In 1981, Allan Lichtman, an American University professor, along with Russian seismologist Vladimir Keilis-Borok, created The Keys to the White House model. Since then, Lichtman has been widely quoted throughout the media for his ability to predict who will win presidential elections.
Bound to Be Wrong Sometime
In 2016, against all odds, Lichtman boldly predicted that Donald Trump would win. In August 2020, during media interviews and again in early October, the professor said that Donald Trump would lose in 2020. According to his analysis, Trump only possessed six of the 13 keys listed below, and failed to gather seven of them, hence, adding up to an election loss
Was the professor’s assessment correct for the 2020 presidential election? Let’s look at the record.
The 13 Keys
1. Party Mandate: After the midterm elections, the incumbent party holds more seats in the U.S. House of Representatives than after the previous midterm elections. So, Lichtman’s very first tally was 0 to 1, against Trump.
2. Contest: There is no serious contest for the incumbent party nomination. Lichtman, 1 to 1.
3. Incumbency: The incumbent party candidate is the sitting president. Lichtman, now favored Trump 2 to 1.
4. Third party: There is no significant third party or independent campaign. Lichtman: 3 to 1.
5. Short-term economy: The economy is not in recession during the election campaign. Lichtman, 3 to 2. Was this the right call? Sure, we had shutdown-related economic challenges and maybe it felt like a recession to some people, but as Geoff Colvin at Fortune pointed out, we were not in a recession.
Also, despite COVID-19, masks, lockdowns, riots, and such, an astounding 56% of Americans report that they were better off then, than when Obama and Biden left office. “The figures are the highest on record, which Trump has hailed as incredible.”
6. Long-term economy: Real per capita economic growth during the term equals or exceeds mean growth during the previous two terms. Lichtman: 3 to 3. Real per capita economic growth dropped precipitously during the lockdown, however everyone understands the causes and many people see the rising tide.
7. Policy change: The incumbent administration affects major changes in national policy. Lichtman: 4 to 3. Tightening the border, ending our long-term involvement in foreign wars, launching “Right to Try,” enacting prison reform, and so much more – take your pick!
8. Social unrest: There is no sustained social unrest during the term. Lichtman: 4 to 4.
9. Scandal: The incumbent administration is untainted by major scandal. Lichtman, 4 to 5, so Trump was losing. Democrats did a solid job in launching witch hunts, conducting phony impeachment proceedings, and jailing Trump associates on process crimes.
10. Foreign/military failure: The incumbent administration suffers no major failure in foreign or military affairs. Lichtman: 5 to 5.
11. Foreign/military success: The incumbent administration achieves a major success in foreign or military affairs. Lichtman: 5 to 6. Is this the right call? What about crushing ISIS, and the aforementioned Middle East breakthroughs?
12. Incumbent (party) charisma: The incumbent party candidate is charismatic or a national hero. Lichtman: 5 to 7. The Left can’t stand Trump, but 15,000 to 30,000 people showing up at airport stops, with many attendees from the ranks of Democrats and unaffiliated voters, shouldn’t be overlooked.
13. Challenger (party) charisma: The challenging party candidate is not charismatic or a national hero. Lichtman, 6 to 7. Biden likely has the lowest charisma quotient that Democrats have ever nominated.
Bonus Points
If the professor was wrong about keys #5, #11, and/or #12 Trump would be ahead 7 to 6, or possibly 8 to 5, or even 9 to 4.
One might also observe that with gasoline under $2.17 per gallon; Trump’s minority voter support having tripled since 2016; and a challenger with health problems, who is frequently not on the campaign trail, and is tainted by scandal even as the mainstream press censors the news, it was game over.
So, why did Biden ‘win’? Massive cheating.
Unprecedented Cheating
Whether it was minimizing ID requirements, ballot-box stuffing, ballot harvesting, voting twice, voting in place of the deceased, forging signatures, doctoring ballots, not delivering ballots, backdating ballots, re-running ballots through counting machines, restricting the access of poll watchers, coaching voters at the voting booth, feigning water main breaks to clear out voting precincts and then manipulate counting machines, and using software now proven to be susceptible to vote-switching (as employed in dozens of states), the effort was pervasive.
Also, in delivering truckloads of computer-generated ballots, paying for votes, offering raffles prizes for voting, destroying opposition ballots, ‘finding’ stacks of ballots late, and so many other illegal and un-democratic schemes, the raison d’etre was the same: To rob us of our 233-year heritage, to vanquish our fundamental right to vote in free and fair elections, to prevent the rightful, winning candidate from assuming office, and, by implication, to steal other elections at the national, state, county, and local level.
As such, could any presidential prediction model be effective? No way.
– – – – –
