General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region ForumsWhich do you trust more: Polls or Allan Lichtman's Keys?
Me? I trust Allan Lichtman, the American University historian who's been called the "Nostradamus of presidential election predictions," because of his near-perfect 40-year track record.
[https://www.democraticunderground.com/100219428373|
Allan Lichtman predicts Kamala Harris is going to win.
GOTV.
53 votes, 0 passes | Time left: Time expired | |
I trust the polls more than Allan Lichtman's Keys. | |
3 (6%) |
|
I trust Allan Lichtman's Keys more than the polls. | |
19 (36%) |
|
I trust neither. | |
30 (57%) |
|
I don't know. | |
0 (0%) |
|
Other. | |
1 (2%) |
|
No answer. | |
0 (0%) |
|
0 DU members did not wish to select any of the options provided. | |
Show usernames
Disclaimer: This is an Internet poll |
sky_masterson
(568 posts)What Political election theories do you get behind?
Rachel Bitecoffer
Alan Lichtman
Nate Silver
To me Bitecoffer is the one i put most behind.
Lichtmens Keys are subjective to me.
displacedvermoter
(3,199 posts)the polls are more and more indicative of his prediction.
getagrip_already
(17,528 posts)They are designed to make money for the authors and buyers. They are used as the currency of the media.
Neither is scientific nor statistically defensible.
Poiuyt
(18,272 posts)Just because someone has been in the past really has no bearing. If you flip a coin and it comes up heads six times in a row it is still 50-50 on the next flip. A real tell is the use of the term "Nostrodamus" who wrote silly vague crap. Bookmakers are very realistic and only care about making money. The problem with polls is the "likely voter" classification. No one knows who will turn up on election day. Of course, the booky thing is just based on how the money is going like pari-mutual betting so it doesn't include non gamblers. What we do know that a good candidate will find a way to win especially in a close race and the way to do it is through enthusiasm thst drives people to vote.
TwilightZone
(28,834 posts)They basically just swing with the news. They aren't any more predictive than anything else (in some cases, they're decidedly worse).
https://statmodeling.stat.columbia.edu/2022/11/16/how-good-are-election-prediction-markets/
ClimateHawk
(344 posts)Because they have held since 1860.
tavernier
(13,277 posts)Gore won.
mucholderthandirt
(1,201 posts)If Lichtman has been so right in the past, the odds are he's right this time, too. If the MSM bobbleheads weren't corporate lackeys, Harris would have a twenty point lead and Trump would truly be the laughing stock of the world, instead of coddled and excused.
rso
(2,489 posts)Fortunately, both Lichtmann and most polls are predicting a Harris victory.
Frank D. Lincoln
(644 posts)but not to the point of complacency.
I know we still have to GOTV on a massive scale.
ecstatic
(34,504 posts)So I don't know.
Also, we now have a lot of people fucked up due to the storms.
Quixote1818
(30,428 posts)I think he's onto something with voter trends near election day but the electoral college makes his keys almost irrelevant. What if Texas had been a blue state in 2016? Trump would have lost. Subtle shifts in voter trends in current swing states could ruin his predictions. He's been lucky several swing states have worked in his favor as the popular vote has shifted to the left.