Allan Lichtman: Trump is headed for a win in Nov. because of the Gary Johnson 3rd party key

[bigdarryl]

WOW!!! he's never been wrong but I pray to god he's wrong on this one.He's saying the 3rd party key might fall because Johnson is polling 10% in the polls he cut that in half to 5% of the vote on election day for a 3rd party candidate which makes it 6 keys down https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/the-fix/wp/2016/09/23/trump-is-headed-for-a-win-says-professor-whos-predicted-30-years-of-presidential-outcomes-correctly/

[MBS]

1. I pray he's proved wrong, too (and I bet he will be)

The more Gary Johnson opens his mouth, the more obvious it is that he's loony. And hopefully that will be more and more obvious, and the stakes of this election more obvious, even to the most oblivious, with every day that goes by. (A millennial who voted for Bernie would vote for Johnson and his bizarre statements on climate change? I just can't see this)

[TheBlackAdder]

38. Lichtman - Seer? GHWB, WJC 1 & 2, Shrub 2, Obama 1 & 2 were high probabilities. Shrub 1 variant.

.


Really, looking objectively at the heartbeat of the nation, and the candidates running, Shrub 1 was the only real surprise of the elections. Shrub's first election was bolstered by the controversy in WJC's second term, and Gore's weak presentational image, and a country not ready for a Lieberman vice-presidency helped to make a Democrat 3rd term harder to achieve than it should have been, allowing for the perversions of the voting system, the recount and SCOTUS ruling to occur. Shrub's reelection was the result of swiftboating, fearmongering, and hype from the wars.


Here is my prediction: HRC will win, and win handily.


While I hold this, based on the pulse and feedback at the collegiate levels, reflections with Republicans, nothing is taken for granted. As with any race, as with flying a plane, you maintain controls until the very end, never relaxing or becoming resigned or complacent.


Racism and paternalism is rife in this country. 45% of women support paternalism and will vote for a man. Research at CAWP supports this. My many conversations with people of different faiths support this as well, especially the evangelicals, Mormons, and Seventh-day Adventists.


That being said, variations between the polls and reflections when the time to vote occurs will slightly emerge as many will vote their conscious instead of the public support they profess.


.

[MBS]

42. good analysis. n/t

[Dawson Leery]

2. For the first time he will be wrong.

Third party candidates also see their numbers wane in the last month.

[LiberalFighter]

40. That is one of the defects in his prediction.

[BigDemVoter]

3. Horse SHIT

[bigdarryl]

4. Well the latest average polling has Johnson polling around 10 to 11%

That's what the Professor is looking at if he was polling 4 or 3 it wouldn't be any problem.Another problem is the media keeps interviewing him making him accessible and curious to people who don't like either party nominees http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2016/president/us/general_election_trump_vs_clinton_vs_johnson_vs_stein-5952.html

[trof]

9. Just what I was gonna say.

[vdogg]

5. The most important part

"Given all of these exceptions that Donald Trump represents, he may well shatter patterns of history that have held for more than 150 years, lose this election even if the historical circumstances favor it."

He doesn't have confidence in his prediction because of Trump. He's saying that the keys point to a Trump victory, but he's also giving 50/50 that Trump defies this and loses.

[Dawson Leery]

6. If that is the case, Lichtman's system does not work.

[vdogg]

7. It may work to an extent, but all systems are fallible.

538 has had some embarrassing mistakes, and they're pretty much the gold standard. I suspect that Mr. Lichtman is going to take an L on this one.

[Dawson Leery]

8. Johnson and Stein's votes are starting to fade,

It is more notable at the state level than federal, but it IS happening.

[RBInMaine]

15. "Generic Republican" DOES NOT MEAN TRUMP! He makes that CLEAR. People have got to see that

Johnson simply is not the answer, and Trump is WAY too dangerous to get anywhere near the White House.

[pnwmom]

10. His whole theory is based on a traditional candidate, and a 3rd party nominee not polling

more than 5%. He also claims that Johnson was polling 12-14%, which we know is wrong. He's never polled that high in the aggregated polls. Or any poll of which I've been aware. When has he ever gotten 14%?

Also, not a single one of his "keys" accounts for the fact that our nominee this year will be a woman -- who is running against a sexist pig.

[Dawson Leery]

11. Johnson's highest has been 8 points.

[bigdarryl]

12. He's at 8.9 average in the real clear politics polls

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2016/president/us/general_election_trump_vs_clinton_vs_johnson_vs_stein-5952.html

[LiberalFighter]

41. Traditional candidate is another key he fails to see.

[DinahMoeHum]

13. I call bullshit on this. Gary Johnson appeals more to Republicans. . .

. . .not the democrats.

Republicans who may not like Trump but are reluctant to pull the lever for Hillary Clinton would vote for a guy like him, thus taking votes away from TrumpleThinSkin.

[unblock]

18. the philosophy of the model is that it doesn't matter who the third-party candidate takes votes from

the idea is that the mere presence of a significant (at least 5% of the vote) third-party candidate is an indicator that the country is in the mood for a change in the white house, so in theory that means a lot of people will vote for the challenging party, notwithstanding the comparatively small effect of who switches their vote to the third-party candidate.

personally, i think johnson will seriously fizzle. in 1980, anderson got as high as 27%, ended up with 7%. especially in a close race, people will be reluctant to vote for a third-party candidate.

i think johnson will be lucky to end up with 3% of the vote, i really don't think 5% is in the cards for him.

[radius777]

32. 1996 disproves that theory

Bill Clinton 49.2% 379 EV
Bob Dole 40.7% 159 EV
Ross Perot 8.4% 0 EV

Johnson's higher polling is less about dissatisfaction with the incumbent president or his party and more about the presence of Trump, who is unpalatable to many GOP voters.

I agree that Johnson's (and Stein's) numbers will fizzle as we get closer to election day and millennals/busters and others realize what is at stake, with help from Obama to rally them back into the D column.

[DinahMoeHum]

33. It was actually in 1992.

n/t

[radius777]

36. 1992 was the first time Perot ran and got 18.9%

of the vote. The challenger Bill Clinton won and unseated an incumbent president so it proves the model correct.

However, Perot also ran in 1996, and got 8.4% of the vote, and the incumbent president Clinton won in an electoral landslide, disproving (at least that element of) the model.

But as unblock just posted, there are many other elements within the model to consider.

[unblock]

35. a third-party candidate with 5% of the vote is just one of the 13 keys.

it's an indicator of an election that changes the party in control of the white house, but there are 12 other keys to consider.

[underthematrix]

28. I don't know. It seems to me. Trump appeals to angry Repubs while Gary

appeals to angry Dems

[TexasBushwhacker]

30. He appeals to a certain sector of millenials too n/t

[unblock]

14. saw him on cnbc today. he's hedging big time, very scared of calling this election.

so officially he calls it for trump but says trump might break the model because he's such an unusual candidate.

but the main point of the model is that elections are largely a referendum on the current administration and that the candidates themselves, their plans, their ground games, the polls, etc., don't much matter in and of themselves (unless they're fdr/reagan level charismatic).

more to the point, the quality of the candidates is in fact a function of the expected outcome based on the model. that is, if the model calls for the status quo (democrats keep the white house in this case) then the republican candidate might well be very weak. the model's philosophy is not that the republicans lost because the candidate was weak, but the candidate was weak because the republicans were always going to lose (better candidates avoid a losing battle, funding isn't as strong, etc.)

the real weakness of the model in this case is that it requires prediction of whether or not a third party candidate will get more or less than 5% in november. my bet is "no", in which case the model says hillary will win.

lichtman's view today is a cop-out. he found a way to hedge his bets by calling it for trump based on the dubious assumption that johnson will get 5% of the vote, while allowing himself a big out because trump is so "unusual".

[Dawson Leery]

16. +1,000,000

[Demsrule86]

17. Bullshit

Johnson hurts Trump anyway.

[Bleacher Creature]

19. Silly pseudoscience.

Every four years there's some infallible "model" or predictor that's proven wrong. This is his year.

[RBInMaine]

20. He's giving himself a HUGE out due to the Trump effect. His model is based on a "generic" candidate.

Lichtman wants to be true to his model, but he has said Trump is a HUGE exception as a candidate and could prove the model wrong for the first time.


Millenials have got to see that a vote for Johnson is a total waste. Hillary's campaign needs to continue to work the ground HARD with millenials.

[Mamajami]

21. Key number 3 is off. Though Obama is actually not on the ballot, he is virtually running again to

a huge segment of the Democratic base. I would tend to treat this key as though the incumbent is the party candidate.

[OhZone]

22. Others say Hillary will win so -

538 has her up.

Princeton has her way up.

Predictwise has her at 72% likelyhood.

Recent polls have her up even with 3rd parties.

The economy is pretty good and gas prices are still good. That's a good predictor too.

And unlike Gore's distancing himself from Clinton, Hillary and Obama are working together.

What about that guy who says he's better than Nate Silver?

[bigdarryl]

26. His keys are not based on polling

Its based on past history when it comes to Presidents in power

[OhZone]

34. This election is very different than any in our history.

If he's wrong, he'll just change his keys, maybe?

Seems like his predictions are worthless.

[meow2u3]

23. I'm thinking Johnson hurts Trump far more than he does Clinton

He's the third party choice for disgruntled repukes who just can't bring themselves over to the good guys.

[LenaBaby61]

24. Allan Lichtman: Trump is headed for a win in Nov. because of the Gary Johnson 3rd party key..

I have friends who WERE going to vote for Johnson, and mind you they don't like Hillary very much and they HATE tRump.

Well, they've had enough of Johnson and what they've called ignorance as in dumb as a rock. They're voting for Hillary. You could have knocked me over with a feather

These 4 folks I'm talking about (Husband/wife---husband/wife) are hard-core Bernie people who are not exactly in love with Hillary but they KNOW Johnson is dumb as a brick, and that tRump is Hitler lite. They're both in a swing state too thank God (Ohio).

[Gothmog]

25. A vote for stein or Johnson is a vote for trump

[Godhumor]

27. Oh, it's you. N/t

[DarthDem]

29. My Thoughts Exactly!

My very concerned thoughts, naturally, that is.

[MFM008]

31. Fu*k him

Twice.
Maggot won't get there with my vote.

[bigdarryl]

37. The latest polling has Johnson a 7percent

So if we go by.Lichtmans theory by cutting the number in half by election day Johnson would end up with 3.5 percent not enough to turn the key.This is only one poll that has him at 7 percent he has been.hovering around 8 percent https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/poll-clinton-trump-in-virtual-dead-heat-on-eve-of-first-debate/2016/09/24/b99c95de-81cb-11e6-8327-f141a7beb626_story.html?hpid=hp_hp-top-table-main_poll-1202am%3Ahomepage%2Fstory

[RBInMaine]

43. NBC poll has him at 5 percent. That's 2.5 in Lichtman's model.

[bigdarryl]

44. Um interesting maybe people who were flirting with voting

For him are seeing how nutty he is with some of his statements.Plus progressive talk show host like Joe Madison,Tom Hartman,Randi Rhodes, Stephnie Miller are all on there show's saying if you vote a protest vote for Stein or crazy ass Your voting for Trump which Lichtman has confirmed.

[speaktruthtopower]

39. If Trump..

can look halfway reasonable in the debates, he'll probably bring some of those voters back, but he may also lose some wackos.