Professor Lichtmann predicts Presidential Race for 2016

[Devout Centrist]

At least this means people will finally stop taking this fellow seriously.

Yup.

Have you wiped the egg off your face yet?

Oh no,

http://edition.cnn.com/2016/11/15/politics/allan-lichtman-professor-predicts-trump-impeachment-erin-burnett/index.html

Allan just predicted that Trump will be impeached before 4 years is up.

I wouldn't count on it. When you get one prediction right, you get cocky.

Oh, they won't impeach him, they'll literally kill him. I've been predicting that long before the election and I believe it now more than ever judging by how the demonstrators have been acting.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

[Atlas Has Shrugged]

At least this means people will finally stop taking this fellow seriously.

Yup.

Have you wiped the egg off your face yet?

Oh no,

http://edition.cnn.com/2016/11/15/politics/allan-lichtman-professor-predicts-trump-impeachment-erin-burnett/index.html

Allan just predicted that Trump will be impeached before 4 years is up.

I wouldn't count on it. When you get one prediction right, you get cocky.

Oh, they won't impeach him, they'll literally kill him. I've been predicting that long before the election and I believe it now more than ever judging by how the demonstrators have been acting.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

There was already a verified incident involving a British national attempting to commander a Secret Service agent's sidearm near the side of a stage during a Trump speech. I have no doubt that people will try and kill him. I've heard three stories of semi-prominent people (journalists, a CEO, etc) making threats over Twitter as well, and usually only angry Republican white males tend to do that (see Dylan Wolf before he turned to literal terrorism).

[Likely Voter]

The media are saying he called the election correctly, but I thought the Lichtmann model was for predicting the PV winner. 

[Meclazine for Israel]

I am paying him Likely.

He was right on the cusp saying that if Johnson got less than 5% of the vote, the prediction swings the other way.

Given that he first said that "Trump will win the Election", he was one of the few people to pick it.

[Penelope]

Oh no,

http://edition.cnn.com/2016/11/15/politics/allan-lichtman-professor-predicts-trump-impeachment-erin-burnett/index.html

Allan just predicted that Trump will be impeached before 4 years is up.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

lol ok

[Nym90]

The media are saying he called the election correctly, but I thought the Lichtmann model was for predicting the PV winner. 

Right, but he ended up correctly calling Clinton as the popular vote winner since the third party key didn't end up turning against the Democrats after all since Johnson got under 5 percent of the vote.

[Atlas Has Shrugged]

Oh no,

http://edition.cnn.com/2016/11/15/politics/allan-lichtman-professor-predicts-trump-impeachment-erin-burnett/index.html

Allan just predicted that Trump will be impeached before 4 years is up.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

lol ok

I can hear Ayn Rand's cold cackle coming all the way from her grave in Vahalia.

[SWE]

The media are saying he called the election correctly, but I thought the Lichtmann model was for predicting the PV winner. 

Right, but he ended up correctly calling Clinton as the popular vote winner since the third party key didn't end up turning against the Democrats after all since Johnson got under 5 percent of the vote.

On the other hand, this is only because he arbitrarily redefined the primary challenge key. Using the standard he applied to every prior election, Hillary had 6 keys against her, as Bernie was able to hold her below 66% of delegates.

[AtorBoltox]

This is completely meaningless. Didn't he predict a Gore victory in 2000, and then said the fact he won the popular vote means he was right? Yet Hillary won the popular vote this year, therefore the model must be wrong.

[Meclazine for Israel]

This is completely meaningless. Didn't he predict a Gore victory in 2000, and then said the fact he won the popular vote means he was right? Yet Hillary won the popular vote this year, therefore the model must be wrong.

No,

When Johnson got less than 5% of the vote, his PV vote automatically flipped to Hillary.

[Likely Voter]

what's the point of a predictive model if one of the factors cannot be determined until after the election? That kind of voids the whole predictive thing. 
 
Regardless, Lichtman is being proclaimed as the guy that predicted the election of Trump by the media, such as headlines like "Professor predicted Trump win, says he will be impeached".  It seems to me that he incorrectly predicted Trump would win the PV then he retroactively says his model correctly predicted the Clinton PV win but he is happy to take credit for also predicting Trump won the election. It seems that no matter what, his model is correct.

[TheElectoralBoobyPrize]

The media are saying he called the election correctly, but I thought the Lichtmann model was for predicting the PV winner. 

Right, but he ended up correctly calling Clinton as the popular vote winner since the third party key didn't end up turning against the Democrats after all since Johnson got under 5 percent of the vote.

On the other hand, this is only because he arbitrarily redefined the primary challenge key. Using the standard he applied to every prior election, Hillary had 6 keys against her, as Bernie was able to hold her below 66% of delegates.

THIS TIMES A THOUSAND! This needs to be repeated over and over again. He moved the goalposts on the nomination contest key. Carter in 1980 came closer to 66% of the delegates than Hillary did yet the key was turned against him (although only retroactively...the keys hadn't been developed yet).

[SteveRogers]

what's the point of a predictive model if one of the factors cannot be determined until after the election? That kind of voids the whole predictive thing. 

This. ^^^^^ This times infinity! This is what I have been saying all along. How on Earth are some of you people saying, "well, he technically called Hillary winning the popular vote since Johnson didn't end up getting 5%"? It's mind boggling. No. No he did not. By definition neither Lichtmann nor his model "called" or "predicted" any such thing since the "prediction" would have to be based on a factor not know until after the event. Now can we please consider the Lichtmann keys dead and buried for good?

[○∙◄☻¥tπ[╪AV┼cVê└]

Here's how this joke does for 1856.

1856

Key 1: The incumbent party (in this case, Democrats) holds more seats in the U. S. House of Representatives after the midterm election than after the preceding midterm election.
FALSE, huge loss of seats

Key 2: There is no serious contest for the incumbent-party nomination.
FALSE, the incumbent President got primaried after 17 ballots

Key 3: The incumbent-party candidate is the current president.
FALSE

Key 4: There is no significant third-party or independent candidacy.
FALSE, Filmore got 21%

Key 5: The economy is not in recession during the campaign.
TRUE

Key 6: Real (constant-dollar) per capita economic growth during the term equals or exceeds mean growth for the preceding two terms.
UNDECIDED, there was a 1853-1854 recession

Key 7: The incumbent administration has effected major policy changes during the term.
UNDECIDED, should the  Kansas-Nebraska Act count?

Key 8: There has been no major social unrest during the term.
FALSE, Bleeding Kansas

Key 9: The incumbent administration is untainted by major scandal.
TRUE, I guess

Key 10: There has been no major military or foreign policy failure during the term.
FALSE, Attempt to buy Cuba failed


Key 11: There has been a major military or foreign policy success during the term.
UNDECIDED, does Gadsden Purchase count?


Key 12: The incumbent-party candidate is charismatic or is a national hero.
FALSE, I don't think his military service counts

Key 13: The challenger is not charismatic and is not a national hero.
UNDECIDED.  Fremont is considered by some to be a military hero


7 false, 2 true, 4 unknown for 1856 . I think we know why the Litchman test starts with 1860.

[Absentee Voting Ghost of Ruin]

I really wish people would stop taking Lichtmann seriously. He waffles and tweaks his model continually, and then claims to have "predicted" stuff. He's little better than a magician who does cold reading, except most stage magicians *don't* claim to actually have powers.

[Phony Moderate]

I really wish people would stop taking Lichtmann seriously. He waffles and tweaks his model continually, and then claims to have "predicted" stuff. He's little better than a magician who does cold reading, except most stage magicians *don't* claim to actually have powers.

Pretty sure that his actual model hasn't been tweaked at all; the problem is that many of the 'keys' are open to varying interpretation.