Lichtman's 13 Keys to the 2024 Election

[Airbrush]

Allan Lichtman is famous for correctly predicting 9 of the last 10 US elections.  He says his final prediction will come in August. At this moment it looks like Biden will win in 2024 by 9 out of 13 keys.

Skip forward to minute 12:00 for the analysis of keys:

 

To summarize his findings for 2024:

1  MIDTERM GAINS - FALSE - clearly no Dem midterm gain

2  NO PRIMARY CONTEST - YES, clearly no primary contest

3  INCUMBANT SEEKING RE-ELECTION - YES, clearly Biden is incumbent

4  NO THIRD PARTY CHALLENGE - LIKELY, but not certain about RFK Jr's challenge

5  STRONG SHORT-TERM ECONOMY - YES, certainly true

6  STRONG LONG-TERM ECONOMY - YES, certainly true

7  MAJOR POLICY CHANGE - YES, clearly there were major policy changes

8  NO SOCIAL UNREST - NOT certain, probably true

9  NO SCANDAL - YES, clearly no Biden scandals, Hunter Biden is not Joe Biden

10 NO FOREIGN/MILITARY FAILURE - LIKELY FALSE

11 MAJOR FOREIGN/MILITARY SUCCESS - LIKELY FALSE

12 CHARISMATIC INCUMBANT - FALSE, Biden is clearly NOT charismatic

13 UNCHARISMATIC CHALLENGER - YES, Trump is only charismatic with his base

[Airbrush]

Biden's prospects look bad after the debate.  He had a hard time talking, and Trump just lied over and over again without Biden countering them.  After Biden's obviously poor debate performance, Allen Lichtman remains adamant that Biden "blowing" a debate does not change the "Keys" to the election. Lichtman will make another projection in July and the final one in August.

"Presidential debates have no predictive value in elections. Hillary Clinton won them all."

 

 

[CharonY]

I am wondering how strongly these predictions are dependent on perception. E.g. the US economy is fairly strong, but the perception of it is quite different. Likewise, a proportion of the population believes that there is a Joe Biden scandal (though they are probably unsure what it might be). 

[Airbrush]

On 7/4/2024 at 9:43 PM, CharonY said:

I am wondering how strongly these predictions are dependent on perception. E.g. the US economy is fairly strong, but the perception of it is quite different. Likewise, a proportion of the population believes that there is a Joe Biden scandal (though they are probably unsure what it might be). 

Lichtman has addressed the perception of the economy vs economy as measured by traditional economic means.  Perception does not count with the 2 economic keys.  Only objective measures determine this, economic growth, inflation, unemployment, stock market, etc.

[Airbrush]

Here is the last update of the 13 Keys.  It is borderline now, Dems are down by 5.  IF Dems lose one more key, they lose.  Final prediction by Lichtman is a week away!  What key could fall?

 

[Phi for All]

I find it hard to believe in this " key " approach when there is so much misinformation out there that the right seems attracted to. I've seen MAGA supporters interviewed who claimed California allows abortions up to 3 months AFTER birth. Others claimed some women were having 2 or 3 abortions a month. And the things they believe about the border with Mexico! 

The "No Scandal Key" cracks me up. 

[Peterkin]

This method of prediction appears to me outmoded: pre-Trump, pre-Covid, from a time when mainstream media reported factual news and votes were accurately represented at the ballot counting.  Nostalgic, almost.

[swansont]

So a candidate that had more “keys” steps aside for another who polls better and has raised a boatload of cash, and the new candidate has fewer “keys”? 

[Bufofrog]

3 hours ago, Peterkin said:

and votes were accurately represented at the ballot counting.  Nostalgic, almost.

But they are accurately counted, every analysis has supported that.  Sure there are some gullible people who say the election was 'stolen', but the evidence says otherwise.

[Peterkin]

1 hour ago, Bufofrog said:

But they are accurately counted, every analysis has supported that. 

That, too, is in the past. Biden's victory happened in spite of Republican states having committed every kind of chicanery they could get away with - more egregious at each cycle. This has been general knowledge for decades. Had the votes been accurately counted, Biden would have won by a much wider margin. 

This time, the MAGA faction is pulling out all the obstacles to keeping potential Democratic voters out of the polling booth and disqualifying their votes if they do cast one.  And they're already gearing up to contest every district Trump loses. (If that doesn't work, there's always violence....) They're calling for a jihad on a slip of a pop singer, because she objected to being falsely depicted in their advertising.

Expect nothing sane from these people! 

Edited August 27 by Peterkin

[Airbrush]

On 8/27/2024 at 8:50 AM, Peterkin said:

This method of prediction appears to me outmoded: pre-Trump, pre-Covid, from a time when mainstream media reported factual news and votes were accurately represented at the ballot counting.  Nostalgic, almost.

Lichtman has correctly predicted the results of ten consecutive elections, from 1984 to 2020.  The 2020 election was special because Gore won the popular vote, but the election was decided by SCOTUS, electing Bush.  In 2016 Lichtman switched from predicting popular vote to the electoral college vote.

"Using the system, Lichtman has correctly predicted the popular vote outcomes of each presidential election from 1984 to 2012. Though Lichtman claims he called the 2016 election correctly based on the 13 keys, his 2016 book and paper stated that the keys only referred to the popular vote, which Donald Trump lost.^[4][5][6][7] He switched to just predicting the winner across all publications after the 2016 election, stating recent demographics changes give Democrats an advantage in the popular vote in close elections, and correctly called the outcome of the 2020 election.^[8][9]

"Lichtman argues that the checklist's content and its track record of reliability prove that American voters select the next president according to how well the country was governed in the preceding four years and that election campaigns have little, if any, meaningful effect on American voters. If American voters are satisfied with the governance of the country, they will re-elect the president or elect their party's nominee, but if they are dissatisfied, they will transfer the presidency to the challenging party."

The Keys to the White House - Wikipedia

Edited August 29 by Airbrush

[Phi for All]

So he completely switched from popular to electoral college predictions 8 years ago. Add COVID, the misperceptions about how well Biden has done, and TFG's criminal record and I think this methodology is flawed. I don't think the Dems are one "key" away from defeat. Far from it. I predict Harris/Walz is going to destroy the GOP, or at least force it to power wash its leadership.

[Peterkin]

54 minutes ago, Airbrush said:

"Lichtman argues that the checklist's content and its track record of reliability prove that American voters select the next president according to how well the country was governed in the preceding four years and that election campaigns have little, if any, meaningful effect on American voters.

Okay. I'm saying he has predicted the outcome, according to what voters are concerned about, based on a reasonably functioning system of counting. He does not seem to have factored in election tampering, but tacitly admitted - changing to electoral college - that the voters are no longer the deciding factor.

The decreasing margins between winner and loser (as in 2000) indicate the acceleration of tampering. There is no way to apply the same criteria to the level that interference reaches after an unprecedented event like the mob invading the Capitol and a self-proclaimed army threatening civil war.   

Edited August 29 by Peterkin

[Phi for All]

Which "key" accounts for the surge in voter registration we're seeing? It not easy to see where this information is being accounted for:

https://www.salon.com/2024/08/29/with-democrats-fired-up-by-harris-candidacy-young-people-are-now-registering-to-vote-in-droves/

These numbers are unprecedented. I predict Lichtman will change his prediction.

[swansont]

3 hours ago, Airbrush said:

Lichtman has correctly predicted the results of ten consecutive elections, from 1984 to 2020.  The 2020 election was special because Gore won the popular vote, but the election was decided by SCOTUS, electing Bush.  In 2016 Lichtman switched from predicting popular vote to the electoral college vote.

So his current model has only predicted the last two elections

(and that should be 2000, not 2020, for Gore)

3 hours ago, Airbrush said:

"Using the system, Lichtman has correctly predicted the popular vote outcomes of each presidential election from 1984 to 2012. Though Lichtman claims he called the 2016 election correctly based on the 13 keys, his 2016 book and paper stated that the keys only referred to the popular vote, which Donald Trump lost.^[4][5][6][7] He switched to just predicting the winner across all publications after the 2016 election, stating recent demographics changes give Democrats an advantage in the popular vote in close elections, and correctly called the outcome of the 2020 election.^[8][9]

This suggests he didn’t predict the results of 2016 correctly.

3 hours ago, Airbrush said:

"Lichtman argues that the checklist's content and its track record of reliability prove that American voters select the next president according to how well the country was governed in the preceding four years and that election campaigns have little, if any, meaningful effect on American voters. If American voters are satisfied with the governance of the country, they will re-elect the president or elect their party's nominee, but if they are dissatisfied, they will transfer the presidency to the challenging party."

The Keys to the White House - Wikipedia

People were pretty satisfied with Obama’s governance, but some were dissatisfied with the color of his skin, and also there was foreign meddling. Is there a key for that? How about election rules regarding contributions, which changed drastically. Or changes to how voting rights were safeguarded?

The problem with all of this is that correct answers can be gotten by accident; it’s like the octopus that predicted sports outcomes. There’s meager evidence that this works.

[Airbrush]

On 8/29/2024 at 1:00 PM, Phi for All said:

Which "key" accounts for the surge in voter registration we're seeing? It not easy to see where this information is being accounted for:

https://www.salon.com/2024/08/29/with-democrats-fired-up-by-harris-candidacy-young-people-are-now-registering-to-vote-in-droves/

These numbers are unprecedented. I predict Lichtman will change his prediction.

I think the surge in voter registration would fall under Key #7 - Major Policy Changes.  You see YOUTHS registering to vote because of their concern about "Major policy changes" (ban abortion, defund Ukraine, corp tax cuts, daily clown shows, etc, under TFG) which is a key in FAVOR of Harris winning the election.

Lichtman has complained about a false entry in Wikipedia that he hasn't been able to remove, that makes it look like he did not predict the 2016 election, but he did predict a Trump victory.  In the interview he said NOTHING about the popular vote.  He also predicted that Trump would be impeached.  Trump sent Lichtman a thank you note for predicting his win in 2016.

He also predicted Gore won 2000, and Gore did win the popular vote by 540,000 votes, but the demographic changed at that time, so popular vote differed from the electoral college.

At this moment Lichtman believes a lot would have to go wrong for Harris, for Harris to lose.  Another key fell when Harris replaced Biden, and they lost the Incumbency Key.  One more key would need to fall for Harris to lose.  His final prediction will be next week!

Here is his most recent post:

 

Edited September 1 by Airbrush

[swansont]

30 minutes ago, Airbrush said:

I think the surge in voter registration would fall under Key #7 - Major Policy Changes.  You see YOUTHS registering to vote because of their concern about "Major policy changes" (ban abortion, defund Ukraine, corp tax cuts, daily clown shows, etc, under TFG) which is a key in FAVOR of Harris winning the election.

Voting isn’t a new policy or policy change and all of these policy issues existed before Biden stepped aside. The surge only happened afterwards. 

38 minutes ago, Airbrush said:

Lichtman has complained about a false entry in Wikipedia that he hasn't been able to remove, that makes it look like he did not predict the 2016 election, but he did predict a Trump victory.  In the interview he said NOTHING about the popular vote.

In a document of his from October 2016

“the Keys predict the popular vote, not the state-by-state tally of Electoral College votes”

https://www.dropbox.com/scl/fi/ksm9n3qsptqkjd7avr5km/Allan-Lichtman-2016-The-Keys-to-The-White-House-Social-Education-80-5.pdf?rlkey=qdtcni8kxv60qxfz52ewecy1u&e=1&st=27o5ep7i&dl=0

[swansont]

One drawback of the keys system is that it’s just a binary tally; there’s no weighting for the importance of the issue, or that there might be multiple issues that would sway a larger group of voters.

[Airbrush]

On 9/1/2024 at 12:43 PM, swansont said:

“the Keys predict the popular vote, not the state-by-state tally of Electoral College votes”

https://www.dropbox.com/scl/fi/ksm9n3qsptqkjd7avr5km/Allan-Lichtman-2016-The-Keys-to-The-White-House-Social-Education-80-5.pdf?rlkey=qdtcni8kxv60qxfz52ewecy1u&e=1&st=27o5ep7i&dl=0

You are correct, but that is not the point.  In 2000, the electoral college diverged from the popular vote for the first time.

"As a national system, the 13 Keys predict the popular vote, not the state-by-state tally of Electoral College votes.

However, only once in the last 125 years has the Electoral College vote diverged from the popular vote. That was in the disputed election of 2000, when Bush defeated Al Gore.  Despite narrowly losing the popular vote, Bush won in the Electoral College by holding a 537-vote margin over Gore in Florida when the Supreme Court halted the recounting of ballots."

On 9/1/2024 at 12:43 PM, swansont said:

...all of these policy issues existed before Biden stepped aside. The surge only happened afterwards. 

Biden won the key "Major Policy Changes" as did Harris.  You know that policies differ between Dems and GOP....MAJORLY.  That is an easy Key for the Dems to win.  So I don't understand your point.

[swansont]

1 hour ago, Airbrush said:

You are correct, but that is not the point.  In 2000, the electoral college diverged from the popular vote for the first time.

"As a national system, the 13 Keys predict the popular vote, not the state-by-state tally of Electoral College votes.

However, only once in the last 125 years has the Electoral College vote diverged from the popular vote. That was in the disputed election of 2000, when Bush defeated Al Gore.  Despite narrowly losing the popular vote, Bush won in the Electoral College by holding a 537-vote margin over Gore in Florida when the Supreme Court halted the recounting of ballots."

No, it’s precisely the point. Clinton won the popular vote in 2016, but if this model predicted Trump, then it was wrong. You/he don’t get to say otherwise.

1 hour ago, Airbrush said:

Biden won the key "Major Policy Changes" as did Harris.  You know that policies differ between Dems and GOP....MAJORLY.  That is an easy Key for the Dems to win.  So I don't understand your point.

You’re lumping voting registration in with policy changes but the evidence is that it’s a separate issue, not accounted for. Flawed model. 

[Peterkin]

The model is simply not applicable to the volatile political landscape of today.

[Airbrush]

On 9/3/2024 at 2:55 PM, swansont said:

Clinton won the popular vote in 2016, but if this model predicted Trump, then it was wrong. You/he don’t get to say otherwise.

You’re lumping voting registration in with policy changes but the evidence is that it’s a separate issue, not accounted for. Flawed model. 

Lichtman is firm that he did NOT predict the 2016 election on popular vote.  He predicted it by his 13 Keys.  His only mistake in predicting elections was 2000, when he predicted Gore would win.  So, he correctly predicted 9 of the last 10 elections.  90% seems like a robust model.

Voting registration is not a Key.  That is why I lumped it under "Major Policy Changes" because it seems to me that young people registering in great numbers would do so based on their perception of Trump policies VS Biden policies, and they fear what may happen under Trump.

His final prediction comes this week, earliest by today, and by Sunday at the latest.  We will revisit this after the election!

 

Edited September 5 by Airbrush

[iNow]

Even if the model is garbage and is based on the number of eyes on a potato spud or on how many ears of corn Tonya can fit into a record player box, it STILL has a 50/50 chance of being correct 

Edited September 5 by iNow
Auto incorrect

[swansont]

1 hour ago, Airbrush said:

Lichtman is firm that he did NOT predict the 2016 election on popular vote. 

Which sounds like a rewrite of history, since his published paper fromOct 2016 says what I quoted earlier.

 

1 hour ago, Airbrush said:

 

He predicted it by his 13 Keys.  His only mistake in predicting elections was 2000, when he predicted Gore would win.  So, he correctly predicted 9 of the last 10 elections.  90% seems like a robust model.

The octopus I mentioned earlier had a similar success rate. 

 

1 hour ago, Airbrush said:

Voting registration is not a Key. 

Which is a flaw in the model

1 hour ago, Airbrush said:

That is why I lumped it under "Major Policy Changes" because it seems to me that young people registering in great numbers would do so based on their perception of Trump policies VS Biden policies, and they fear what may happen under Trump.

But it’s not a policy change.

 

[Airbrush]

21 hours ago, swansont said:

Which sounds like a rewrite of history, since his published paper fromOct 2016 says what I quoted earlier.

The octopus I mentioned earlier had a similar success rate. 

Which is a flaw in the model

But it’s not a policy change.

Could you quote that from his published paper of Oct 2016?  I can't find it.

What octopus did you mention?  I searched above and could not find it.  Is there an octopus that correctly predicted 9 of the last 10 elections?  No octopus lives 40 years.  They live between 1 year and up to 5 years in captivity.

You have not studied the model enough to know registrations do not matter.  Lichtman never mentions that.  I can tell you have not studied it.

Anyhow, last night Lichtman pulled the trigger, before the debate, and said Harris would win.  Let's see if he was wrong.  He reminds me of the character Hari Seldon in the Isaac Asimov's "Foundation" series of scifi stories

"The premise of the stories is that in the waning days of a future Galactic Empire, the mathematician Hari Seldon devises the theory of psychohistory, a new and effective mathematics of sociology. Using statistical laws of mass action, it can predict the future of large populations."

Foundation (book series) - Wikipedia

Now it looks like the Dems may lose the Senate because John Tester's polls don't look good.

 

 

On 8/27/2024 at 8:50 AM, Peterkin said:

This method of prediction appears to me outmoded: pre-Trump, pre-Covid, from a time when mainstream media reported factual news and votes were accurately represented at the ballot counting.  Nostalgic, almost.

Allen Lichtman has addressed your concerns and believes his model is not yet outdated.

Edited September 6 by Airbrush