• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Washington Post - Donald Trump Will Win The White House in November

538 gives Trump about 40% odds of winning at the moment so predicting Trump will win isn't a stretch. If something has a 40% chance of happening it will happen 2 out of 5 times.

I would bet money Hillary is going to win. But I wouldn't bet a lot.
 
And I've picked the last 30 Super Bowl winners, honest.

Anyway I don't understand this comment from him:

Donald Trump has made this the most difficult election to assess since 1984.
Click to expand...

People on Mars knew Reagan was going to win in a landslide. What was difficult to predict about the 1984 election?
 
I've heard of this guy, and his 'Keys' theory before.

The thing is: He doesn't get into the specifics of a given race at all, but rather focuses on the general conditions surrounding it.

For that reason, I think it's a great general indicator - but flawed.

However, it's hard to argue with his success here, so I'm not sure what to say? It's an interesting theory. though.
 
Harry Guerrilla said:
I still think he's going to win.
It's probably already over at this point, aside from something disastrous.
Click to expand...

And I don't see how Trump can win.

After Romney's defeat in 2012 everyone, even Republican experts, said to win in 2016 the GOP had to make nice with Blacks, Hispanics and younger women. The % of White voters is dropping every 4 years. So Trump has come along and made it worse for the GOP with all 3 of those demographics.

Anything is possible. But given that, IMO the math just doesn't work for Trump.
 
SenorXm/Sirius said:
And I don't see how Trump can win.

After Romney's defeat in 2012 everyone, even Republican experts, said to win in 2016 the GOP had to make nice with Blacks, Hispanics and younger women. The % of White voters is dropping every 4 years. So Trump has come along and made it worse for the GOP with all 3 of those demographics.

Anything is possible. But given that, IMO the math just doesn't work for Trump.
Click to expand...

Someone told me very early that the math didn't work either.
They were wrong.

The momentum is behind Trump.
He has all the persuasion skills to take it home.

He and Clinton have swapped strategies.
He's becoming more scripted, she's attempting to emulate his earlier performances.
He has control.
 
NoLeftNoRight said:
According to a respected source

Trump is headed for a win, says professor who has predicted 30 years of presidential outcomes correctly

https://www.yahoo.com/news/m/ae06c607-9a6f-3782-866c-18029482ac6e/ss_trump-is-headed-for-a-win%2C.html
Click to expand...

Lichtmann, using the same criteria and method, predicted a Clinton win about a month ago. Seems awfully convenient -- or really, not very useful -- if you are allowed to switch your prediction right up to election day. ;)

“Every election is basically a referendum on the incumbent party,” Lichtman said. “If it does a good job, their candidate gets reelected. If it does a bad job, their candidate gets thrown out.”

Lichtman added his model currently predicts Clinton will win about 52 percent of the vote because eight of the test statements are true.

Experts predict Clinton win during Hammer Museum lecture | Daily Bruin
 
SenorXm/Sirius said:
And I don't see how Trump can win.

After Romney's defeat in 2012 everyone, even Republican experts, said to win in 2016 the GOP had to make nice with Blacks, Hispanics and younger women. The % of White voters is dropping every 4 years. So Trump has come along and made it worse for the GOP with all 3 of those demographics.

Anything is possible. But given that, IMO the math just doesn't work for Trump.
Click to expand...


That would be traditional thinking. But traditionally candidates usually drop out early if they have no ground game and do no advertising. Trump won that way.

Traditionally, candidates who call highly placed individuals, cripples, and so forth ugly names, usually get driven out of the game.

This is not a traditional election.

Further, 40% seems like a real good position to be in, but not if your opponent is at 48%. It speaks to the absolute vacuum which is the Hilary campaign, as I said tow years ago, she is running a classic campaign....for the nineties.

At this point, it's a 50-50 thing, they are head to head scrapping for votes. The issue is trust in government, Hilary's biggest weakness, the second being out of anyone's control, as the British say the electorate has risen and they want "change", and in this case it's become so hostile, superficial, and dishonest, no one has a clue what that "change" should look like, and Trump's supporters are filling in his blanks with their hopes.

Horrible situation where you have a choice between a snake oil salesman and a cheating puppet.
 
SenorXm/Sirius said:
And I don't see how Trump can win.

After Romney's defeat in 2012 everyone, even Republican experts, said to win in 2016 the GOP had to make nice with Blacks, Hispanics and younger women. The % of White voters is dropping every 4 years. So Trump has come along and made it worse for the GOP with all 3 of those demographics.

Anything is possible. But given that, IMO the math just doesn't work for Trump.
Click to expand...

People are fed up with the established politicians on both sides in the pockets of the elite bankers and such and the status quo which Hillary 100% represents. Bush, Rubio and Kasich represented this establishment on the Republican side and got their asses handed to them for it. Now that they lost and are backing the enemy just solidifies these feelings in the voters minds. The liberal Nanny State isn't working and even the blacks have finally figured it out, a block that historically has only supported a Republican with 5% is now trending closer to 19% and Trump received more Republican votes than any other nominee in history. To top it off Hillary (The Clintons) lies, corruption and cronyism is well known and documented, not to mention she is an unlikable witch who, like Obama, puts the global agenda above their own country. People want to return to the days when people would be proud to be an American, not ashamed, and not embarrassed to fly the flag of "Racism". Utter BS! Trump is the only solution that will bring any hope of change.
 
I hope the professor is correct one more time.

After all, we know that Trump probably is not a great candidate....but we know for sure that Hillary is the worst possible candidate.
 
Fearandloathing said:
That would be traditional thinking. But traditionally candidates usually drop out early if they have no ground game and do no advertising. Trump won that way.

Traditionally, candidates who call highly placed individuals, cripples, and so forth ugly names, usually get driven out of the game.

This is not a traditional election.

Further, 40% seems like a real good position to be in, but not if your opponent is at 48%. It speaks to the absolute vacuum which is the Hilary campaign, as I said tow years ago, she is running a classic campaign....for the nineties.

At this point, it's a 50-50 thing, they are head to head scrapping for votes. The issue is trust in government, Hilary's biggest weakness, the second being out of anyone's control, as the British say the electorate has risen and they want "change", and in this case it's become so hostile, superficial, and dishonest, no one has a clue what that "change" should look like, and Trump's supporters are filling in his blanks with their hopes.

Horrible situation where you have a choice between a snake oil salesman and a cheating puppet.
Click to expand...

As I said anything is possible. But I remember in 2012 2-3 months before the election, it was the same as it is now. 1 week Romney was up in the polls, the next week Obama was, the next week they were even. And that would rinse and repeat until November.

The election came along and a President who's popularity was waning, PLUS with an economy that was still limping along easily won the electoral. Why? Because it turned out the GOP simply pissed off every moderate in every demographic except the white male voter.

This year Trump is pissing off more demos than the GOP did in 2012.

I hear you, it is a weird and very non traditional election. BUT IMO it will still come down to the moderate voters in all the demos, and they can't like what they are hearing from Trump.
 
Visbek said:
Lichtmann, using the same criteria and method, predicted a Clinton win about a month ago. Seems awfully convenient -- or really, not very useful -- if you are allowed to switch your prediction right up to election day. ;)

“Every election is basically a referendum on the incumbent party,” Lichtman said. “If it does a good job, their candidate gets reelected. If it does a bad job, their candidate gets thrown out.”

Lichtman added his model currently predicts Clinton will win about 52 percent of the vote because eight of the test statements are true.

Experts predict Clinton win during Hammer Museum lecture | Daily Bruin
Click to expand...

That was in August. I guess as facts and circumstances change, his prediction has to be fluid.
So he is giving a "snapshot" prediction current at the present time.
Given that, he could again state his pick would be Clinton in the future
 
Last edited:
SenorXm/Sirius said:
Oh? They were wrong? 6 weeks BEFORE the election, you are sure enough to flat out say 'they were wrong'?

OK.
Click to expand...

They were wrong in their assessment at the end of the primaries.
In the sense that Hillary would crush him.
Very very very wrong.

I could be wrong to, but I don't think I am.

You see the latest Hillary video?
That's not the behavior of a winner.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news...isnt-50-points-ahead-or-even-10-points-ahead/

That is what someone does in a desperate need to catch up.
 
NoLeftNoRight said:
That was in August. I guess as facts and circumstances change, his prediction has to be fluid.
So he is giving a "snapshot" prediction current at the present time.
Given that, he could again state his pick would be Clinton in the future
Click to expand...
Yeah, you've got to know what to look for ;)

People were talking about Lichtmann's predictions last month, which is how I heard about it.
 
Visbek said:
Lichtmann, using the same criteria and method, predicted a Clinton win about a month ago. Seems awfully convenient -- or really, not very useful -- if you are allowed to switch your prediction right up to election day. ;)

“Every election is basically a referendum on the incumbent party,” Lichtman said. “If it does a good job, their candidate gets reelected. If it does a bad job, their candidate gets thrown out.”

Lichtman added his model currently predicts Clinton will win about 52 percent of the vote because eight of the test statements are true.

Experts predict Clinton win during Hammer Museum lecture | Daily Bruin
Click to expand...

So that's how he has a 100% success rate. He "predicts" that both will win.
 
blaxshep said:
and not embarrassed to fly the flag of "Racism". Utter BS! Trump is the only solution that will bring any hope of change.
Click to expand...

Yeah, if anti-PC Trump didn't make fun of a disabled reporter, or insult POW's I might jump on the anti-PC bandwagon.

But no, I can't support a 70 year old man when he's constantly doing things I use to discipline my kids for. The man acts like a spoiled 8 YO brat.

Come up with a anti-PC candidate with some class and self control and I might jump onboard.
 
SenorXm/Sirius said:
Yeah, if anti-PC Trump didn't make fun of a disabled reporter, or insult POW's I might jump on the anti-PC bandwagon.

But no, I can't support a 70 year old man when he's constantly doing things I use to discipline my kids for. The man acts like a spoiled 8 YO brat.

Come up with a anti-PC candidate with some class and self control and I might jump onboard.
Click to expand...

How do you come up with a anti-PC with class? Isn't that the point of being anti-PC?

Granted he is a spoiled rich blowhard but that really should just roll off your back, I really don't care if he makes fun of anyone. I'm more interested in what he's going to do, or even worse what Hillary will do.
 
blaxshep said:
How do you come up with a anti-PC with class? Isn't that the point of being anti-PC?

Granted he is a spoiled rich blowhard but that really should just roll off your back,
Click to expand...

No, making fun of disabled people and people who were in POW's camps goes waaaaaaaaaay beyond being anti-PC.

Sorry, I'm a parent and if my kids did that they would be punished. So I can't let it roll off my back when a man who is running for the most powerful office in the history of mankind can't show even a little class and self discipline.
 
NoLeftNoRight said:
According to a respected source

Trump is headed for a win, says professor who has predicted 30 years of presidential outcomes correctly

https://www.yahoo.com/news/m/ae06c607-9a6f-3782-866c-18029482ac6e/ss_trump-is-headed-for-a-win%2C.html
Click to expand...
Well, buried deep in the article, the professor hedged his bets more than a little bit.

"So very, very narrowly, the keys point to a Trump victory. But I would say, more to the point, they point to a generic Republican victory, because I believe that given the unprecedented nature of the Trump candidacy and Trump himself, he could defy all odds and lose even though the verdict of history is in his favor. So this would also suggest, you know, the possibility this election could go either way."

I'm not saying the professor is wrong. In fact, I'm very nervous about the final outcome of this election. But this professor has already changed his mind once about the winning candidate and we haven't even gone through the debates yet. The headline should read, "Donald Trump is More Likely to Win in November. Maybe." Then again, it's the Washington Post--always in the tank for Hillary, or so we're told ad naseum.
 
manise said:
Well, buried deep in the article, the professor hedged his bets more than a little bit.

"So very, very narrowly, the keys point to a Trump victory. But I would say, more to the point, they point to a generic Republican victory, because I believe that given the unprecedented nature of the Trump candidacy and Trump himself, he could defy all odds and lose even though the verdict of history is in his favor. So this would also suggest, you know, the possibility this election could go either way."

I'm not saying the professor is wrong. In fact, I'm very nervous about the final outcome of this election. But this professor has already changed his mind once about the winning candidate and we haven't even gone through the debates yet. The headline should read, "Donald Trump is More Likely to Win in November. Maybe." Then again, it's the Washington Post--always in the tank for Hillary, or so we're told ad naseum.
Click to expand...

It is not often that I can agree with a liberal. Miracles happen.
 
Visbek said:
Lichtmann, using the same criteria and method, predicted a Clinton win about a month ago. Seems awfully convenient -- or really, not very useful -- if you are allowed to switch your prediction right up to election day. ;)

“Every election is basically a referendum on the incumbent party,” Lichtman said. “If it does a good job, their candidate gets reelected. If it does a bad job, their candidate gets thrown out.”

Lichtman added his model currently predicts Clinton will win about 52 percent of the vote because eight of the test statements are true.

Experts predict Clinton win during Hammer Museum lecture | Daily Bruin
Click to expand...

Sure...that way no matter who wins he can claim he was right...and sell more books. lol
 
SenorXm/Sirius said:
No, making fun of disabled people and people who were in POW's camps goes waaaaaaaaaay beyond being anti-PC.

Sorry, I'm a parent and if my kids did that they would be punished. So I can't let it roll off my back when a man who is running for the most powerful office in the history of mankind can't show even a little class and self discipline.
Click to expand...

Guess we will just have to disagree ... again.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom