Thirteen key indicators go into Lichtman's predition. Those key indicators include:
Party mandate - favors GEOTUS
No primary contest - favors Commulala
Incumbent seeking re-election - favors GEOTUS
No third party - favors Commulala
Strong short-term economy - favors Commulala
Strong long-term economy - favors Commulala
Major policy change - favors Commulala
No social unrest - favors Commulala
No scandal - favors Commulala
No foreign or military failure - Toss-up, likely favors GEOTUS
Major foreign or military success - Toss-up, likely favors Commulala
Charismatic incumbent - favors GEOTUS
Uncharismatic challenger - favors Commulala
His analysis says eight of the keys favor Commulala while three do not, with two toss-ups. Reading into this analysis, I don't see how either of the economy indicators go to Commulala. It is the number one issue for most voters and no one is happy about it. Every real economic indicator (not the fudged numbers from the fed.gov) show the economy is in the tank and getting worse. Record number of corporate bankruptcies, jobs numbers dropping, you name it. No primary contest goes to her by default only because she was selected. And the number of people who have walked away from her simply for this reason is significant, which I don't think Lichtman takes into account. And to claim that GEOTUS is an "uncharismatic challenger" is just bunk. I would also go as far as arguing there is a third party, RFKJr and his supporters, that have mostly swung to GEOTUS.
Flip those five keys, and Commulala is at three. GEOTUS is at eight, with two toss-ups.
"Significant issues would have to arise for Democrat to lose in November", Licthman said. I don't think he realizes they already have.
There is also this: "In 2016, Lichtman predicted a Trump victory using the Keys. However, Trump lost the popular vote, and Lichtman had previously clarified that the Keys only predicted the popular vote, not the Electoral College outcome."
Well, that might just be taken as a sort of proof that there were shenanigans during that election too, and Trump maybe actually won the popular vote then too, but still.
And of course there is still the question whether his predictions are truly based on those keys of his, or if he gets some "hints" from the uniparty and his predictions are one way to steer the voters into the right direction, the way polls can be used. And 2016 was maybe supposed to be his second failure (first seems to have been Gore vs Bush), with Trump maybe being allowed to get the popular vote but not the Electoral College.
Thirteen key indicators go into Lichtman's predition. Those key indicators include:
His analysis says eight of the keys favor Commulala while three do not, with two toss-ups. Reading into this analysis, I don't see how either of the economy indicators go to Commulala. It is the number one issue for most voters and no one is happy about it. Every real economic indicator (not the fudged numbers from the fed.gov) show the economy is in the tank and getting worse. Record number of corporate bankruptcies, jobs numbers dropping, you name it. No primary contest goes to her by default only because she was selected. And the number of people who have walked away from her simply for this reason is significant, which I don't think Lichtman takes into account. And to claim that GEOTUS is an "uncharismatic challenger" is just bunk. I would also go as far as arguing there is a third party, RFKJr and his supporters, that have mostly swung to GEOTUS.
Flip those five keys, and Commulala is at three. GEOTUS is at eight, with two toss-ups.
"Significant issues would have to arise for Democrat to lose in November", Licthman said. I don't think he realizes they already have.
There is also this: "In 2016, Lichtman predicted a Trump victory using the Keys. However, Trump lost the popular vote, and Lichtman had previously clarified that the Keys only predicted the popular vote, not the Electoral College outcome."
Well, that might just be taken as a sort of proof that there were shenanigans during that election too, and Trump maybe actually won the popular vote then too, but still.
And of course there is still the question whether his predictions are truly based on those keys of his, or if he gets some "hints" from the uniparty and his predictions are one way to steer the voters into the right direction, the way polls can be used. And 2016 was maybe supposed to be his second failure (first seems to have been Gore vs Bush), with Trump maybe being allowed to get the popular vote but not the Electoral College.