Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
But he's a professor (gasp!) and therefore has no credibility according to the right.
oh, no no no.....see, the hil side it already planning victory parties based on the polls out there. Since they are the "Educated" class, logically, the other side is valid on their right to play the same game using polling and "Experts", correct? As who can get more educated than a professor?
Donald Trump has made this the most difficult election to assess since 1984. We have never before seen a candidate like Donald Trump, and Donald Trump may well break patterns of history that have held since 1860.
We've never before seen a candidate who's spent his life enriching himself at the expense of others. He's the first candidate in our history to be a serial fabricator, making up things as he goes along. [MOD CUT/copyright]
oh, no no no.....see, the hil side it already planning victory parties based on the polls out there. Since they are the "Educated" class, logically, the other side is valid on their right to play the same game using polling and "Experts", correct? As who can get more educated than a professor?
If this guy was predicting a Hillary win, you'd claim he was some crazy Marxist!
Lichtman says his methodology favors a "generic" GOP candidate.
It doesn't factor in an insane candidate.
The GOP blew it. This election was theirs to lose - and they did.
Prof. Allan Lichtman: "So very, very narrowly, the keys point to a Trump victory. But I would say, more to the point, they point to a generic Republican victory, because I believe that given the unprecedented nature of the Trump candidacy and Trump himself, he could defy all odds and lose even though the verdict of history is in his favor. So this would also suggest, you know, the possibility this election could go either way. "
Actually, his Keys predicted an Al Gore win in 2000. Here is his convoluted explanation (excuse):
Quote:
In the contested election of 2000, the Keys correctly forecast Democratic candidate Al Gore’s popular-vote victory. However, with five keys turned against them, the Democrats were just one key short of a predicted defeat. However, a fatal sixth key, Third Party Key 4, could conceivably have turned against the party holding the White House. Consumer advocate Ralph Nader surpassed the 5 percent threshold in some polls, However, the rule of thumb for third-party contenders is that they usually finish at about half their peak poll percentage because of the voters’ reluctance to back a nearly certain loser. Nader finished with 2.7 percent of the popular vote, just short of the threshold needed to topple Key 4. However, Nader won more than 97,000 votes in the state of Florida, more than enough to cost Gore a victory (and the presidency) in a state that Bush won by 537 votes.
By the way, if you are too lazy to look it up, here are the Keys. A lot of them are wicked subjective, like does the challenger/incumbent has charisma? Seriously?
Quote:
The Keys are statements that favor the re-election of the incumbent party. When five or fewer statements are false, the incumbent party is predicted to win; when six or more are false, the challenging party is predicted to win.
1. Party Mandate: After the midterm elections, the incumbent party holds more seats in the U.S. House of Representatives than after the previous midterm elections.
2. Contest: There is no serious contest for the incumbent party nomination.
3. Incumbency: The incumbent party candidate is the sitting president.
4. Third party: There is no significant third party or independent campaign.
5. Short term economy: The economy is not in recession during the election campaign.
6. Long term economy: Real per capita economic growth during the term equals or exceeds mean growth during the previous two terms.
7. Policy change: The incumbent administration effects major changes in national policy.
8. Social unrest: There is no sustained social unrest during the term.
9. Scandal: The incumbent administration is untainted by major scandal.
11. Foreign/military failure: The incumbent administration suffers no major failure in foreign or military affairs.
12. Foreign/military success: The incumbent administration achieves a major success in foreign or military affairs.
13. Incumbent charisma: The incumbent party candidate is charismatic or a national hero.
14. Challenger charisma: The challenging party candidate is not charismatic or a national hero. The above 13 keys are slightly different from the 12 keys originally proposed in 1981.
Actually, his Keys predicted an Al Gore win in 2000. Here is his convoluted explanation (excuse):
By the way, if you are too lazy to look it up, here are the Keys. A lot of them are wicked subjective, like does the challenger/incumbent has charisma? Seriously?
I don't know about you but this sure sounds like BS.
Mick
A lot of his points rely on subjectivity rather than the numbers you have with the poll related conputer studies. You also don't have anything like the amount of data you do with a polling analysis.
Define who has charisma, and where's the point where it becomes tangible enough to count?
When does a "scandal" become significant enough to count?
Actually, his Keys predicted an Al Gore win in 2000.
Just an aside. Al Gore did win the popular vote. He just didn't win the electoral college.
But I agree with the prof that Trump is in no way a generic R. Trump supporters would strenuously agree - they hated the "standard" R candidates.
So I think the model is failing.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
As who can get more educated than a professor?
