Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Nobody likes Harris but we have to stop Trump.

I like Harris. The more I learn about her, the more I like. I was focused on other candidates during the 2020 primaries, and Vice Presidents are generally invisible. I'm pleasantly surprised. Of course, she's helped by the fact that "not ancient" and "fairly normal" are like a breath of fresh air in this country.

This.
She is just so normal! It’s great.

Anonymous wrote:Political Science has long had physics envy.

But political science cannot quantify all the variables in the human and historical experience.

Weird shit happens at odd times. And there’s no formula for that.

I think Harris will win. And I can point to data in Michigan or Wisconsin or wherever and it all seems logical.

And then Pearl Harbor happens. Or Kennedy gets assassinated. Or 9/11 happens.

And your little PhD models are useless. Because human beings remain unpredictable

The best we can manage are patterns, not predictions

Yes, but social/political science can still be accurate at a macro level. Yes, humans are unpredictable, but groups of humans are often much more predictable. If your predictions account for a certain percentage of variation, then it doesn't matter if the lowest percentile or a middle percentile varies from the model, the model can still be a fairly accurate predictor.

In this case, Professor Lichtman uses modeling tools that may not be accurate on the micro level, but his research has shown it to be fairly accurate on the macro level and he has analyzed it for all elections in the last 50 or so years. So that's over 10 elections and with the exception of the case that was decided on a court case, not on the actual election, he was 100% correct. And his model did predict who would be the popular vote winner, just not the electoral vote winner and that win was decided by a court case.

It's a pretty sound model that has, so far, been accurate. And it will remain a highly watched index until such time as it fails to be more accurate than not.

Anonymous wrote:Nobody likes Harris but we have to stop Trump.

I like Harris. The more I learn about her, the more I like. I was focused on other candidates during the 2020 primaries, and Vice Presidents are generally invisible. I'm pleasantly surprised. Of course, she's helped by the fact that "not ancient" and "fairly normal" are like a breath of fresh air in this country.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

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

Biden did win. Are you OK?

Lichtman said the Democrats were being hasty in dumping Biden after the debate debacle this time. He said they still held enough keys to win even with a doddering Biden on the ticket.

Yeah but he never makes his actual prediction until after Labor Day.

+1 If Biden had stayed on, I'm 100% sure he would've lost.

I’m not so sure. Trump lost already. He fomented an insurrection. He is a convicted felon. None of these things are appealing to your average citizen.

Harris is more likely to win if we all get out and vote for her and get others to the polls as well.

- an independent who wants to vote on policy again.

Nobody likes Harris but we have to stop Trump.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

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

Biden did win. Are you OK?

Lichtman said the Democrats were being hasty in dumping Biden after the debate debacle this time. He said they still held enough keys to win even with a doddering Biden on the ticket.

Yeah but he never makes his actual prediction until after Labor Day.

+1 If Biden had stayed on, I'm 100% sure he would've lost.

I’m not so sure. Trump lost already. He fomented an insurrection. He is a convicted felon. None of these things are appealing to your average citizen.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Professor Lichtman has never been wrong, except for the Bush-Gore election. He even made the 2016 call for Trump against conventional wisdom. From his mouth to God’s ears.

Once the votes were actually counted, Gore won Florida and thus was entitled to the White House, alas.

The Supreme Court blocked the recount.

And for some reason Gore didn't send an army of goons to storm the Capitol, and didn't use his position as Vice President to block verification of the electoral College, and didn't spend years filing fraudulent lawsuits challenging the result. Weirdo.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/2000_United_States_presidential_election_recount_in_Florida

And yet, moronic MAGA think Gore simply challenging the results, is analogous to what their flying monkeys did on 1/6.

Well know for certain 2 months from now

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Professor Lichtman has never been wrong, except for the Bush-Gore election. He even made the 2016 call for Trump against conventional wisdom. From his mouth to God’s ears.

Given that the Supreme Court awarded that one to the loser, he hasn’t been wrong.

Exactly what I was thinking

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Professor Lichtman has never been wrong, except for the Bush-Gore election. He even made the 2016 call for Trump against conventional wisdom. From his mouth to God’s ears.

Once the votes were actually counted, Gore won Florida and thus was entitled to the White House, alas.

Ummm...no.

https://www.cnn.com/2015/10/31/politics/bush-gore-2000-election-results-studies/index.html

The two major conclusions here are that Gore likely would have won a hand recount of the statewide overvotes and undervotes -- which he never requested -- while Bush likely would have won the hand recount of undervotes ordered by the Florida Supreme Court, although by a smaller margin than the certified 537 vote difference.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Professor Lichtman has never been wrong, except for the Bush-Gore election. He even made the 2016 call for Trump against conventional wisdom. From his mouth to God’s ears.

Once the votes were actually counted, Gore won Florida and thus was entitled to the White House, alas.

The Supreme Court blocked the recount.

And for some reason Gore didn't send an army of goons to storm the Capitol, and didn't use his position as Vice President to block verification of the electoral College, and didn't spend years filing fraudulent lawsuits challenging the result. Weirdo.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/2000_United_States_presidential_election_recount_in_Florida

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Professor Lichtman has never been wrong, except for the Bush-Gore election. He even made the 2016 call for Trump against conventional wisdom. From his mouth to God’s ears.

Once the votes were actually counted, Gore won Florida and thus was entitled to the White House, alas.

Ummm...no.

Political Science has long had physics envy.

But political science cannot quantify all the variables in the human and historical experience.

Weird shit happens at odd times. And there’s no formula for that.

I think Harris will win. And I can point to data in Michigan or Wisconsin or wherever and it all seems logical.

And then Pearl Harbor happens. Or Kennedy gets assassinated. Or 9/11 happens.

And your little PhD models are useless. Because human beings remain unpredictable

The best we can manage are patterns, not predictions

Opinions are like a**holes, everyone's got one. I support Harris and, I guess, I'm happier that this guy is predicting Harris than if he was predicting Trump, but this is ultimately worthless.

Vote for Harris. Persuade your friends to vote for Harris. Donate to her campaign if you have the means. Join up with a group organizing post card writing campaigns to swing states. Look for ways to help down ballot. Polls and predictions are just masturbation at this point.

People should use percentages when they predict.
I will say 52% for VP Harris.
48% for Trump as of now.