Allan Lichtman predicts Harris will win

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:You know Hillary was better at policy than politics. Bill was the politician. Kamala is a politician. You gotta be able to sell your lies as a politician. It's an amazing gift Bill had - that charisma. That ability to sell. Hillary wasn't likeable. Likeability is number one must have in sales. People like Kamala. I personally do not but she can connect in a way Hillary never could.

People like the idea of Kamala. But the actual Kamala is incredibly socially awkward and apparently a very nasty boss.

Every single decision, choice and action that has taken place since the moment Biden announced he was standing down as been flawless. The rollout of the Harris campaign, getting the other potential Dem contenders to line up behind her rather than challenge her, the execution of the first speeches from Atlanta etc, the Convention, the fundraising, the choice of Walz - flawless. Absolutely flawless.

If what we have seen of her execution since the end of June represents her executive abilities, then I don't care if she is a nasty boss. She is getting it done.

Right. But all that was contingent on the media playing along, which of course they have.

Well, if that bothers you then I imagine you are truly outraged about the media giving Trump a pass on his gibberish for the last 9 years.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Any fool can see that (barring any crazy event close to election day) Kamala is going to win. I mean the amount of money she's raised, Trump's age and legal issues, Vance selection, economy is still above board, etc. You don't really have to be that academic or brilliant to see this.

Every Democrat remembers 2016. No one is complacent. Trump is the Ivermectin sloughed-off lining of someone’s gut in a toilet, but he still might win.

But it's not 2016. Key considerations that swing the tide to Dems this time around:

1. Trump has had a shot. In 2016 he was a shiny new thing - nuts and over the top, lots of drama and weird - but an outsider people were willing to try out. He represented in 2016 a hope for a lot of people, right or wrong. The anger was tangible and he was the populist candidate in a sense. No longer. We know what he stands for.

2. Trump has serious legal issues this time around - conviction in 2024 v none in 2016.

3. Hillary had her own drama. She was never the most popular person as Dems would like to believe. She had been in the rodeo so everyone knew her name but she wasn't exactly a star. She ran a horrible campaign in the sense that her and her team went in to play a game they never prepped for. Overconfident, no prep and never saw the loss coming. We've all experienced 2016 and it's 2024 now.

Kamala has the distinct advantage over Trump.

Trump has the biggest advantage - A white man in America.

Obama won as a black man. Not sure the advantage is still there.

Do you seriously think Obama could’ve gotten anywhere near the White House if he were as stupid and disgusting as Trump? When you’re white, you can get away with being as dumb as W and Palin. So it isn’t just the white males who get away with being unqualified and failing upward. Imagine having the audacity to refer to “DEI” as an insult and yet your party allows uneducated white person after uneducated white person to fail upward?

I said this in the Vance thread - but look at JD Vance. He's a prime example of this. The guy wrote a book and has been in the Senate for like five minutes. He has no actual policy experience, zero foreign policy experience, but as soon as Harris was announced she was labeled a DEI hire. This despite being the AG of California (the largest state in the union BTW), Senator from California, and Vice President.

Pale, male, and Yale cannot be underestimated as an advantage.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:You know Hillary was better at policy than politics. Bill was the politician. Kamala is a politician. You gotta be able to sell your lies as a politician. It's an amazing gift Bill had - that charisma. That ability to sell. Hillary wasn't likeable. Likeability is number one must have in sales. People like Kamala. I personally do not but she can connect in a way Hillary never could.

People like the idea of Kamala. But the actual Kamala is incredibly socially awkward and apparently a very nasty boss.

counterpoint

My god. And I take it this is the narrative the media is running with, that’s she’s a bad boss because she’s thorough?!

No, it's because she doesn't do the homework, she doesn't read what her staff gives her, and then she looks like an ass in public and chews her staff out for her laziness.

There are MANY sources that have reported that.

This is ridiculous. You aren't a successful prosecutor, DA, and AG by winging it.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Let us see how we all feel in 2028. I get why we need Kamala in 2024. I am just not sure she's that awesome person everyone thinks she is yet. I think she's definitely who we need over Trump but again, it isn't exactly rocket science why that is. Voting someone in with confidence is a wholly different than that person being awesome. Only time will tell. NOBODY can say whether she will be good or how good she will be. No way this early on.

That's fair, but it's not 2028. And I think you are mistaking people stating the obvious - she's competent and likeable - with people thinking she's the second coming. I don't think anyone is saying that.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:You know Hillary was better at policy than politics. Bill was the politician. Kamala is a politician. You gotta be able to sell your lies as a politician. It's an amazing gift Bill had - that charisma. That ability to sell. Hillary wasn't likeable. Likeability is number one must have in sales. People like Kamala. I personally do not but she can connect in a way Hillary never could.

People like the idea of Kamala. But the actual Kamala is incredibly socially awkward and apparently a very nasty boss.

It's amazing how no man is ever a nasty boss, or that it doesn't matter, when these discussions are had.

“constant amount of soul-destroying criticism.” That’s your girl. The joy is just for the cameras.

[Anonymous]

Like an aging athlete staying in the game to long. Best to retire when the stats are still in your favor.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:You know Hillary was better at policy than politics. Bill was the politician. Kamala is a politician. You gotta be able to sell your lies as a politician. It's an amazing gift Bill had - that charisma. That ability to sell. Hillary wasn't likeable. Likeability is number one must have in sales. People like Kamala. I personally do not but she can connect in a way Hillary never could.

People like the idea of Kamala. But the actual Kamala is incredibly socially awkward and apparently a very nasty boss.

It's amazing how no man is ever a nasty boss, or that it doesn't matter, when these discussions are had.

“constant amount of soul-destroying criticism.” That’s your girl. The joy is just for the cameras.

Dems are happy because there's an alternative, and she has a chance at beating Trump. So yea, she's "our" girl, though I'm an Independent.

Beats a convicted felon, rapist, dictator lover, and someone who's a threat to our national security in more ways than one.

On the one hand you have someone who tries a felon; on the other, you have a felon. Perfect match to go toe to toe, IMO.

[Anonymous]

He already predicted. Will he be wrong this time?
He wasn't in 2016.

[Anonymous]

He won’t be wrong this time. He hasn’t had a miss except for Bush v. Gore.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:He predicted Biden would win as well. lol

Well, I guess it's a Democrat, whoever runs.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:He predicted Biden would win as well. lol

Well, I guess it's a Democrat, whoever runs.

No. The common denominator is Trump. Trump is a loser.

I continue to be surprised that the gop nominated him.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Any fool can see that (barring any crazy event close to election day) Kamala is going to win. I mean the amount of money she's raised, Trump's age and legal issues, Vance selection, economy is still above board, etc. You don't really have to be that academic or brilliant to see this.

Every Democrat remembers 2016. No one is complacent. Trump is the Ivermectin sloughed-off lining of someone’s gut in a toilet, but he still might win.

But it's not 2016. Key considerations that swing the tide to Dems this time around:

1. Trump has had a shot. In 2016 he was a shiny new thing - nuts and over the top, lots of drama and weird - but an outsider people were willing to try out. He represented in 2016 a hope for a lot of people, right or wrong. The anger was tangible and he was the populist candidate in a sense. No longer. We know what he stands for.

2. Trump has serious legal issues this time around - conviction in 2024 v none in 2016.

3. Hillary had her own drama. She was never the most popular person as Dems would like to believe. She had been in the rodeo so everyone knew her name but she wasn't exactly a star. She ran a horrible campaign in the sense that her and her team went in to play a game they never prepped for. Overconfident, no prep and never saw the loss coming. We've all experienced 2016 and it's 2024 now.

Kamala has the distinct advantage over Trump.

Trump has the biggest advantage - A white man in America.

Obama won as a black man. Not sure the advantage is still there.

Do you seriously think Obama could’ve gotten anywhere near the White House if he were as stupid and disgusting as Trump? When you’re white, you can get away with being as dumb as W and Palin. So it isn’t just the white males who get away with being unqualified and failing upward. Imagine having the audacity to refer to “DEI” as an insult and yet your party allows uneducated white person after uneducated white person to fail upward?

I said this in the Vance thread - but look at JD Vance. He's a prime example of this. The guy wrote a book and has been in the Senate for like five minutes. He has no actual policy experience, zero foreign policy experience, but as soon as Harris was announced she was labeled a DEI hire. This despite being the AG of California (the largest state in the union BTW), Senator from California, and Vice President.

Pale, male, and Yale cannot be underestimated as an advantage.

nice one.. lol

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Any fool can see that (barring any crazy event close to election day) Kamala is going to win. I mean the amount of money she's raised, Trump's age and legal issues, Vance selection, economy is still above board, etc. You don't really have to be that academic or brilliant to see this.

Every Democrat remembers 2016. No one is complacent. Trump is the Ivermectin sloughed-off lining of someone’s gut in a toilet, but he still might win.

But it's not 2016. Key considerations that swing the tide to Dems this time around:

1. Trump has had a shot. In 2016 he was a shiny new thing - nuts and over the top, lots of drama and weird - but an outsider people were willing to try out. He represented in 2016 a hope for a lot of people, right or wrong. The anger was tangible and he was the populist candidate in a sense. No longer. We know what he stands for.

2. Trump has serious legal issues this time around - conviction in 2024 v none in 2016.

3. Hillary had her own drama. She was never the most popular person as Dems would like to believe. She had been in the rodeo so everyone knew her name but she wasn't exactly a star. She ran a horrible campaign in the sense that her and her team went in to play a game they never prepped for. Overconfident, no prep and never saw the loss coming. We've all experienced 2016 and it's 2024 now.

Kamala has the distinct advantage over Trump.

Trump has the biggest advantage - A white man in America.

Obama won as a black man. Not sure the advantage is still there.

Do you seriously think Obama could’ve gotten anywhere near the White House if he were as stupid and disgusting as Trump? When you’re white, you can get away with being as dumb as W and Palin. So it isn’t just the white males who get away with being unqualified and failing upward. Imagine having the audacity to refer to “DEI” as an insult and yet your party allows uneducated white person after uneducated white person to fail upward?

I said this in the Vance thread - but look at JD Vance. He's a prime example of this. The guy wrote a book and has been in the Senate for like five minutes. He has no actual policy experience, zero foreign policy experience, but as soon as Harris was announced she was labeled a DEI hire. This despite being the AG of California (the largest state in the union BTW), Senator from California, and Vice President.

Pale, male, and Yale cannot be underestimated as an advantage.

That didn't stop Obama.

[Anonymous]

Prediction: Lichtman will update his prediction before the election and say Trump.
He has changed his predictions before, gutsiest was he switched to Trump in 2016.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Prediction: Lichtman will update his prediction before the election and say Trump.
He has changed his predictions before, gutsiest was he switched to Trump in 2016.

Why do YOU think he will update his prediction?