How? She's allowed to rig the election as we've seen her do 3 times already, and the media, the treasonists and the GOP-E support that. What's he going to do? Demand a recount? Sue?
HA HA HA HA HA!
Posted on 02/23/2016 7:21:28 PM PST by 2ndDivisionVet
A professor of political science at Stony Brook University has forecasted that Donald Trump has a minimum 97 percent chance of winning the general election as the Republican nominee.
Professor Helmut Norpoth's forecast presentation took place Monday evening in the SUNY Global Center in Manhattan, which was organized by the Stony Brook Alumni Association.
Norpoth created a statistical model of presidential elections that uses a candidate's performance in their party's primary and patterns in the electoral cycle as predictors of the presidential vote in the general election.
Donald Trump has a 97 percent chance of defeating Hillary Clinton and a 99 percent chance of defeating Bernie Sanders in the general election, according to Norpoth's formula.
"The bottom line is that the primary model, using also the cyclical movement, makes it almost certain that Donald Trump will be the next president," Norpoth said, "if he's a nominee of the [Republican] party."
Norpoth's primary model works for every presidential election since 1912, with the notable exception of the 1960 election. These results give the model an accuracy of 96.1 percent.
Norpoth began the presentation with an introduction of the potential matchups in the general election, including a hypothetical Sanders vs. Trump general election.
"When I started out with this kind of display a few months ago, I thought it was sort of a joke." Norpoth said referring to Trump and Sanders, as many alumni in the audience laughed. "Well, I'll tell you right now, it ain't a joke anymore."
As the presentation continued, laughter turned to silence as Norpoth forecasted a 61 percent chance of a Republican win in the general election.
This forecast was made using the electoral cycle model, which studies a pattern of voting in the presidential election that makes it less likely for an incumbent party to hold the presidency after two terms in office. The model does not assume who would be the party nominees or the conditions of the country at the time.
"You think 'This is crazy. How can anything come up with something like that?' " Norpoth said "But that's exactly the kind of equation I used to predict Bill Clinton winning in '96, that I used to predict that George Bush would win in 2004, and, as you remember four years ago, that Obama would win in 2012."
Norpoth then added data from the New Hampshire and South Carolina primaries to narrow down the forecast to specific candidates. As he brought up the first slide with matchup results, the silence was broken by muttering from the audience.
"Trump beats Hillary 54.7 percent to 45.3 percent [of the popular vote]. This is almost too much to believe." Norpoth said, with a few members of the audience laughing nervously. "The probability of that [outcome] is almost complete certainty, 97 percent. It's almost 'Take it to the bank.' "
The primary model predicts a Trump victory with such certainty due to Trump's relatively high success in the Republican primaries, Norpoth said. Clinton, in comparison, is in an essential tie with Sanders in the Democratic primaries. As a result, Sanders would also lose to Trump in a similar landslide if Sanders were to be the Democratic nominee, Norpoth said.
In contrast, Norpoth forecasted that a hypothetical presidential race with Ted Cruz or Marco Rubio on the Republican ticket would be a much closer race. The results showed Clinton with a 55 percent chance of winning the race against Cruz or Rubio with a 0.3 percent lead in the popular vote.
Norpoth's model showed Sanders losing against Rubio or Cruz with a 0.6 percent gap in the popular vote, giving a Rubio or Cruz ticket a 60 percent chance of winning against the Vermont senator.
Norpoth added that while the non-Trump Republican ticket would be much more unlikely to win the general election due to differences in the popular vote and the electoral college vote, there is almost no chance that Trump would lose the electoral college vote with his forecasted lead in the popular vote.
"If you win by 54 percent [of the popular vote], you have a big majority in the electoral college," Norpoth said. "Nobody who has ever gotten 54 percent has lost."
He must be trying to get fired.
BOOM!
Did you hear Hillary coughing her way through the town hall? She may be out of the race any day now for health reasons. If not indicted before then.
I see Trump putting normally blue WI, MI, PA, NJ, maybe even NY in play.
Cruzbots and Boobiobots who think their candidate can win - this is a wake-up call.
If Trump is nominated, he could very well be our next President.
No other GOP candidate can defeat Hillary. Period.
B-b-b-b-but what about all those polls showing Trump losing to Hillary now?
Because as we all know, polling results are permanently locked in and never change over time, so we must base all future predictions on the results right now in February!
/s
Trump does still need to get past Cruz and Rubio. But if he can get the nomination, I have no doubt he’ll win the general election going away.
How? She's allowed to rig the election as we've seen her do 3 times already, and the media, the treasonists and the GOP-E support that. What's he going to do? Demand a recount? Sue?
HA HA HA HA HA!
Bump
Et tu, Brute?
Just kidding. You keep me busy every day reading the threads you start. Thank you for this one as well. It seems to contradict what all the high paid political pundit entertainers are saying.
If Trump wins, hopefully he’ll purge as many of the ruling establishment as possible. The rats need to be run out of Washington.
Weren’t you one of the FR people supporting Schwarzenegger in 2003? I’m just wondering because I seem to remember you standing up for the Arnold. If so, how did that turn out? I think Donald Trump is Arnold on the national scale — a disaster waiting to happen.
“Norpoth’s primary model works for every presidential election since 1912, with the notable exception of the 1960 election. These results give the model an accuracy of 96.1 percent.”
None of the pollsters can claim that level of accuracy. Just hope we’re not “revisiting” 1960. Go Trump!
“I think Donald Trump is Arnold on the national scale — a disaster waiting to happen.”
I guess you can’t read. This guy’s methodology doesn’t deal with the candidates at all. So what you think of Trump really has no bearing on the validity of his model. He’s saying that this is a Republcan Year. So I guess if Cruz or Boobio gets the nomination, they’d get elected too. Problem is that Cruz is already dead man walking, and Boobio is circling the bowl as this is being written. Now, I know those facts probably piss you off, but that does not make them any less valid.
If that happens, it will be a landslide of at least 1980 proportions.
Go Trump!
Only Trump has stood up against the media, China, Mexico ,illegals, Muslims (All of the enemies of America and freedom). etc. All other politicians have not stood up nor said anything against ALL of these enemies of America.
President Trump will tame China! China has been eating our lunch as China makes everything.China uses unfair trade deals against the USA. Where the factories are ,the technology is and so is the power and wealth.China knows this ,S Korea, Japan all of Asia knows this. No one understands this here in America except me and Trump!
Nixon won 1960 but not by enough to cover the margin of fraud.
It’s the truth isn’t it? She wins 6 coin tosses, WOW how lucky she beats 1 in 64 odds! Then she gets super delegates to tie with Bernies delegates even though he won New Hampshire, hey how much did that cost her? And then they broke a tie in Nevada with a card pick and WOW again! She picks an Ace over Bernies 6! Wow, she’s just as lucky as she is in cattle futures! Nothing to see here folks, move it along. This really ticks me off, I am quite versed in how this b*tch works. I live in New York and watched her BS when she was running for Senator.
Nixon won 1960 but not by enough to cover the margin of fraud.
*********************************************************
Well, at least you didn’t bring out the old canard about Nixon being cheated out of Illinois’ votes, thereby losing Illinois’ electoral votes, thereby losing the national election.
(Which is simply not true)
I heard the coughing. Hillary may need to cut down on so much bong use, I mean inhaler use before her interviews.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.