Biden to defeat Trump in election 2024 | Allan Lichtman

[Moses]

 

[EmmetK]

12 hours ago, stevenkesslar said:

Like I said, enjoy your cruelty while it lasts.  When Trump starts deporting the parents of legally American kids, or the kids themselves, cruelty won't look so good anymore.  And Lichtman will still have his hair.  😉

It is not cruelty. It is called enforcing the law. No doubt the fake news media will show photos of parents separated from their children. And if they were decent parents, they would take their kids back to their homes, and apply for legal entry from there.
Tom Homan will not be moved from ding his job of enforcing the law by some lawbreaking parents or whiny woke-ists.

Deport, deport, deport.......

TRUMP2024
MAGA

12 hours ago, stevenkesslar said:

 

 

[Bingo T Dog]

1 hour ago, EmmetK said:

And if they were decent parents, they would take their kids back to their homes, and apply for legal entry from there.

Tell that to Jared Kushner's grandparents.

[stevenkesslar]

12 hours ago, Moses said:

This is Belgrade, April 2022.

Sweetie.

That ain't nothin.

Finland hates the United States.   They had a special election in 2024 in which they voted for Genocide Man to take then over and slaughter their women and children.

Sweden hates the United States.   They had a special election in 2024 in which they voted for Genocide Man to take then over and slaughter their women and children.

Oh, wait.  No.  I'm wrong.   Sweden and Finland joined NATO because they despise Genocide Man and his slaughter of women and children.

I mean, Genocide Man won an important battle.   But it doesn't change the inevitable collapse of the rotten and weak Russian Federation, where citizens are processed into meat.   Enjoy it while it lasts.

[stevenkesslar]

8 hours ago, EmmetK said:

It is not cruelty. It is called enforcing the law.

I agree with you on this, mostly.

Democrats did not legislate COVID into existence.   They did not legislate to have global supply chain shocks and inflation.  So I view COVID as one big win for Democrats in 2020 and one big loss for Democrats in 2024.  But pandemics are outside our control.

Immigration is a whole different story.  The easy comparison is Obama to Biden.   Obama was Deporter In Chief, and he did well with Hispanics.  Biden went too far the other direction, and even Blacks and Latinos revolted.   Democrats asked for it.  At every point along the way elected Democrats in swing states were warning that the reaction was building.  

Trump Border Czar Tom Homan To Blue States: If You're Not Going To Help Us, Get Out Of The Way

I'm actually really glad the Democrats lost the House.  What makes sense is let 50 % of America have what they voted for.  We know for sure fascist wannabes like you will want as much cruelty as you can get.  But don't count on that teeny tiny majority holding.  If the 50.0000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000001 % Trump majority were a penis, it would be invisible and useless.

When Trump gives his hog feed tax cuts to billionaires, Democrats will go nuts.  And hopefully demand he give the budget-busting money to Latinos as child tax credits instead.  Eliminate Hispanic child poverty, and raise taxes on billionaires.  But you guys are greedy and people just won't like it.  

When Homan deports rapists and murderers, it will be popular.  And for the most part I think the blue states - where most of these "illegals" live - will go along.  If we are talking about rapists and murderers.

When he tries to "find" 300,000 "missing" children, it will be the opposite. What's missing is not the children.  What's missing is the paperwork.  Most Latino children are not rapists and murderers, as far as I am aware.

These children, and many others, chose to cross into the US and are likely mostly living with relatives.  So when Homan starts to round them up, separate the "missing" children from the families they came to be with, and say this somehow ends "sex trafficking" or whatever it ain't gonna go down well.  ESPECIALLY WITH LATINOS.

But you don't care.   You can't get enough cruelty.

Why are you so cruel?

[EmmetK]

Tweedle Dee Dee denies wearing a wig:

I'm glad to know that I'm not the only one sending him nasty and sarcastic e-mails.
And note to the Village Idiot: Pulling on your hair doesn't prove you are not wearing a wig. It only proves you are using strong toupee wax.

TRUMP2024
MAGA

[EmmetK]

The Young Turks rip Alan Lichtman (aka The Village Idiot aka Tweedled Dee Dee aka the Smug Professor) and his magical keys to shreds.

Hard to believe that anyone with half a brain would actually give this partisan halfwit any credibility, much less promote him, his magical keys, and wacko predictions.
It's REALLY hard to believe.

TRUMP2024
MAGA

Confucius say: He who talks the most, says the least.

[EmmetK]

Top pollster Ann Selzer to retire after bombshell Iowa poll ended in huge miss

https://www.cnn.com/2024/11/17/media/iowa-pollster-ann-selzer-retire-trump-harris/index.html

 

Now that Tweedle Dee Dum is retiring, how much longer before Tweedle Dee Dee follows her out the door of prognosticating? Hopefully soon. And he can auction off his magical keys on eBay. I'll start the bidding at 5 cents.

And those who continued to promote this snake oil salesman here on this forum ad nauseum as if that clueless moron had any idea of what he was talking about, should hold their heads in shame. The silver lining is that they showed themselves to be partisans who have ZERO knowledge of the American mindset and political landscape of the USA.

TRUMP2024
MAGA

 

[EmmetK]

Trump: Investigate Pollster Ann Selzer for Fraud

Donald Trump is calling for fake pollster Ann Selzer, aka Tweedle Dee Dum,to be investigated:

https://truthsocial.com/@realDonaldTrump/posts/113500487850838306

How much fraud will the American people tolerate? Who is this fake pollster that thought she could change American mindset?

First, it was Allan Lichtman, aka Tweedle Dee Dee, and his magical keys, which some here promoted as if he was something other than the fool he proved to be.

The American people sick of this already. Enough!!

 

Selzer and Lichtman are just a couple of sympathy-for-the Democrats - lying political stooges attempting to keep Trump voters home by making them think it's useless to even vote.

"Might as well stay at home - the polls say Kamala has already won it all!"

It didn't work!

President Trump will have the White House, the House, and the Senate; he should pass laws that prevent lying polls, and laws which hold the lying media accountable for their lies and half-truths.

ALL ABOOOOOOOOOARD

TRUMP2024
MAGA

 

 

[stevenkesslar]

38 minutes ago, EmmetK said:

Donald Trump is calling for fake pollster Ann Selzer, aka Tweedle Dee Dum,to be investigated:

Exactly.   Spread hate.   Attack.  Divide.   This is the Trump Doctrine.

First, Ann Selzer is a highly respected professional who exudes grace.  This is not something Trump respects, or even understands.  It is graceful for Selzer to admit her mistake and resign.  Of course, you and Trump would agree.  ATTACK THE BITCH!

Selzer was the canary in the coal mine whose polls showed in 2016 and 2020 that Trump was doing way better in Iowa than the MSM thought he would do.  Trump praised her.  Now he says attack her.

Lichtman was the canary in the coal mine who said Trump was going to win in 2016.  Trump sent him a note praising him.

So this is so Trump.

Of course he is going to only want facts and opinions he agrees with.

If Trump does not like it, attack.

If Trump does not like it, divide.

If Trump does not like it, spread respect.   Duh!  Of course not.  Spread hate.

Thank you for revealing so clearly what Trump and MAGA stand for.

 

ALL ABOOOOOOOOOARD THE HATE TRAIN

TRUMP2024
MAGA

SPREAD DIVISION
SPREAD HATE

SPREAD TAX CUTS FOR BILLIONAIRES

 

[stevenkesslar]

On 11/14/2024 at 3:55 PM, EmmetK said:

The Young Turks rip Alan Lichtman (aka The Village Idiot aka Tweedled Dee Dee aka the Smug Professor) and his magical keys to shreds.

Hard to believe that anyone with half a brain would actually give this partisan halfwit any credibility, much less promote him, his magical keys, and wacko predictions.
It's REALLY hard to believe.

TRUMP2024
MAGA

Confucius say: He who talks the most, says the least.

Thanks for posting that video.

It should be clear I read and watch a lot of right-wing media.  I am a political junkie, so I at least want to hear what the other side is saying.

Cenk is of course left-wing.  But he is one person I rarely listen to.  I did listen to his debate with Lichtman, in which Lichtman creamed him.  So of course Cenk is the kind of guy who wants to gloat, just like @EmmetKruelty does.  But even now, he is just dead wrong.  He can't trash The Keys without understanding what they say.  Even now, Cenk fails to grasp the most basic facts.

Cenk's point is that Lichtman was wrong in 2024 because incumbency didn't help Harris.  Apparently, Cenk is unaware that Lichtman took the incumbency key away from Harris precisely because she is not the incumbent.  So Cenk's argument is misinformed.  Lichtman turned the incumbency against Harris.  So it could not be a reason Lichtman was wrong in saying she would win. 

Like he so often is, Cenk is just spreading misinformation, without intending to.  He never does his homework.  It would be interesting to hear which other keys Cenk things Lichtman should have turned against Harris.  But instead Cenk just wants to gloat.

I'll admit that I took Lichtman and Selzer seriously.  Was I wrong to?   I actually don't think I was.  They are widely respected experts.  Everyone took Selzer seriously this time.  And in 2020.  And in 2016.  Everyone took Lichtman seriously in 2016, when he said Trump was going to win.  Including Trump. 

Do experts have to be right 100 % of the time?  No.  But this one is a big one.  Selzer was smart to be humble and quit while she is mostly ahead.  Lichtman is digger his hole deeper.  

At this point Lichtman is doing something particularly unhelpful.  I don't think it is helpful for him to suggest that maybe Latino men voted for Trump because of disinformation.   I'd rather argue they voted for Trump because of inflation and their pocketbook. 

There is no simple one truth.  Some Black women are saying, probably correctly, that some Latino men simply would not vote for a Black woman.  There's going to be a reckoning around that, somehow.  But for most (White) Democrats, I think the best argument now is that we need to take the economic concerns of working class Latino men (and Asian and Black and White working class men) very seriously.  I think Democrats got the memo.

I still think Lichtman's Keys are fantastic.  Mostly, because they compliment American voters, and say we make smart decisions.  So in 2024 it makes it possible to say, "You know what?  Latino men are not stupid.  They are concerned with higher costs, and putting food on the table for their family."  I think that is closer to true than saying Latino men are racist or stupid. 

I will keep insisting that 2024 was actually a victory for multi-racial democracy.  2024 proved that all Americans are free to vote, and free to vote as they damn well please.  We may deeply disagree.  But that is why it's a democracy.  

Where I wish Lichtman would go is this:  where was his interpretation of his Keys wrong?  He is a mere mortal.  It would be a better look if, like Selzer, he simple admitted that all humans make mistakes.

He is saying that his "party mandate" key is perhaps in part to blame, because we never had a Democratic primary.  My own view is that switching in Harris with no primary was one of the smart things Democrats did.  I will always believe the polls were right.  We would have done far worse if Biden were at the top of the ticket.  Most Republican politicos believe that.  They thought they would have something like a Reagan 1980 landslide.  I think it is logically next to impossible to argue that all the money, joy, energy, and volunteers Harris brought in didn't help.  The fact that it was not enough doesn't mean it didn't keep things from being much worse.

The key that I think is obviously suspect is his short-term economy/recession key.  Lichtman did count that key against Bush 41 in 1992.  And what mattered most, of course, was that he was right.  Bush 41 did lose in 1992.  But Lichtman's very weak argument was that even though the recession ended in 1991, it was not formally declared over until after the election in 1992.  As if anyone cares!  What Lichtman also argued at the time, on TV, is that everybody still says we're in a recession in polls.  Maybe that is what his key should measure.  Because that was obviously THE KEY for a lot of working class voters in 2024, who had voted for Biden in 2020 and were pissed off.

If you change that key to be against Harris, that would have been 5.  Lichtman's system says you need 6 against you to lose.  But Gore also had 5 keys against him in 2000, and lost narrowly.  The system is based on the idea that Americans make common sense decisions based on important things.  It is almost obviously true that in 2000 and 2020 we had close races, and many Americans had some deeply conflicting impulses.

In retrospect, I think had Lichtman counted that short-term economy against Harris, he would have a lot less egg on his face today.  The reality that I will always believe is that Harris did a much better job than Biden would have, in a race that was always likely to penalize the incumbent party because of the inflationary economy of 2022.    And the higher prices and especially higher rent that have not gone away.

And, like in 2000, it was actually close.  @EmmetKruelty will keep insisting 2020 was stolen, and 2024 was a landslide.  But as of now Harris lost by about 4.5 million votes LESS than Trump did in 2020.  Trump lost by 7 million votes.  Harris lost by 2.5 million, and that number keeps getting smaller.  On the electoral side, if 150,000 Trump voters switched to Harris, she could have won all three blue wall states.  My guess is 150,000 2024 Trump voters did vote for Biden in 2020, and were punishing him for inflation and immigration.

@EmmetKruelty is a fan of simple-minded dogma and cruelty.  I still like Lichtman's Keys.  At some point I hope he stops his "disinformation" rant and decides maybe his Keys need a tune up.

 

[EmmetK]

12 hours ago, stevenkesslar said:

 

It should be clear I read and watch a lot of right-wing media.  I am a political junkie.....

 

A political junkie?  Lol. A Jew-hating political junkie with the political instincts of a camel.

Confucius: He who talks the most, says the least.

ALL ABOOOOOOOOOOOOOOARD!

TRUMP2024
MAGA

[stevenkesslar]

3 hours ago, EmmetK said:

A Jew-hating political junkie

What's that based on?

According  to close to half of younger American Jews, you, my pro-Genocide Jew, are supporting policies of Israel that are

RACIST

an/or  APARTHEID

and/or  GENOCIDE.

This is not my opinion, my dear pro-Genocide Jew.  This is what American Jews are saying, through the work of the Jewish Electoral Institute.   Are they "Jew-hating" when they say YOU support genocide?

Do you think almost half of younger American Jews are "Jew-hating" or anti-Semitic?  What is your definition of "Jew-hating"?   Someone who does not want to see Bibi The Baby Killer up his game and slaughter hundreds of thousands of Palestinian women and children, with Trump and Huckabee being silently complicit?

You clearly and repeatedly express pro-Genocide views every time you open your mouth here about Palestinians.  Any concern about the tens of thousands women and children killed by Bibi The Baby Killer doesn't count because it is stated by Palestinians (and the UN, and many nations and agencies).

The way you personally try hard not to kill Palestinian women and children is to dismiss anything anyone says about them.   Including up to half of younger American Jews.  You can kill as many Palestinian women and children as you want, in your view. Because they are Palestinian.  And if Bibi The Baby Killer killed them, it obviously needed to be done.

That's genocide, according to over 1 in 3 younger American Jews.  Others call it racism, or apartheid.  Which do you think it is?

Or do you think up to half of younger American Jews are "Jew-hating"?  Anti-Semitic?  What are they when they decry your genocidal fever dreams?

 

 

[EmmetK]

I only have faith when it is blessed by Allan Lichtman and his magical keys.

TRUMP2024
MAGA

[Bingo T Dog]

2 hours ago, EmmetK said:

I only have faith when it is blessed by Allan Lichtman and his magical keys.

TRUMP2024
MAGA

You seem to have the hots for Allan Lichtman!!  You love posting his photo.  I think he's a little young for you.  

[stevenkesslar]

So here's my inner data geek at work.

One of the best criticisms against Lichtman for a long time has been that you could do just as well predicting who will win the Presidency by simply looking at the horse race polls.

That's kind of true.   But only if we are talking about the final horse race poll average right before the election.  There were cycles - Obama in 2008, Reagan in 1984 - where we knew they were going to win a week before people voted.  The problem with this approach is we also knew Clinton was going to win a week before the election in 2016.  Except Lichtman predicted Trump would win in September 2016.

My one line on Lichtman moving forward is that he got one key badly wrong:  the short term economy.  And I don't blame him, since the entire Democratic Party got that wrong.  We mostly all thought that Kamala Harris could outrun the "wall of lava" which was spewed out by the economy, stupid.  Turns out we were mostly all wrong.

Or were we?

Another truism about polling that is stated a lot is that no President, or incumbent party, has ever been re-elected with approval ratings like Joe Biden had in the year of the election.   That's absolutely true, as I will show below.  We kind of lost track of that when Biden stepped aside.  

Turns out that that there is a simple rule you can use to predict who will win.   In 16 out of 16 cases, the incumbent party won when the incumbent President's approval rating was 50 % or higher, and lost when the incumbent party's approval rating was under 50 %.   But in a total of 19 races, there are three exceptions.  And all 3 of 3 cases involved a very specific situation:  when the person running on the incumbent party ticket is not the sitting President, and is going for a third incumbent term (Nixon in 1960, Gore in 2000, Clinton in 2020).

Biden’s polling said Trump would win at least 400 electoral votes before president quit the race, Obama’s aide claims

Harris actually did way better than the historical math would suggest, based on Biden's 39 % approval rating. 

I have no idea what Team Biden knew right before he stepped aside.  But what lots of Republicans and Democrats were saying at that moment sounded like the headline above.  There was a belief on both sides that Trump could win in a Reaganesque landslide.   Instead, as of now we lost ZERO House seats, and narrowly held on to 4 of 5 Senate seats in swing states that voted narrowly for Trump.

I think one reasonable take away is that the "wall of lava" was mostly aimed at one person: Kamala Harris.  She was running on behalf of Biden, and made a point of not even trying to distance herself from him.  It now seems obvious she was going to be the one held accountable.  As Ron Brownstein argued, there has never been an example where an unpopular President was able to keep his party in power by not running again.  There are now several examples where it was tried, and almost worked.  Harris and Humphrey both came close.

Here are every President since Truman, ranked by their approval rating when the election was held, followed by the margin of victory or defeat of the incumbent party candidate.  There are 19 races, and the three exceptions to the rule are in boldface.

75 % approval - LBJ in 1964 - Incumbent party (LBJ) wins by 32.5 %

69 % approval - Ike in 1956 - Incumbent party (Ike) wins by 15.4 %

62 % approval - Ike in 1960 - Incumbent party (Nixon) loses by - 0.2 %

61 % approval - Nixon in 1972 - Incumbent party (Nixon) wins by 23.2 %

60 % approval - Reagan in 1984 - Incumbent party (Reagan) wins by 18.2 %

60 % approval - Clinton in 2000 - Incumbent party (Gore) wins by 0.5 % but loses electoral college.

59 % approval - Clinton in 1996 - Incumbent party (Clinton) wins by 8.5 %

55 % approval - Reagan in 1988 - Incumbent party (Bush 41) wins by 7.8 %

54 % approval - Obama in 2012 - Incumbent party (Obama) wins by3.9 %

52 % approval - Obama in 2016 - Incumbent party (Clinton) wins by 2.2 % but loses electoral college.

50 % approval - W. in 2004 - Incumbent party (W) wins by 2.4 %

44 % approval - Ford in 1876 - Incumbent party (Ford) loses by - 1.9 %

42 % approval - LBJ in 1968 - Incumbent party (Humphrey) loses by -0.7 %

42 % approval - Trump in 2020 - Incumbent party (Trump) loses by -4.8 %

41 % approval - Bush 41 in 1992 - Incumbent party (Bush 41) loses by - 5.6 %

39 % approval - Biden in 2024 - Incumbent party (Harris) loses by -1.7 %

37 % approval - Carter in 1980 - Incumbent party (Carter) loses by -9.7 %

30 % approval - Truman in 1952 - Incumbent party (Stevenson) loses by -10.9 %

26 % approval - W. in 2008 - Incumbent party (McCain) loses by -7.2 %

That is a remarkably clean list.

In 16 out of 19 races, you could predict the winner of the election based on whether the incumbent President had an approval rating of 50 % or higher.

In 18 out of 19 races, you could predict the winner of the popular vote based on the incumbent's approval rating.   The only exception - Nixon in 1960 - was 0.2 % away from winning the popular vote.

This is an example of why I still think Lichtman's Keys make lots of sense.  What these three exceptions strongly suggest is that, most of the time, incumbency helps.   The incumbent party probably would have won in all three exceptions if Ike, Bill Clinton, and Obama could have run for a third term.

And that is how Lichtman's keys work.  He doesn't argue one variable is right all the time.  He argues that if you take these 13 variables and blend them, they give you the right answer even if one variable is off.  Again, I think the variable that was way off in 2024 was the short-term economy.  That is what did Harris in.  Period.

This way of looking at it strongly suggests that Democrats helped themselves in 1968 and 2024 by getting an unpopular incumbent out of the way.  Had Biden resigned earlier, like LBJ did, and Harris had more time to win a primary and stage a campaign, things might have worked better.  We'll never know. 

But we do know for a fact that Biden in 2024 was close to being as unpopular as Carter was in 1980.   In 1980, Reagan won 489 electoral votes, 12 Senate seats, 34 House seats, and 4 Governor seats.  If this were 1980, we would have lost every Democrat that won in a swing state.  Plus perhaps a few other "shockers" as well.  Like Tim Kaine in Virginia, or Martin Heinrich in New Mexico.

Given how unpopular Biden was, mostly due to inflation and immigration, Harris did no worse than we should have expected, and arguably way better.   

Republicans are having fun trashing the $1 billion boondoggle.  As one of an army of small grassroots donors, I'm proud of the fact that we held the line.  Zero losses in the House and Governor races.  Those Governor seats will be the foundation of the resistance to the craziest things Trump will try to. 

It sucks that we lost 4 Senate seats.  But 4 losses are better than 12.   And given that Democrats are going to be uncompetitive in red states until we fix our White working class problem, we now should simply understand that states like Montana, Ohio, and West Virginia are out of reach for the time being.

 

 

[EmmetK]

 

Allan Lichtman aka Tweedle Dee Dee, aka the Village Idiot, aka the Smug Professor: "I don't get it" Duh!

What a fool. And his Electronic Intifada-reading acolytes? Even bigger fools!

ALL ABOOOOOOOARD!

TRUMP2024
MAGA