Elections expert who’s called every presidential race since ’84: Obama will win

posted at 4:53 pm on August 30, 2011 by Allahpundit

Dude, it’s over.

“Even if I am being conservative, I don’t see how Obama can lose,” says Lichtman, the brains behind The Keys to the White House…

Working for the president are several of Lichtman’s keys, tops among them incumbency and the scandal-free nature of his administration.Undermining his re-election is a lack of charisma and leadership on key issues, says Lichtman, even including healthcare, Obama’s crowning achievement.

Lichtman developed his 13 Keys in 1981. They test the performance of the party that holds the presidency. If six or more of the 13 keys go against the party in power, then the opposing party wins.“The keys have figured into popular politics a bit,” Lichtman says. “They’ve never missed. They’ve been right seven elections in a row. A number that goes way beyond statistical significance in a record no other system even comes close to.”

They’ve been right seven elections in a row about the popular vote. See Wikipedia’s precis of what the Keys predicted for Bush and Gore in 2000. For fair-use reasons, I can’t excerpt Lichtman’s analysis of how the 13 Keys will play out for Obama next year, so follow the link up top and read through. He’s got The One winning on nine of 13 counts:

1. No contested primary
2. Incumbency
3. No third-party candidate
4. Major domestic-policy changes in his first term
5. No social unrest
6. No major scandals
7. No major foreign-policy failures
8. Major foreign-policy achievements in his first term (killing Bin Laden)
9. Little charisma by his likely opponent

The GOP wins three categories:

1. The incumbent’s party lost seats in the last House election
2. The long-term economy looks poor
3. Little charisma by the incumbent

One other criterion, the state of the economy during the campaign, is undecided because no one knows yet how the short-term trends will look. In other words, if I’m reading this correctly, the GOP will be within one Key of winning the presidency if (a) economic indicators look bad next year, which is only too grimly plausible, and (b) they nominate someone charismatic, like, say, Rick Perry. (What the threshold is for measuring “charisma,” I have no idea.) In which case, how can Lichtman seriously say, “I don’t see how Obama can lose”? Especially since, surreally, he’s counting the stimulus, which the public reviles, and ObamaCare, about which the public is deeply suspicious, as a point in Obama’s favor because they are, after all, major “changes” to American domestic policy. By that standard, even the dumbest, most hated piece of legislation should be treated as an asset to a presidential campaign so long as it’s significant enough to constitute “major change.” If you flip that Key to the GOP, then you’ve got six for the Republicans — enough to take the White House by Lichtman’s own metrics.

All of which assumes, of course, that this will be an ordinary election like the past seven were. Maybe it will; maybe there’s no such thing as an extraordinary election. But the state of the economy is surely extraordinary, poised as it is for a double-dip, and unemployment is extraordinary compared to any other era over the past 75 years. That is to say, we’re assuming that these “Keys” are equally weighted in election after election, no matter the circumstances, when basic awareness of the current political climate suggests the two economic Keys will be weighted way more heavily than any of the others. Can’t wait to see how it plays out. If, heaven forbid, we do end up in another recession and The One wins anyway, then maybe Lichtman really is a genius.

Breaking on Hot Air

Blowback

Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.

Trackbacks/Pings

Trackback URL

Comments

Comment pages: 1 2 3 4

AP, could you please ask Mr. Lichtman to apply his keys to Carter (1979) before his matchup with Reagan and tell us what the prediction would have been?

TheRightMan on August 30, 2011 at 6:11 PM

Ace has a good point: how does the first credit downgrade in United States history figure into Lichtman’s “13 points”? Our president has been rather “historic” — largest debt increase in American history, major domestic policy “win” becomes more unpopular with every poll.

I think Lichtman had better prepare himself for a “historic and unprecedented” election to match this historic and unprecedented presidency.

Rational Thought on August 30, 2011 at 6:12 PM

..I’d like to stack this shitt-witt’s prediction record against 10-straight election wins.

This limp-wristed, dingle-berry-licking, pig fornicator can pound sand as far as I am concerned.

The War Planner on August 30, 2011 at 6:12 PM

3. No third-party candidate

I don’t think this one inures to the benefit of a Democrat. I believe that it affects the re-election (or election) efforts of a Republican candidate as it did in 1992 & 1996 with Ross Perot. Clinton won election (and re-election) with a plurality but never a majority of the vote.

It’s hard for me to conceive of a third party candidate who could seriously take votes from the left of Obama. His left flank is secure. A third party candidate to the left or right of a Republican would cetrainly siphon votes from the Republican and probably hand victory to Obama.

Michael K. on August 30, 2011 at 5:24 PM

A third party candidacy by John Huntsman would hurt Obama.

There is one libby site I visit that is actually selling bumper stickers for “Hillary/Huntsman 2012″. That’s in Caifornia.

Unbelievably, Huntsman is very attractive to the liberals who are disenchanted with Obama and most seem to view him as their fave Republican candidate.

This tells us (1) charisma to liberals (gay and straight) is Huntsman; and (2) why Huntsman only gets 1% from GOP and Rep-leaning independent voters. :)

Greyledge Gal on August 30, 2011 at 6:12 PM

Dude, I’ve got my fingers in my ears and am screaming LA LA LA LA LA I CAN’T HEAR YOU. I can’t even read that whole post, it’s too depressing.

scalleywag on August 30, 2011 at 6:13 PM

unreal.

by his own measure obama is a goner.

let’s review:

1. No contested primary
– TOO SOON TO SAY

2. Incumbency
- OKAY, 1-FOR-2

3. No third-party candidate
- OKAY FOR NOW

4. Major domestic-policy changes in his first term
- HMMM, WHAT ABOUT THE FACT THAT UNEMPLOYMENT WENT UP AND HE’S ABOUT TO ANNOUNCE A JOBS PLAN 3 YEARS LATE!?!?

5. No social unrest
- TEA PARTY = UNREST, JUST NOT VIOLENT

6. No major scandals
- FAST N FURIOUS

7. No major foreign-policy failures
- DIDN’T CLOSE GITMO OR BRING THE TROOPS HOME – THE LEFT, HIS BASE, SEES THESE AS FAILURES

8. Major foreign-policy achievements in his first term (killing Bin Laden)
- OK. BUT THE FACT THAT THINGS IN PAKISTAN AND AFGHANISTAN AND IRAQ AND EGYPT AND SYRIA ARE WORSE HURTS MORE

9. Little charisma by his likely opponent
- RICK PERRY IS MORE CHARISMATIC, AND HE DOESN’T NEED A TELEPROMPTER.

USING LICHTMAN’S OWN VALUES, OBAMA IS A GONER.

reliapundit on August 30, 2011 at 6:15 PM

Small problem with all those ‘factors.’ They can’t all be equally weighted. Rather, there are some that are more important, like number 5, the short term economy. That’s probably going to matter the most and if you’re weighting things, should be given something like 60% or 70%. Because the economy 15 months from now looks to be the same or perhaps worse, that’s a huge knock on his re-election chances.

Perhaps better indicators are the fact that nobody since Truman has been re-elected with an unemployment rate as high as it is now this late in a first term. And I love Licthmann’s view that factor number 5 is “undecided” because the economy isn’t in a recession. Well, tell all those that are unemployed or underemployed that when campaigning, champ.

ieplaya on August 30, 2011 at 6:15 PM

I wonder if the same election expert called the 2010 elections corectly….I mean all of them. What a bunch of worthless BS.

David in ATL on August 30, 2011 at 6:15 PM

I don’t see ONE McCain voter who will suddenly vote for Obama. I see millions of Obama who are disenchanted and will vote GOP or not vote at all.

Dennis D on August 30, 2011 at 6:20 PM

Yeah, some of those keys might not count.

2008 election… you know, before the economy tanked? It was worried about Foreign Policy… then the economy went into the crapper and I realized I didn’t so much care.

2010 election; no foreign policy concerns for me… none.

2012 election. You really think I’m going to give a flip about foreign policy with the economy the way it is? You can claim you’re going to pull an imao.us move and Nuke the Moon; but if you’ve got a reasonable plan to employ 5-6% of the US citizenry as well; I’ll vote for you (get us back to full employment you can attack whoever or whatever you want).

gekkobear on August 30, 2011 at 6:20 PM

He’s going down in 2012.

hawkdriver on August 30, 2011 at 5:38 PM

Overconfidence is a dangerous thing. The Dems still have an awesome GOTV machine, and Obama is still the First Black President ™ . Ain’t no way that beating him would be a walk in the park, I don’t care who the GOP nominee is.

ddrintn on August 30, 2011 at 5:42 PM

We know the Dims won’t give up power easily. They’ve had (until very recently) basically unlimited feeding at the public trough since Bam-Bam’s inauguration, and they won’t just walk away. They’ll have to be dragged away, kicking and squealing and snarling like the feral pigs they are. They’ll use their taxpayer-financed voter fraud machine (ACORN, by whatever name it’s using these days), the corrupt and complicit media, and whatever other dirty tricks they can think of. But in the end, hawkdriver will be right because, in the infamous words of Democratic campaign strategist James Carville, it’s the economy, stupid.

AZCoyote on August 30, 2011 at 6:21 PM

4. Major domestic-policy changes in his first term
5. No social unrest
6. No major scandals
7. No major foreign-policy failures
9. Little charisma by his likely opponent

I beg to differ
4. OBAMACARE: that’s a BIG negative, especially after SCOTUS rules in 2012 BEFORE the election
5. Wait another year while the economy remains lousy and the jobs don’t come back
6. FAST and FURIOUS/Gun runners
7. What ISN’T a scandal? Libya? Syria? Foreign policy?
9. See Rick Perry

I demand a recount…

Khun Joe on August 30, 2011 at 6:23 PM

5. No social unrest

Uh-huh. Take a look at this posted today at Gateway Pundit:

http://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2011/08/congressional-black-caucus-tea-party-wants-to-lynch-blacks-video/

As earlier posters have said, “No social unrest…yet.”

GrannyDee on August 30, 2011 at 6:24 PM

If, heaven forbid, we do end up in another recession and The One wins anyway, then maybe Lichtman really is a genius.

TimeTraveler on August 30, 2011 at 6:25 PM

Obama’s Attorney General Eric Holder is nothing but scandal.

Really Right on August 30, 2011 at 6:25 PM

No scandals? Well, we shall see what develops with Fast and Furious; if the the MSM actually covers it this has the potential to become a full-blown scandal; my sense is that the Holder DOJ is very suspect.

PrincipleStand on August 30, 2011 at 6:26 PM

Dude, it’s over.

Allah,

I know it’s your schtich , but it drives people away. After months (yes months) of Dude, Rubio’s toast I won’t put up with it this far out. No I won’t.

Marcus on August 30, 2011 at 6:28 PM

9 points to Obama, No way.
1. No contested primary Not yet Hillary waiting for Obama to self destruct.
2. Incumbency Jobs, jobs, jobs. No jobs no Obama.
3. No third-party candidate Too soon to tell
4. Major domestic-policy changes in his first term will haunt him
5. No social unrest Wisconsin was a love in
6. No major scandals Project Gunrunner, unmanned space station
7. No major foreign-policy failures Arab spring may be Obama’s fall
8. Major foreign-policy achievements in his first term (killing Bin Laden) The lack of justice at Gitmo cancels this out.
9. Little charisma by his likely opponent Sarah will charm Obamas pants off and then giggle at the little man.

meci on August 30, 2011 at 6:32 PM

Sorry, but this article is a complete joke….

BrianVII on August 30, 2011 at 6:33 PM

Lichtman = Liberal

WordsMatter on August 30, 2011 at 6:33 PM

Here are some keys that I developed for this election:

1.Turd
2.Marxist turd
3.Anti-American
4.Racist
5.Chronic liar
6.Destroyer of the economy
7.Dogassugly co-conspirator wife who acts like Marie Antoinette
8.Lazy
9.Obnoxious
10.Imbecile

If a candidate tallies up all 10, he will lose in a landslide.

justltl on August 30, 2011 at 6:35 PM

I count 8 for the Republicans. I AIN’T worried.

birdhurd on August 30, 2011 at 6:43 PM

I should clarify here that the term “dogassugly” is an Ohio Creole term that translates roughly to “spiritually tainted”.
Not to be confused with the phrase “dog ass ugly” which means an entirely different thing and that could possibly result in banning.
In fact, I think that there is a breve or something over the “a” in the Creole term, but I don’t know how to apply it.

justltl on August 30, 2011 at 6:47 PM

He doesn’t sound like a man about to lay money on his forecast. In fact, his “keys” look basically like a tautology. Do they mention how many times the expert changes his mind before making an “official” prediction?

Of course, even if they did, AP would still troll us with the headline. It’s all good though.

If, heaven forbid, we do end up in another recession and The One wins anyway, then maybe Lichtman really is a genius.

No maybe about it. Even if the economy grows at a rating matching its “best” performance of The One’s reign, I’d be prepared to call the gentleman a genius if Obama is re-elected.

HitNRun on August 30, 2011 at 6:48 PM

Dear AP,

Shut up. Really. I’ve never even heard of Lichtman before and now you’re going to wave this man in our faces and proclaim the endtimes? ‘But he was right all those other times!’ Woopteedoo. The man isn’t psychic and I’m not going to bet the future of the country on his analysis. And besides, as meci pointed out all the so-called positives in Obama’s favor have been canceled out by other factors. So what if Lichtman happened to be the one analyst who was right more often than the other analysts? The basis for his conclusion is still crap.

If your point was, “We can’t let our guard down now,” then point taken, but sometimes I can’t help but think that you’re trying a little too hard to scare us.

R. Waher on August 30, 2011 at 6:53 PM

I’ll just mention one key (of several) that seems problematic:

Foreign policy failures:

Afghanistan (“quagmire”, helicopter shootdown, indecisive)
Bowing to foreigners
UK (snubs)
Libya (undeclared/illegal war, leading from behind)
Egypt (Muslim Brotherhood, leading from behind)
Israel (snubs, SCOAMF for negotiations)
Iraq (still there)
Stopped missile defense of Europe
Fast and Furious
Iran (nuke bomb?, leading from behind–Neda)
Kyota/Copenhagen accord debacle — Yay!!!!
GITMO (shows world we are evil — Yay!!!)
Pakistan (undeclared/illegal war)
China (love your one child policy)
Tibet (Dalai Lama out with the trash)
Olympic bid
Men’s and Women’s world cups–yes, I blame 0bambi :)

Damn, 0bambi really earned that SCOAMF label didn’t he?

mockmook on August 30, 2011 at 6:54 PM

Here are some keys that I developed for this election:

1.Turd
2.Marxist turd
3.Anti-American
4.Racist
5.Chronic liar
6.Destroyer of the economy
7.Dogassugly co-conspirator wife who acts like Marie Antoinette
8.Lazy
9.Obnoxious
10.Imbecile

If a candidate tallies up all 10, he will lose in a landslide.

justltl on August 30, 2011 at 6:35 PM

Well said although it would have been strengthened by more use of the word, “turd”, e.g. Lazy turd, obnoxious turd etc.

Mason on August 30, 2011 at 6:55 PM

14. Racism

 
FIFL.

rogerb on August 30, 2011 at 6:57 PM

I’m not at all surprised that Allah dug this guy and put him on the front page.And here I thought it’s the economy stupid and everything else is a distance second.

Hera on August 30, 2011 at 7:02 PM

What if he doesn’t run?

cpaulus on August 30, 2011 at 7:02 PM

This is the one election that he will get WRONG! The 2010 ass kickin’ will definately come into play for 2012.

Winebabe on August 30, 2011 at 7:07 PM

I wonder, if this Betard fella’ is a bettin’ man?.. If he’d like to put his money where his “keys” are?

My money’s on Captain Abysmal losing — losing BIG.

Talk is cheap.

franksalterego on August 30, 2011 at 7:16 PM

Obama will win? I guess Palin is running and will be the nominee.

/s

CW on August 30, 2011 at 7:21 PM

6. No major scandals
- FAST N FURIOUS

reliapundit on August 30, 2011 at 6:15 PM

Echoing that, I hereby declare an extended period of real unemployment over 15% to be a scandal.

Kaisersoze on August 30, 2011 at 7:24 PM

MO has been the one state that correctly predicted the POTUS since the ’50s… until ’08 when it went McCain. Everyone’s wrong eventually. Unless O cheats his way there (which is a HUUUUUGE possibility), it ain’t gonna happen.

-Aslan’s Girl

Aslans Girl on August 30, 2011 at 7:30 PM

Dennis D on August 30, 2011 at 6:20 PM

This, plus people who refused to vote McCain will vote to oust Barack. I want his electoral votes to be in the hundreds and no higher.

SouthernGent on August 30, 2011 at 7:33 PM

Could happen if the GOP serves up a fool nominee, +/- a third party distraction.

But more likely than not, Lichtman’s streak is coming to an end.

bayview on August 30, 2011 at 7:35 PM

Oh, he might win if he proclaims himself a dictator. I am sure this has crossed his evil mind and the evil minds of many of his supporters.

mobydutch on August 30, 2011 at 7:38 PM

Epic delusional “expert” fail. Walk through it yourself.

#1 – False (GOP)
#4-? (hard to call right now)
#5-False (GOP) (a true recovery is impossible. Moreover a de facto recession has essentially never ended for most Americans. This is not a conventional recession or typical bad economy: it has been structurally devastating to too manys sectors, and had a concussive effect on the American psyche. Obama has totally reshaped the regulatory relationship between business and government. This is almost worth two FALSE keys for GOP.
#6-False (GOP)
#7-True (But this is a “false” True. This doesn’t redound to Obama; quite the contrary. Obamacare was the most divisive legislation in modern history. Its punitive and industry-altering taxes haven’t even started to kick in. It’s been declared unconstitutional by at least one a federal court is pending a Supreme Court rebuke.
#8-False. (GOP) You don’t think the tea party represents social unrest? This is the total credibility killer for this “expert.” And furthermore by 2012, you will see the type old fashioned social unrest across America this idiot can actually recognize. Guaranteed.
#9-False. (GOP) Lichtman’s analysis here is absurd. There are multiple and serious scandals in this administration (just not termed as such by the media) rippling across the American consciousness. More importantly, this entire administration is a scandal. Call it the unspoken meta-scandal. How does that get measured? It doesn’t – it just gets felt and absorbed into the zeitgeist. Another whiff by Lichtman.
#10-We don’t know conspicuous what failures await here.
#11-who knows.
#12-False (GOP). Obama has the charisma of a mortician.
#13-False. (GOP) That is, with either Palin or Perry as the nominee. With loser Romney, no.

I count 7 keys for GOP, a few toss-ups, and one “false true” indicator. None of these analysts understand what’s going on right now in America. 2012 will be incomparable to anything they’ve known.

Just don’t nominate Romney.

rrpjr on August 30, 2011 at 7:45 PM

Nov 2012
Associated Press

—————————-

Experts were stunned when Barack Obama was unexpectedly defeated tonight in a landslide victory. The challenger, an eight-year hot dog salesman from Kentucky who campaigned in a squirrel costume, was widely expected by both media & political experts to lose…

RationalIcthus on August 30, 2011 at 7:49 PM

I predicted all of those races as he has, too. They weren’t too difficult. But I am not a political professional, and I know Obama will lose in 2012.

savvydude on August 30, 2011 at 7:52 PM

Blockhead

ultracon on August 30, 2011 at 7:56 PM

What he did to GM and Chrysler bondholders was a scandal.

John the Libertarian on August 30, 2011 at 7:57 PM

reliapundit on August 30, 2011 at 6:15 PM

#5 on your list WILL change, if the economy gets worse, or if other variables come into play. And I’m not necessarily meaning that those who identify with the Tea Party will be the perps…

I think there’s a very good chance it will be a leftist-instigated scenario.

Talismen on August 30, 2011 at 8:02 PM

Sarah Palin would instantly flip a couple of the keys to the GOP and Palin’s relentless attack would flip enough to win by time of the election. go Sarah

mathewsjw on August 30, 2011 at 8:02 PM

Has anybody taken upon themselves to forecast what an outgoing and defeated odumbo administration will do to the WH, the State Dept, and the Doj? The Clinton shenanigans will be insignificant compared to what to odumbo people will do. We will need the National Guard to make sure these people don’t desecrate our WH.

ultracon on August 30, 2011 at 8:02 PM

7. No major foreign-policy failures

Let’s see what Iraq and Afghanistan look like a year from now after the draw downs.

pedestrian on August 30, 2011 at 8:07 PM

1. No contested primary

More out of fear of alienating African-American voters than out of loyalty to the guy.

2. Incumbency

I’ll give him that

3. No third-party candidate

Not so sure about that

4. Major domestic-policy changes in his first term

But are they popular domestic-policy changes?

5. No social unrest

O RLY?

6. No major scandals

The more the media sit on the scandals, the closer to pollin’ time before the dam bursts. The truth will out.

7. No major foreign-policy failures

O RLY?

8. Major foreign-policy achievements in his first term (killing Bin Laden)

Okay…Killing Bin Laden and……..? And then…..?

9. Little charisma by his likely opponent

Perry and Palin seem awful charismatic to me…

Sekhmet on August 30, 2011 at 8:11 PM

Dogass is actually a corruption of a southern Caribbean term “dougla” meaning “mixed”. ‘Snothin’, really.

Won’t be a walk in the park. It’ll be a walk into history, as it must.

Schadenfreude on August 30, 2011 at 5:45 PM
I wish I could be so sure. I think people might be reading a little too much into the 2010 midterms. It’s going to be somewhat different in 2012.

ddrintn on August 30, 2011 at 5:46 PM

So far only TXUS has given me any real hope. With the MSM/LSM (more realistically known as the National Propaganda Service) it’ll take a candidate who can come up with real stinging-yet-humble soundbites which the Media can’t corrupt or take out of context. Christie miiiight be able to do this. I’m hoping Perry can do it, regardless of accent, concealed carry, and cowboy boots.

Any Texans out there who have a good idea whether Perry can mold the Media rather than being molded by it?

flicker on August 30, 2011 at 8:12 PM

I’ll see your “expert” and raise you Gene Simmons.

-Aslan’s Girl

Aslans Girl on August 30, 2011 at 8:15 PM

Meaningless

georgealbert on August 30, 2011 at 8:21 PM

Well, at least the guy’s impartial. Oh, wait.

Outside of the classroom, Lichtman has testified as an expert witness on civil rights in more than 70 cases for the U.S. Department of Justice and for civil rights groups such as the NAACP, the Mexican-American Legal Defense and Education Fund and Puerto Rican Legal Defense and Education Fund, and the Southern Poverty Law Center. He also consulted for Vice President Al Gore and Senator Edward Kennedy. He assisted the U.S. Commission on Civil Rights investigation into voting irregularities in Florida during the 2000 election,[1] submitting an extensive report of his statistical analysis of balloting problems. Lichtman concluded “there were major racial disparities in ballot rejection rates”.[2]

cynccook on August 30, 2011 at 8:25 PM

5 No social unrest ?

The Communist Black Caucus is out there right now trying to stir up social unrest.

How do you spell “Jedi mind trick” again?

Dhuka on August 30, 2011 at 8:25 PM

After months (yes months) of Dude, Rubio’s toast I won’t put up with it this far out. No I won’t.

Marcus on August 30, 2011 at 6:28 PM

Yes. Yes you will.

JohnGalt23 on August 30, 2011 at 8:31 PM

Elections expert who’s called every presidential race since ’84

Big deal. I’ve called every presidential race since ’84. I’ll bet there are a lot of us out there. I might have called ’88 differently if the Democrats hadn’t nominated that doofus Dukakis and in ’92 you had to figure Perot would drain votes from the Republican. The rest were obvious and easy, although I was surprised when Bush didn’t take the popular vote in 2000.

I’m underwhelmed by Lichtman and his Keys.

SukieTawdry on August 30, 2011 at 8:35 PM

Unbelievably, Huntsman is very attractive to the liberals who are disenchanted with Obama and most seem to view him as their fave Republican candidate.

Greyledge Gal on August 30, 2011 at 6:12 PM

Jon Huntsman 2012 = John Anderson 1980 before he went independent.

I was in high school at the time — the 1980 election was the first one I voted in (for RR, of course!) — and remember my liberal friends telling me how thrilled they were that “your party finally picked someone reasonable!” (Yes, I was “out” — I was a member of the student Republican club.)

A contemporary National Review article, if I remember it correctly, diagnosed this as a sort of exoticism (if that’s the right word) among liberals who were getting a delicious transgressive thrill from the contemplation of — gasp! — voting Republican! — and that that sense of the exotic went away when Anderson went third-party, which is why his support tanked.

That may be what’s going on with the Huntsmania, such as it is, among liberals who fancy themselves politically sophisticated.

Mary in LA on August 30, 2011 at 8:43 PM

5. No social unrest – Check out October2011.org and their plans to shut down the workings of the Federal Government until the whole lefty agenda is in place. And Obama is bound to handle that in a totally incoherent manner, trying to look like all what all sides want him to look like.

6. No major scandals – Operation Fast and Furious has made it all the way to White House National Security Director for North America Kevin O’Reilly. Is O’R going to fall on his sword bayonet and be able to stonewall for an entire year about how far up in the WH that info went?

7. No major foreign policy failures. In a year, the entire Arab Spring will have morphed into wild cheers for the Muslim Brotherhood to enforce very strict versions of Sharia in every country affected.

eeyore on August 30, 2011 at 8:45 PM

I just can’t believe that the state of the economy has no influence.

Also this list was also developed in 1981. PRIOR to the internet, citizens were likely less informed and educated about what our government was doing and the impact of laws, regulations and policy. And AFTER the internet,yes, some are a little dumber.

pjean on August 30, 2011 at 8:56 PM

The “keys” may be accurate, but the judgement on who gets the keys is pivotal…#9 isn’t even chosen yet, so how does he know?
If it’s Palin, charisma is off the chart…Perry is a close second. That alone shows his keys may be accurate, but his choice of who gets what is not.

right2bright on August 30, 2011 at 9:01 PM

After the election Lichtman will probably get plastic surgery and move to the countryside of France.

Lon Chaney on August 30, 2011 at 9:15 PM

How many presidents have been re-elected with unemployment > 8%? Tea party, high unemployment, plus Obamacare = new president.

kerrhome on August 30, 2011 at 9:16 PM

Well experts are experts until they are wrong! Oh yeah, they also consider Krugman an expert, nough said!

bluemarlin on August 30, 2011 at 9:22 PM

Apparently this expert has never tried the “keys theory” on a Marxist Socialist pResident before.

Key West Reader on August 30, 2011 at 9:23 PM

Mr Lichtman, I am reminded of something someone wrote in a comment on this very blog “America Is A Country Of First”

Dr Evil on August 30, 2011 at 9:26 PM

Well, Mr. Lichtman, 7 out of 8 correct election predictions isn’t such a bad record.

Hermeticus on August 30, 2011 at 9:30 PM

6. No major scandals -Fast and Furious

Dr Evil on August 30, 2011 at 9:34 PM

5. No social unrest -Flash Mobs SEE Philadelphia etc…

Dr Evil on August 30, 2011 at 9:35 PM

9. Little charisma by his likely opponent -SEE Rick Perry

Dr Evil on August 30, 2011 at 9:36 PM

Damnn if you add three to the Republicans, I listed above, and subtract the same three from Obama it becomes 50-50.

Dr Evil on August 30, 2011 at 9:38 PM

Oh my Mr Lichtman who is that in your rear view mirror :) Oh my: Perry 41, Romney 12, Paul 11, Bachmann 9.

Perry took the front runner lead after he was in the race for 2 days. Charisma, check.

Dr Evil on August 30, 2011 at 9:42 PM

I believe Lichtman is going to have to start another streak. When you look at why Obama was elected, in 2008, you have to wonder what would make people think re-electing him will change what’s happening now. We now know his lack of experience is hurting us, as a country, and his inability to pick competent advisors has hurt us even more.

Normally, incumbency would be a good thing, I don’t believe it’s an advantage in this case. He was a blank slate (primarily because of all those “present” votes) and easy to foist on the voters of the country and the press refused to vet him, last election, which was also to his benefit. Now, no one believes the press any more and he has a record to defend. Of course the media will help him defend his record, and they’ll trash whoever the Republican candidate is but, in the long run, that won’t make a difference because he has a little over a year to prove he’s competent and those results are not something the press can do for him it’s the results that will count.

Wait until we see his NEW economic plan. If that is what many expect it to be, the press is going to have their hands full. Defending the indefensible is pretty hard for anyone. The same plan as last year will be a disaster for him. Not only does he roll it out in September, but then he spends 2 months talking and talking and talking, trying to convince the public it’s new and going to work and then he has less than a year before the election and he still hasn’t proven his competence.

Vote Republican and only be called a racist one more time.

bflat879 on August 30, 2011 at 9:47 PM

I’m no Santorum fan but he did a great job blasting Perry.

Santorum blasts Perry.

Santorum gave a laundry list of criticism about Perry’s record in Texas, staring with the Governor’s support of the pro-immigrant DREAM Act. Santorum also blasted Perry for supporting Al Gore for President in 2000 (“I can’t imagine any point in time in my life that I would think of supporting Al Gore for anything”), and Rudy Giuliani early in the 2008 primary (“He was supporting a pro-gay marriage, pro-choice, pro-bigger government Mayor of New York”).
He saved his strongest language for Perry’s controversial 2007 executive order mandate that Texas girls receive a vaccine for the sexually transmitted disease HPV.
“To require it, and have parents have to be aware of it and have to opt out, that is the heavy hand of government,” Santorum thundered. “That is something I’d expect from Barack Obama, not someone who says they’re a conservative.”
And…
Santorum he dismissed the notion that Perry would keep other conservative candidates from gaining traction.
“They said the same thing about Michele Bachmann a few weeks ago,” he said, arguing it indicated that Republicans were unhappy with the field. “Candidates have gone from zero to 30 points, and then back down to two. It happened to Herman Cain, now Michele Bachmann is drifting down.”

Spathi on August 30, 2011 at 9:49 PM

the scandal-free nature of his administration.Undermining his re-election is a lack of charisma and leadership on key issues

Scandal-free? Really? Not because there haven’t been plenty of scandal-worthy events, but because the MSM ignores them.

No way a 2nd term for this utter failure.

IrishEyes on August 30, 2011 at 9:52 PM

Two keys that shouldn’t be in his favor:

1) no scandals: Gunrunner alone should be enough to kill that meme.

2) no major foreign policy failures: maybe not any singular failure, but when you add them up–Israel, Iran, Egypt, Russia–it starts to look like a comprehensive bomb in foreign policy.

Those are two key issues that the GOP damn well better pound on.

nukemhill on August 30, 2011 at 9:53 PM

Obama approval – disapproval poll average, per RCP, now at minus 10.2%.

Lon Chaney on August 30, 2011 at 9:54 PM

Oh, and if Iraq starts to implode like it looks to be, then there’s your major failure.

nukemhill on August 30, 2011 at 9:54 PM

It is about time this guy is wrong. It has to happen eventually.

Voter from WA State on August 30, 2011 at 9:31 PM

The guy is never wrong because he just changes who has the “keys”.
If it gets down to Perry/Palin/Romney or whomever, is ahead by 15 points at towards the end of the election cycle, than he just says…PPM has the charisma, Obama stumbled in foreign affairs, and the xyz hurt him domestically…so the guy never loses, he just switches the keys around so he always wins.

right2bright on August 30, 2011 at 9:54 PM

the scandal-free nature of his administration.

Say what?

YehuditTX on August 30, 2011 at 9:55 PM

bflat879 on August 30, 2011 at 9:47 PM

I don’t believe any of those previous presidential races, he predicted, had to contend with a grass roots movement like “The TEA party.

Dr Evil on August 30, 2011 at 9:56 PM

Spathi on August 30, 2011 at 9:49 PM

And that has to do with this thread how?
Move on Spathi…it’s Perry’s to lose, and Santorum is a great guy, but he ain’t going anywhere.

right2bright on August 30, 2011 at 9:56 PM

The only way I see him winning is if Ron Paul pulls a Perot. Which is entirely possible.

ErinF on August 30, 2011 at 9:59 PM

Spathi on August 30, 2011 at 9:49 PM

Did you switch from Ron Paul to Rick Santorum? You know you just made a lateral swap. Think vertical Spathi.

Dr Evil on August 30, 2011 at 10:01 PM

I can’t see Øbama winning. His kung fu just isn’t strong enough.

Mojave Mark on August 30, 2011 at 10:04 PM

His points of measurement assumes the historical deportment of the incumbent. Given who presently holds the office, this list seems quaint and most certainly naive. In truth, the social unrest question alone could easily go against him by virtue of the Tea Party.

So many of Obozo’s problems so overshoot these basic, “normal” measures that they don’t even blip down on Lichtman’s radar.

starman on August 30, 2011 at 10:07 PM

Perry pledges to keep voting like a Democrat even though he needed to change parties since Texas was moving GOP

Rumors that Perry would defect to the GOP — and run against populist Democratic Agriculture Commissioner Jim Hightower — picked up steam by late 1989. On Sept. 29, 1989, he made it official at a Capitol news conference. At his side were GOP Chairman Fred Meyer and U.S. Sen. Phil Gramm, a former Democrat who was aggressively courting would-be converts.

“I intend to vote the same convictions,” Perry said. “The only difference is there will be an R beside my name.”

_perry

Spathi on August 30, 2011 at 10:07 PM

Maybe the guy is a genius and knows exactly how this is going to go, but I have to wonder how on earth he gives these four points to O’Bozo:

5. No social unrest
6. No major scandals
7. No major foreign-policy failures
8. Major foreign-policy achievements in his first term (killing Bin Laden)

Really? He sounds like a Democrat to me.

Jaibones on August 30, 2011 at 10:13 PM

The only way I see him winning is if Ron Paul pulls a Perot. Which is entirely possible.

ErinF on August 30, 2011 at 9:59 PM

If Ron Paul does his name will be Mudd.

Dr Evil on August 30, 2011 at 10:19 PM

“They’ve never missed. They’ve been right seven elections in a row. A number that goes way beyond statistical significance in a record no other system even comes close to.”

WTF kind of statistical nonsense is this?
Okay, let’s assume that every election is a 50/50 proposition, then the odds of picking the winner 7 straight times is 1 out of 128 or a p-value of 0.78%. Impressive no?

But out of the past 7 elections, 1984, 1996 and 2008 were not 50/50 propositions. So that leaves us with 1988, 1992, 2000, and 2004 in which a year before the event one could say that it could go either way.

So, really his system only holds up in 4 straight elections in which there was a really doubt about the outcome. The odds of picking the winner 4 straight times is 1/16 or 6.25% which is not significant at the traditionally-accepted 5% level.

It also appears that he got 2000 wrong and got around it with special pleading about the popular vote versus the electoral vote. So his success rate is actually 3 out of 4 in contested elections.

Finally, his categories are so subjective as to be completely meaningless. If he gets it wrong, he won’t blame the system but merely his misinterpretation of the predictive factors.

GIGO

PackerBronco on August 30, 2011 at 10:29 PM

Spathi on August 30, 2011 at 10:07 PM

That’s a non-issue. So he was a conservative southern Democrat over 20 years ago. No big deal at all. That’s the story of a lot of people south of the Mason-Dixon line.

ddrintn on August 30, 2011 at 10:43 PM

The only way I see him winning is if Ron Paul pulls a Perot. Which is entirely possible.

Perot was able to draw something like 19%. Raon Paul wouldn’t get anything near that.

Eren on August 30, 2011 at 10:43 PM

The guy needs 13 factors to predict 7 elections? I’m guessing his PR skills are what’s counting here.

edshepp on August 30, 2011 at 10:49 PM

If, heaven forbid, we do end up in another recession and The One wins anyway, then maybe Lichtman really is a genius.

You want us to start contemplating suicide, don’t you?

abobo on August 30, 2011 at 10:52 PM

Remember when all the Presidents who got elected in 20 year intervals, from Lincoln onward, were doomed to die in office?

Such formulas typically work for years & years & years – until one day they fail.

Lichtman is a genius? Oh, sure he is . . . & he will continue to be a genius, until one day he magically turns into an idiot.

RedPepper on August 30, 2011 at 11:05 PM

14. SCOAMF

Oops.

trapeze on August 30, 2011 at 11:26 PM

Comment pages: 1 2 3 4