Jump to content
270soft Forum

Allan Lichtman Predicts Trump Loses


Recommended Posts

He didn't correctly forecast the winner of 2000, though. Same as Norpoth.

These 2 guys have perhaps the best records going into 2020, and interestingly, they are now giving divergent forecasts.

Link to post
Share on other sites

5. Short-term economy strong.

False according to Lichtmann.

Correct, but false right now, and we're in an unprecedented situation. It's possible this will change, so I would rank this as "who knows yet."

6. Long-term economic growth.

False according to Lichtmann.

Correct, but same as 5. We're in an unprecedented situation, so I would answer this one as well with "who knows yet."

9. No major scandal.

False according to Lichtmann.

It's true that Trump was impeached, but what was the major scandal? It wasn't the Mueller investigation, which didn't lead to impeachment. It was that he said something about the Ukraine. Does this constitute a major scandal, or just partisan politics?

I am unsold on ranking this as 'False'.

11. Charismatic incumbent.

False according to Lichtmann.

Again in my mind debatable. He is a celebrity who draws massive audiences. Lichtmann may not like him, but he's almost certainly charismatic AFAICT.

Lichtmann has the sum as 6 Trump-7 Biden. If the economy turns around in the next 3 months, however, this would look more like 8 Trump-5 Biden.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
10 minutes ago, admin_270 said:

The problem with his system is it's subjective. Did Trump fulfill this or that key? Well, maybe ...

That's an issue I have with it as well. I'm also opposed with the idea of foolproof systems. 

The states that prior to 2004 the keys predicted only the PV. After that, he made some sort of adjustment to account for EC, but I'm not quite sure exactly what that might be. 

I think the greatest measures for forecasting are the following three things:

1) One nominee is charismatic while the other is uncharismatic. Charisma meaning they are magnetic even to the opposition. This applies to neither. Uncharismatic would mean that they would repulse even though of their own party. 

2) In battleground states that are within a margin of error, who are independents favoring, especially independents that dislike both candidates but plan to vote. Right now Biden's lead is so big that the election isn't close enough for this to apply. He's getting 270 EVs or more even with Trump getting the entire margin in his favor. 

3) What directions is the "direction of the country" polls trending. This is the first day in my 100 day analyses that it has shifted back to Trump. So he might have some hope for those that like him. 

 

 

  • Upvote 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, admin_270 said:

He is a celebrity who draws massive audiences.

His own inauguration and the recent Tulsa rally sort of undermine this claim. I think Trump is entertaining but not charismatic. He's more of an attention-seeker that draws attention to himself but not out of magnetism. 

4 minutes ago, admin_270 said:

9. No major scandal.

False according to Lichtmann.

It's true that Trump was impeached, but what was the major scandal? It wasn't the Mueller investigation, which didn't lead to impeachment. It was that he said something about the Ukraine. Does this constitute a major scandal, or just partisan politics?

This is about  year out of date, but here's something. https://www.bloomberg.com/graphics/trump-administration-conflicts/

I think Trump, like Bill Clinton, and John Quincy Adams kind of went into office with the scandal key turned against them. The latter had high integrity, but his "Corrupt Bargain" followed him into office. I think Clinton and Trump's relations with women were/are scandal enough. This doesn't count the countless ongoing investigations, which convince those that dislike Trump and don't convince those that like him. He also has the reputation of being scandalous, which even if it isn't a tangible scandal, is something that would burden him. We've discussed the scandals before, so I'm not going to repeat things regarding Flynn, Cohen, Russia, etc, etc, etc, which I consider legitimate scandals. I, as well as many others, consider the Mueller investigation and impeachment as right and legitimate.

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, vcczar said:

This is about  year out of date, but here's something. https://www.bloomberg.com/graphics/trump-administration-conflicts/

I think Trump, like Bill Clinton, and John Quincy Adams kind of went into office with the scandal key turned against them. The latter had high integrity, but his "Corrupt Bargain" followed him into office. I think Clinton and Trump's relations with women were/are scandal enough. This doesn't count the countless ongoing investigations, which convince those that dislike Trump and don't convince those that like him. He also has the reputation of being scandalous, which even if it isn't a tangible scandal, is something that would burden him. We've discussed the scandals before, so I'm not going to repeat things regarding Flynn, Cohen, Russia, etc, etc, etc, which I consider legitimate scandals. I, as well as many others, consider the Mueller investigation and impeachment as right and legitimate.

I'm responding to what Lichtmann says in the WP video. But do conflicts of interest within the Trump team constitute major scandal as far as Lichtmann's keys system? I don't think so.

But, perhaps you're right that Trump has the scandal key, for whatever reason. That's the problem with Lichtmann's system - it requires significant interpretation.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, admin_270 said:

Very high standard. Was Obama magnetic to Republicans? I dunno ...

Yeah, you had Republicans saying that they wish they had their own Obama and things like that. I was hearing and reading about stuff like that all the time. I do think he lost some of his charisma by 2012 as if 4 years in office kind of took some of the fire out of him. In your game, I'd say he was a 9 in charisma and then went down to an 8 or 7. Obama's charisma was a huge reason you had GOP to Democrat voters creating a landslide defeat against John McCain, who was highly respected. 

Another way to consider this is that there have been several studies about Obama's charisma. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, admin_270 said:

That's the problem with Lichtmann's system - it requires significant interpretation.

I agree with that.

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, vcczar said:

you had Republicans saying that they wish they had their own Obama and things like that

Yes, but I'm responding to your term 'magnetic'. I think they appreciated his abilities with oratory. But they didn't find him 'magnetic'. Anyway, I think something like the standard you're outlining is an important one when discussing charisma and elections. The person has to be perceived as charismatic beyond a narrow base.

Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, vcczar said:

Obama's charisma was a huge reason you had GOP to Democrat voters creating a landslide defeat against John McCain, who was highly respected

True. Also the idea of a black president who could overcome past racial divisions I think appealed to many.

Link to post
Share on other sites
11 minutes ago, admin_270 said:

Very high standard. Was Obama magnetic to Republicans? I dunno ...

I was a Republican in 2008 and voted Obama.  Palin as VP was the final straw, but it definitely began with Obama's charisma.

  • Upvote 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
×
×
  • Create New...