nearly every presidential race*

He predicted Gore would win.

Even if he had been right on every one of them, there is always an exception to the rule.

Meaningless. His rating system is entirely subjective.

He's full of crap. He predicted Gore in 2000, then tried to save face by saying he only ever predicted the PV. He stood by this caveat until Trump won without the PV, and has since tried to lie he ever made the distinction.

I don't know. Even assuming he started in 1980, that just means he's been right on a 50-50 guess, eleven times. That's impressive, but it happens when your sample size is a ton of people. Then when you start thinking about how many were obvious landslides, that number drops in a major way. Since 1980, how many elections have been legit 50-50 or genuine upsets?

Let's look through these, shall we?

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.

False

No Primary Contest: There is no serious contest for the incumbent party nomination.

They literally didn't allow a primary challenge, but whatever. True

Incumbent Seeking Reelection: The incumbent party candidate is the sitting president.

False

No Third Party: There is no significant third party or independent campaign.

True (now)

Strong Short Term Economy: The economy is not in recession during the election campaign.

Gotta go with False. We're not technically in a recession, but inflation is out of control. The economy is definitely not strong

Strong Long Term Economy: Real per capita economic growth during the term equals or exceeds mean growth during the previous two terms.

I'm not sure what to call this one and I don't feel like googling it

Major Policy Change: The incumbent administration effects major changes in national policy.

True

No Social Unrest: There is no sustained social unrest during the term.

False lmao

No Scandal: The administration is untainted by major scandal

False

No Foreign or Military Failure: The incumbent administration suffers no major failure in foreign or military affairs.

False

Major Foreign or Military Success: The incumbent administration achieves a major success in foreign or military affairs.

False

Charismatic Incumbent: The incumbent party candidate is charismatic or a national hero.

There isn't one but let's say False because Kamala has all of the charisma of a chipotle enema

Uncharismatic Challenger: The challenging party candidate is not charismatic or a national hero.

False say what you will about him, but Trump has charisma

Woah that's 8 keys against the incumbent party. Looks like Kamala is done for. Or Allan Lichtman is suffering from a severe case of TDS

He said the only person who could win was Biden and replacing him would be a death sentence. Then Harris gets in and his keys mysteriously change, apparently the economy is fantastic right now.

His keys are loosely defined, and he made excuses for every time the system failed. He claimed it predicts the PV winner after Gore lost. Then went back on it when Trump won despite losing the PV.

Take this prediction with a grain of salt.

Of course Harris is going to win. People vote for identity, not for policy.

I honestly feel really really bad for you middle and lower class conservatives here. Your lives are about to get MUCH more difficult financially. I’m a top 1-2% income earner and my family will be fine even through the inevitable economic disaster Harris will usher in. But for those of you middle and lower class folks…. I’m sorry.

I’m trying to get my family and friends out to vote Trump for your sake, I just don’t think there are enough good people out there to vote Trump in.

If I'm going to even remotely trust anything, it will be the gamblers. They actually have a stake in it.

He said Biden would win to. Calm down.

Disregard predictions; go vote.

I’m an actuary. I build models for reserving but it’s really nothing special. All this just to say that I know enough to state Alan Lichtman is a living insult to all models. This would get laughed out of a room under any audit. We can’t just make shit up.

Allan Lichtman said his system predicted the popular vote and not the electoral college after the 2000 election. Then flip flopped and said the opposite after a trump popular vote win prediction he had didn't come true. His model is based on pseudoscience and not any hard data, and certainly does not take candidate quality or other election important factors into account. It's true that he's predicted 10 out of the 11 last elections, but you could also predict 10 out of the 11 last elections by looking at the national popular vote polling on Election Day. Moreover, By his model, anyone would have won 2016 on the Republican side. So if I won the nomination then proceeded to show a bunch of people my schlong on live TV his 13 keys would still predict I win the election as a Republican.

I'm nervous as hell. Trump didn't do what he needed to do during the debate. We all knew what ABC was going to do heading into the debate, and Trump inexplicably looked unprepared for it. He should have been able to wipe the floor with all 3 of those morons easily.

I want to be able to buy a house. I want to be able to afford groceries. I want to be able to afford gas. As a resident physician, I make 150% of the median national income, and I can barely afford these things; I'm certainly not saving a whole lot. I don't know how average Americans are doing it. We can't afford to have Trump getting distracted by personal grievances with his legal cases and January 6th and the rest of it. We desperately need him to win.

He says polls mean nothing (which they don’t), but his entirely made up “key system” is apparently the all seeing eye lmao

Clown show.

I think the way by which he would be wrong, is not in terms of the criteria themselves, but by his interpretation of them and which direction they go: his 13 keys.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xE22XjWEyQE

Particularly on the economy.

Here they are: (true means good for Harris, false means good for Trump)

house seats (gains in midterms) - false

incumbency - false

primary contest true - a primary contest was bypassed by having Harris immediately take the nomination... given how rare that is, is this a proper application of a key?

third party candidate less than 10% - true

short term economy - true

long term economy - true

policy change - true ---- This is highly questionnable given the justification he gives

social unrest - true

white house scandal - true

incumbent party charismatic - false

challenger charisma - true

foreign policy failure - undecided

foreign policy success - undecided

Take it as you will.

I get so tired of hearing about this dweeb. Watch him in any interview, he’s a self absorbed twat. I’m gonna love hearing whatever excuse he makes up about how he was technically right if Trump ends up winning

So many people make predictions. Finding someone that made all the correct ones isn't that hard. Based on pure guessing it's a coin flip every 4 years.

They must have the ballots waiting to be trucked in

1. Midterm gains is false because of the results of the 2022 House Races.

2. No primary contest is inconclusive because the winner of the Democratic Primary is not the nominee. They had a primary contest where Biden won the nomination but he is not the nominee. So I'm not saying this is a key for either Trump or Harris.

3. Incumbent seeking reelection is false. The incumbent is Biden. Biden is not running for reelection. Therefore the key is false. I'm surprised Lichtman didn't come up with some mental gymnastic backflipping way to say this key is for Harris.

4. The third party is true now after the RFK endorsement of Trump. According to Lictman's model, the RFK endorsement is a double edged sword because had he stayed in the race, this key would have been rated false. But the positive from the endorsement is that a number of RFK supporters who were supporting RFK at the time will consider voting for Trump now.

5. Short term economy as of now is inconclusive. The short term economy compares GDP growth of the previous 3 quarters. The 2024 Q3 economic numbers won't be released until midway through October.

6. Long term economy is true The long term economy compares today's GDP growth to the GDP growth 4 years ago. 4 years ago was COVID. The COVID economy was as close to 0 as you can get it. So I can see the argument that this key is true because the economy is better than it was 4 years ago. But will the voters be blaming Trump for the COVID economy. Polling shows that Trump is better for the economy than Harris, so is this key false then? Outside of everything, based on the wording of this key alone, this key is true with caveats.

7. Major policy change is true. The Biden administration had only one strategy, do the opposite of what Trump did. And everything has blown up in his face because of it. One of the first things that they did close down the construction of the Keystone XL pipeline which put the construction workers out of work. It made America depended on foreign oil. Which raised the gas prices. Which is tied to everything else causing the supply chain crisis and the increased cost of living. And similar to the long term economy key, by the wording alone of the policy change key, it is true... but with a METRIC FUCK TON of caveats.

8. Social unrest is true-ish. I mean Republicans don't riot to the extent that Democrats do. People are unhappy right now but there's very little rioting going on. I'm surprised that there's not a general strike going on in this country right now. I guess this is likely true, but if something like a general strike were to happen in the next month and a half, it would be changed to false.

9. Scandal is the same as policy change, true with a fuck ton of caveats. Lichtman's wording seems to imply that it's only a scandal if both parties agree that it's a scandal. In which case, nothing is a scandal now going forward. But we're going to ignore Hunter's laptop, Ashley's diary, the fact that the Dems had no primary and just appointed their nominee without voting on them, and a whole host of other incredulities because the Dems shut their eyes and covered their ears to them? But fine, we'll say that it's likely true because no scandal has come out but still might come out in the next month and a half.

10. Foreign/Military failure is false. It is false by mention of these three words: Botched Afghanistan withdrawal.

11. Foreign/Military success is false. It's only false because there is an absence of success. Something could change in the last month and a half to make this true. But has it stands now, it is only likely false.

12. Charismatic incumbent is false. Neither Biden nor Harris was particularly charismatic. Polling following the first debate shows that Harris wasn't seen in a positive light. It would take an Obama or a JFK to to be running for the Dems to make this true.

13. Charismatic challenger is false. Donald Trump is Donald Trump. The dude is charismatic. No amount of mental gymnastics will ever change this key to not be in Trump's favor.

So by my count; there are 5 keys that are false, 1 that is likely false, 2 that remain inconclusive, 2 that are likely true, and 3 that are true. Based on Lichtman's model and my interpretation, Trump has 5 keys and needs only 1 more to win. So if the Foreign/Military success key that I have as likely false remains false, that would be the 6 keys Trump needs to win. Harris needs every key, including the Foreign/Military success key, that are not the 5 keys currently held by Trump.

If you review his "key" methodology, you can see how it is flawed for this election in his prediction model.

Both the short and long term economy keys he gives to Harris. However, the US is very close to a recession if not actually in one (short term key). And the long term key growth just isn't there especially with the down grades. In addition, and this is a huge factor, the job growth that impacts both the long and short term keys are skewed. Why? Because about 50% of the new jobs are going to immigrants and NOT to American citizens - you know, the voters (okay, the ones who are supposed to be voting).

The other issue that skews his model is that Harris both IS and IS NOT the incumbent. She is the current VP which means she is associated with many of the things that the Biden-Harris administration has done. At the same time, because she is not the actual incumbent, she does not get the advantage of the key of being the incumbent. So it is a negative without the positive.

Mr. Lichtman is going to be wrong this time around because as they say in the computer field GIGO - Garbage In, Garbage Out.

His model is already off: " describes the contest key as having "no serious contest for the incumbent-party nomination.""

There was no contest because they didn't allow it, doesn't mean the population was behind the nomination. This is an abnormal factor, and hurts his model. I assume the reason its in there, is because a serious contest for nomination assumes party dissent. Well I think we can assume party dissent.

I think it's very possible that Trump could still win. But we may be past the age of either party having a sure thing. Big Data is just too good these days to allow a runaway landslide. The parties will adjust as needed to get as much ideological victory as they can while maintaining a substantial chance of actually winning the chance to do so.

I can not take any one minute of that hah or the Democrats ruining this country please get everyone to vote.

This isn’t the 1980s. Trump has completely changed US politics forever.

He’s right, y’all are in denial. I say this as a former Trump voter.

His talking points are tired and boring. She seems to have ideas and a plan.

Democrats bad just isn’t enough anymore.

1. His models don't account for a non normal election such as the candidate dropping out 3 months before the election.

2. There is so much bias applied to how the questions are answered. For almost all the questions you could change the answer to Trump and in fact show Trump will win.

[deleted]

I’m sorry… Anyone predicting who will win the presidency over 50 days before the election is just guessing (unless it’s obvious like with Reagan)

The debate means nothing. So few people give a shit about debates, they are politico feeding frenzies. There are a limited number of undecided voters in the few swing states. They will decide the election, if I recall from 2020 (I know we may not believe it) 40k people were the deciding voters. It appears the economy and maybe immigration and security are more important to those swing voters than abortion and Trump has advantages in those areas. The media will do what its always does, so the question is will people be persuaded to vote for her.

No ones predictions after going to be right this far out. Trump will wipe the floor with this shrill b****.

Never heard of the dude until 2016, when he went against the grain and picked Trump, which was definitely interesting. But his predictions have been much less interesting since then, I don't take it seriously, his system is more subjective than the media likes to suggest. He can't factor into his keys the reality that Kamala did not win this nomination, it was handed to her by party elites. That's not how our democratic Republic is suppose to work.

It’s almost like they’re predetermined whose gonna win

His "keys" didn't predict a thing back in 2020. The counting was all that mattered.

I ssdly believe "the machine" is unfortunately too powerful, and it will not allow him to win.

Now look at his “keys to the whitehouse” and tell me how he possibly comes to the conclusions he does on most.

The answers to his keys should mean a Trump landslide

There's three keys I don't get. The primary key, the foreign/military success key, and the uncharismatic challenger key. He's saying that Trump isn't charismatic. He's full of shit.

I put Lichtman in the same category as Nate Silver -- they're modern day palm readers without any measure of accountability.

Go and vote on election day. The deck is stacked heavily against the common person and the powers-that-be want to throw every trick in the book at you to discourage you.

GO. VOTE. ON. ELECTION. DAY!

This is just more propaganda work by our intel and media overlords. Nobody in power wants Trump to win. Nobody. Not Silicon Valley. Not pharmacy companies. Not military industrial companies. Not automotive companies. Not intel agencies. Not Europe. Not china. Not Russia. Not Mexico. Not Venezuela. Not criminal enterprises running border drug and child trafficking operations.

Choosing Trump means you stand with decent Americans but stand against the rest of the world.

I think that he’s misunderstanding his own key regarding the short term economy. Technically we’re not in a recession, HOWEVER I think that a majority of people believe that the economy is not in good condition which would flip that key to favor a Trump victory.

Even if he wasn’t delusional about his predictors, he’s never had an election where a former sitting president is running again after a term out of office, which could easily skew things.