a landslide. Democratic internals were not worried about Michigan, Wisconsin, and Pennsylvania…

When Rudy Giuliani ran for the 2008 Republican presidential nomination, he had already flip-flopped on abortion once. Having switched from pro-life to pro-choice in his first New York City mayoral campaign,…

Politics The Path of AOC It’s all air from here. They were chanting a name in Chicago. Not Kamala’s. Not Barack’s. They certainly weren’t chanting Hillary’s (although she was, surprisingly, cheered). No chant rang out for Buttigieg, or Biden, or Michelle either. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez had barely begun speaking before she was forced to stop. They were chanting her name: “AOC!” rang out the call. If there was a seismic moment at the 2024 Democratic National Convention, this was it. “Six years ago I was taking omelet orders as a waitress in New York City,” AOC cried above a sea of multiracial, multicultural Democrats. “I didn’t have health insurance. My family was fighting off foreclosure, and we were struggling with bills after my dad passed away unexpectedly from cancer.” The great thunderclap that rose and rose from the bowels of the United Center on the first night of the DNC was not for the party standard-bearers but for a woman who took an outsider’s path to power. In brilliant, bright red lipstick that softened her navy power blazer, “Alex from the Bronx” never looked more radiant.   She fiercely defended herself from Republican critics who have mocked her previous professional experience as a bartender. “There is nothing wrong with working for a living,” roared AOC, who used her seven-minute speech to highlight the concerns of the working class. “To love this country, is to fight for its people. All people. Working people. Everyday Americans like bartenders and factory workers and fast food cashiers who punch a clock and are on their feet all day in some of the toughest jobs out there.” This was Ocasio-Cortez like never before, on the nation’s biggest political stage, sharing the personal struggles that shaped her ideology and pushed her to seek congressional office. “Like millions of Americans, we were just looking for an honest shake and we were tired of a cynical politics that seemed blind to the realities of working people.” AOC hammered away at Trump: “Trump would sell this country for a dollar if it meant lining his own pockets and those of his Wall Street friends. I, for one, am tired of hearing how a two-bit union-buster thinks of himself as more of a patriot than the woman who fights every single day to lift working people out from under the boots of greed” My phone was lighting up—“Inspired” read one text from a staunchly independent former colleague. “Hit all of my concerns,” summarized a working-class friend. “Ignore her at your own peril,” read another. The next night, Hillary Clinton screamed “something was in the air” above a joyous crowd. But whether she knew it or not, she wasn’t talking about Kamala.  AOC cleverly avoided the Israel dilemma on the big stage, only offering a passing comment about how Harris “is working tirelessly to get a ceasefire in Gaza.” As Representative Ilhan Omar (D-MN) joined uncommitted delegates in the streets of Chicago to protest the official positions of the Democratic Party on Israel, AOC discussed the Middle Eastern conflict in private and with the sort of learned cadence you’d expect from the establishment class. It was the sort of centrist turn that dominated her measured and mainstreamed appearance in Chicago last Monday. If she is to run for the highest of American offices, the leveling of the far-left outcroppings that first won her power must begin now.  And when AOC inevitably goes for it, who exactly is stopping her?  Kathy Hochul is the primary target. The New York governor was mocked as a “black hole of charisma” following her miserable DNC speech that provided, in its awkwardness, a dramatic contrast to the organically animated congresswoman from New York City. Worse for Hochul, her tenure as New York’s hand-selected governor has been derided by Republicans and Democrats alike. She struggled in her 2022 “reelection” bid to defeat Representative Lee Zeldin in a solidly-blue state and her prospects for 2026 are mid at best. Her saturnine performance at the DNC has done nothing to ease her critics.  Hochul is a robotic, uncelebrated, unenergetic machine creature who has struggled to steward governorship of one of America’s wealthiest and most powerful states. AOC is a vivacious self-starter strutting the sort of meme energy not often associated with the political class. The plaudits Hochul has won via appointment, AOC has won organically from the people. “She’s in way better shape to run for statewide office than I ever was, because she can appeal in a Democratic primary a lot better than I can,” Representative Tom Suozzi, another hand-selected Democrat machinist, said in response to AOC’s big moment at the convention.  It wouldn’t be a race so much as a sweeping referendum, potentially reorganizing the power structure of the Democratic Party for years to come. In a nod to that shifting landscape, it was DNC organizers who reached out to AOC regarding Monday’s primetime speaking slot, not the other way around. Hochul meanwhile was buried and forgotten on Wednesday, the weakest day of the four. Any statewide aspirations that New York City Mayor Eric Adams might have cast for himself appear to have long come and gone. The embattled mayor, who has spent wildly on efforts to reinvent the trash can, made a quiet and unceremonious visit to the DNC and did not receive a speaking slot as he continues to fight a federal investigation into his 2021 campaign finances. The governor’s mansion has long served a launching pad for American presidents. George Bush, Bill Clinton, Ronald Reagan, and Jimmy Carter all made their way to Pennsylvania Avenue via their state’s top office during the modern era. If AOC wants the Oval Office, New York’s highest office is a logical place to start and the runway looks clear for takeoff.  Defeating Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer would be another battle altogether.  Though Schumer is old, age shouldn’t be an issue—California’s Senator Dianne Feinstein died in office earlier this year at the age of 90. House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi is 84. Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell, who has repeatedly glitched in public, is 82. And Schumer, who won reelection to the Senate in 2022, will be “only” 78 years old when he’s up for reelection in 2028.  More worrying for Schumer, however, are the tighter and tighter margins he has won with over the last two decades. Schumer defeated the Republican Joseph Pinion III by 800,000 votes in 2022, but the victory represented Schumer’s smallest margin in a Senate race since he dethroned three-time incumbent Al D’Amato in 1998. Schumer’s position and power does not come from the people. Though he has taken the votes in a comfortably Democratic state, his power truly comes from those other (faceless) people, the bureaucrats and middle managers who couped President Joe Biden. The ones who really run Washington. Schumer’s lengthy tenure is not a testament to his magnanimous character but an ode to the weakness of the New York Republican party and the dogged, brutal machinery of the Democratic power structure (and Schumer’s willingness to climb).  But would she dare? AOC turns 39 in the fall of 2028. That would rank her along with Sens. Josh Hawley and Jon Ossof among the youngest members of America’s highest legislative body. Judging by her attitude on the DNC stage—a stage that has green lit the careers of many other Democratic starlets such as Obama and Tulsi Gabbard—AOC is seeking upward mobility.  The liberal pundit Mehdi Hasan couldn’t resist musing on AOC’s future in a post sharing her speech from the DNC: “If AOC ever runs for president—or a New York Senate seat!—you’ll see this clip a lot.” Although Schumer’s position is stronger than junior Senator Kirsten Gillibrand, it is unlikely AOC would attempt to oust the popular 57-year-old in an election only two years from now. This gives AOC ample time to soften her message and make further appeals to center Left voters who dominate the American electorate.  Freddie DeBoer sounded depressed—“AOC is just a regular old Democrat now,” read the headline of his dismissive 2023 article on the Queens upstart in New York Magazine. After years of performative stunts and stringently voicing for the concerns of America’s blighted underbelly, AOC had finally become the thing she once (allegedly) fought against—the establishment.  It never fit her better. Radicals may still light the spark, but the center is where the path to power lies. Whatever she chooses, governor or senator, the presidency would not then be far beyond her grasp. As it stands now in the summer of 2024, only two men seemed poised to repel what would be, by then, a sufficiently grassroots 2032 campaign with all the dressings of celebrity: California’s Governor Gavin Newsom and Florida’s Governor Ron DeSantis. These appear to be the likeliest of men that would stand in AOC’s path.  DeSantis has reigned supreme over a new Florida that ranks among the happiest and most prosperous states in the Union. Memories of his pudding fingers and his socially awkward demeanor could potentially be mended by that point, especially if he’s willing to allow his rockstar, cancer-beating wife to take a larger role in the campaign.   Newsom has already begun efforts to wipe the slate clea n on his tenure as top man in the Golden State, issuing and then personally seeing through his controversial decision to clean out homeless encampments throughout the state. In a recent show of force, Newsom, often derided by conservative critics for “destroying California,” has threatened to withhold state funds from counties who do not adhere to his executive order. Sporting aviator glasses, blue jeans, and work gloves, Newsom’s brawny show of force was a distinct detour from what has been characterized by his critics as a wasteful term that has seen Republicans in the state mount a recall effort in 2021.  Newsom also bucked party establishment during the DNC, openly mocking the process through which Kamala Harris was deemed fit to take over the 2024 ticket. Newsom, and other top Democratic talent, opted to allow the coronation of Harris 2024 knowing full well that there will be ample opportunity to run a full-on presidential candidacy in 2028 and beyond. As for other potential Republican challengers, Youngkin could be there. Perhaps Hawley too, although the picture may haunt his national ambitions for years to come. Gaetz seems like the type to make a run at the Oval Office, and the country probably deserves a Gaetz vs. AOC showdown for the memes if nothing else. Who knows, even Vance could be in contention, depending on how this whole 2024 thing plays out.  One thing AOC has is time. 2032 is realistic but 2036 probably suits her best. Meanwhile, she will have plenty of opportunities to walk back her more extreme rhetoric while positioning herself as the guiding female force in the new Democratic party. It’s a long, winding road to Pennsylvania Avenue, but for AOC, it’s all air from here.  The post The Path of AOC appeared first on The American Conservative.

Politics Older Liberals Are Destroying Polling For eight years, one group’s response bias has been playing havoc with poll accuracy. (DigitalVision/Getty Images) By the end of July, it had become clear that Joe Biden was going to lose the 2024 presidential election in a landslide. Democratic internals were not worried about Michigan, Wisconsin, and Pennsylvania but New Mexico, Virginia, and New Jersey. Yet polls remained relatively tight nationally because Biden’s considerable support came from one demographic group: older white voters. Quinnipiac’s last poll before Biden dropped out had him leading Trump among senior citizens by eight points; the New York Times/Siena and NPR/Marist polls gave Biden a four-point lead with Baby Boomers and the Silent Generation, Fox News had the 46th president tied with his predecessor. In contrast, the Washington Post/ABC poll gave Trump just a point lead among this crucial demographic.  So, did Joe Biden have a unique ability to win over these voters, perhaps because of his advanced age? No; it was that older white liberals were answering the polls at a greater frequency than the general public.  It’s called polling response bias, and it’s the reason that voters were shocked at Trump’s 2016 victory and how close 2020 was despite Clinton and Biden’s monumental leads. Older white liberals’ tendency to become “Karens,” telling anyone within an eyeshot their opinion, is destroying the reliability of the polling industry.  According to Pew Research’s analysis of the last two presidential elections, Trump defeated Clinton by nine and Biden by four percent among voters over 65. Still, in the run-up to the election, pollsters predicted a blue wave led by an army of gray-haired voters. In the last few weeks before the election, Biden was crushing Trump among seniors in most national polls: Quinnipiac said Biden would win voters 65 and up by 15 points, Emerson by 12, CNN by 11, The New York Times/Siena and Fox News by 10, NPR/Marist by nine, YouGov/Economist by four points USA Today by two, ABC/Washington Post had him up a point.  This wasn’t the first time this happened. In 2016, key swing states had Clinton outperforming Trump among senior citizens.  According to exit polls, Trump beat Clinton by 23 points among senior citizens in North Carolina, but polls leading up to the election had his victory far narrower. Monmouth and the New York Times had his lead at 11 points, CNN had him up five, and Elon University tied them. Likewise, in Pennsylvania, Trump beat Clinton by 10 points among seniors in exit polls. Still, serious pollsters undervalued his support among this key demographic group in the last few weeks of the election. CNN had Clinton leading Trump by four, as did Monmouth. While pollsters have worked at updating models after the embarrassment that was 2016 and 2020, the same issue is occurring in 2024.  With less than 70 days to go, Kamala Harris’s marginal lead in polls is built off the back of a group she will lose, and probably somewhere in the margin Biden and Hillary lost: four to nine points. The only national public polls with crosstabs available to have Trump in this range are Pew Research, which has the largest national sample size of 10,000 people, and the New York Times/Siena poll. Pew shows him besting the vice president by six points among voters over 65, while she leads in the national poll by a single point, while the New York Times has Trump with a single-point advantage overall while winning seniors by five.  National polls like Fairleigh Dickson University have Harris beating Trump among seniors by 16 points, NPR/Marist has the Vice President leading by 11 points among Baby Boomers and two among the Silent Generation, Marquette has her up by four, Fox News has her up by two, Emerson has them tied, ABC/Washington Post has Trump up by just two. In the swing states, the polls are even more lopsided regarding seniors. The New York Times/Siena poll, considered one of the most accurate in the country, has Kamala leading or outperforming Biden’s 2020 numbers among seniors in virtually every swing state. According to their polls, she leads among voters over 65 years old by 20 points in Michigan, 10 points in Pennsylvania and Wisconsin, and two points in Arizona. The pollster has Trump leading by five in Georgia and North Carolina and seven in Nevada. In 2020, Trump performed significantly better against Biden among seniors in most of those states. According to the exit polls, he won voters 65 years and older by 19 points in North Carolina, 12 points in Georgia, seven in Nevada and Pennsylvania, six in Wisconsin, and a point in Arizona. Biden won seniors in Michigan by two points. And the New York Times/Siena poll remains one of the more accurate among this crucial demographic. Quinnipiac has Kamala winning the gray vote by three in Pennsylvania, Marquette has her leading by five in Wisconsin, SurveyUSA has Kamala up 10 in North Carolina, and Landmark Communications has Trump up by just two in Georgia. Older white liberals’ response bias created the illusion that there was a silent Trump voter in the last two presidential elections, and they’re doing it again. The post Older Liberals Are Destroying Polling appeared first on The American Conservative.