Talk:October surprise

2020
I don't see how any of these rates as an "October surprise". Ginsburg's death gives Trump a chance to nominate a new judge. It doesn't seem likely to change the election outcome. The other two events are just routine events in the Trump presidency.--Jack Upland (talk) 03:54, 30 September 2020 (UTC)
 * Agreed. Seems like every news story that comes out, people want to add it.Rja13ww33 (talk) 17:22, 30 September 2020 (UTC)
 * And now COVID-19.--Jack Upland (talk) 09:26, 2 October 2020 (UTC)

Many news outlets (which I have cited) have speculated that Trump getting COVID-19 could be seen as an "October Surprise" --Enzymes (talk) 11:39, 2 October 2020 (UTC)

The New York Post story should be removed until there is actual proven evidence to back it up, no? 24.38.208.110 (talk) 18:29, 20 October 2020 (UTC)

Surprises? Which Month?
I am an inclusionist. Although many of the things listed have little relation to October, I do not delete them. Perhaps the simple indication 'Near October' is what it takes to make such dumb mistakes look harmonious.110.174.132.162 (talk) 15:24, 2 October 2020 (UTC)


 * I agree that these events should generally be included, but I think the underlined/italicized 'Near October' is a little jarring. I think we should have some faith in the reader to recognize that those events, while not occurring in October, follow the same pattern as the others. If there is notable external debate about whether an event qualifies an October surprise, that could be included inline, or the item could simply be removed. OrcWhisperer (talk) 18:33, 2 October 2020 (UTC)
 * Absolutely agree that we can trust readers to make the necessary obvious inferences. I think MOS:PSEUDOHEAD also advises against the current formatting. – Arms & Hearts (talk) 23:09, 2 October 2020 (UTC)

The term "October Surprise" should be things that happen in OCTOBER. Very late in the election game. 2020 is complete overkill at this point. Trumps Covid-19 diagnosis should be the only thing to stay. Why is there something from JUNE in the 1992 section? 24.38.208.110 (talk) 01:42, 3 October 2020 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.38.208.110 (talk) 01:39, 3 October 2020 (UTC)
 * You raise a good point about the 2020 section. I'm guessing it will tend towards being bloated until after the election, when editors will have more hindsight as to what was most influential to the final electoral politics. Surely the September 27th tax returns leak should be included, though. In the New York Times article itself, they write that further articles with more information from the leak will be released in the coming weeks. If the first article were written just a few days later, it would have been the archetypcal October surprise. OrcWhisperer (talk) 04:43, 3 October 2020 (UTC)
 * The tax return leak probably falls under WP:TOO SOON because it's unclear whether or not it will actually have any impact as an October surprise. It already seems more likely that the population will quickly forget about the tax returns and that Trump's fight with COVID-19 will play a bigger role. ACB's confirmation hearings may be significant as well if the President recovers quickly, but Wikipedia isn't a place to speculate. For the time being (and this will certainly change in the days and weeks to come), Trump's COVID-19 diagnosis is the only thing we can be confident enough to include because it's the only thing that is indisputably an October surprise. Bartholomite (talk) 05:31, 3 October 2020 (UTC)
 * It's not clear that Trump's diagnosis will affect the election outcome. It is notable that the definition of "October Surprise" in the lead was recently changed to be more inclusive of these events. The usage of "October Surprise" originally hinged on the idea that the event was being manipulated in order to affect the election outcome. As far as I can see, no one is stating that Trump was deliberately infected, and no one is stating that Biden has capitalised on Trump's diagnosis. The mere fact a few media outlets use the term "October Surprise" does not mean much.--Jack Upland (talk) 07:40, 3 October 2020 (UTC)
 * I would think that the fact that news outlets use the term "October Surprise" is everything -- if lots of people are out there calling some event the "October Surprise" of this year's election (and there are many events) then it should be included on the list. If it's just some newsworthy event, maybe not -- just say "news reports called it" or "[newspaper] reported it as" if there's any question. RexSueciae (talk) 22:52, 4 October 2020 (UTC)
 * Additionally -- I should add -- definitions change. An October Surprise might properly be relegated to well-timed leaks or press conferences, possibly the result of dirty tricks, but if everyone starts using it as slang for "politically momentous thing which happened late in the election cycle" then I don't see why it shouldn't be updated. RexSueciae (talk) 22:54, 4 October 2020 (UTC)
 * I don't think a couple of sources calling an event an "October Surprise" means it is going to be known as such in 10 years time. I also don't think that if a Wikipedian changes the definition on this article that is definitive.--Jack Upland (talk) 04:27, 5 October 2020 (UTC)

Hunter Biden article isn't an October surprise
The GOP has been obsessed with Hunter Biden since late 2019. Anyone following U.S. politics could have predicted that Republicans would release "damaging" information related to Hunter Biden as an October Surprise. Is an event really an October surprise if it is so easily foreseen by pundits all year? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mazeprotection (talk • contribs) 20:07, 22 October 2020 (UTC)
 * While yes, it has been obvious that Giuliani was pushing for dirt on Hunter Biden in the Ukraine for this purpose, we rely on what the sources say, and the sources do discuss the laptop as an attempt at an October surprise. – Muboshgu (talk) 20:24, 22 October 2020 (UTC)


 * I haven't been following this story closely, but the conflict between Twitter and the New York Post may eventually be worth mentioning as an October surprise, as Trump's campaign is trying to use it and the more general issue of media censorship as one. With Greenwald's resignation from the Intercept, the issue has now clearly moved outside Trump's base, even while the Hunter Biden conspiracy theory itself is irrelevant. Really though it's too soon to say whether or not any of this story really ought to be regarded as an October surprise and we ought to wait until we see if the media or academia refer to any parts of it as October surprises because otherwise it's original research. --Bartholomite (talk) 21:41, 30 October 2020 (UTC)


 * I'm surprised that it isn't included, actually. An October "surprise" doesn't mean that it has to be completely unexpected (a literal surprise), the generally accepted definition as documented in this article is that it's got to be some news event which may influence an election, whether deliberately planned or spontaneously occurring. This event occurred very late in the election cycle, when October surprises occur; it was almost certainly deliberately planned by operatives such as Rudy Giuliani in the manner of traditional October surprises, and the intention was to shift voters in the 2020 election -- there's tons of commentary on it out there. It may not have been a particularly effective tactic -- as the original user pointed out, going after Hunter Biden was a move clearly telegraphed months if not years in advance -- but given the generally accepted view that Comey's letter re: Clinton's emails (which the Republican Party had been discussing for quite some time) was an October surprise, I see no reason to deny that characterization to the "we've got Hunter Biden's totally real laptops and/or emails and/or child porn" news story put out by Giuliani et al. RexSueciae (talk) 23:57, 5 November 2020 (UTC)

Perhaps, Meadows revealed the Boss had relevant info in MAL safe? Wikipietime (talk) 18:22, 9 August 2022 (UTC)

Mar-a-Largo August 8 2022
Was the seizure a Trump plant of cooperative witness. Sources lacking credibility, presently. Wikipietime (talk) 18:20, 9 August 2022 (UTC)

1980 "October surprise" section should be updated to include 2023 confirmation of the conspiracy.
The section on the 1980 Reagan efforts to keep the Iranians from releasing American hostages should be updated to note that the conspiracy was confirmed to be real by people who were involved in it, per https://www.nytimes.com/2023/03/18/us/politics/jimmy-carter-october-surprise-iran-hostages.html Rmd1023 (talk) 15:23, 31 May 2023 (UTC)


 * The NY Times article hardly confirms it. In fact, it raises a number of issues with the claims made. There has been a RFC on this on the October Surprise conspiracy theory talk page. Rja13ww33 (talk) 22:50, 31 May 2023 (UTC)