A bit early for Lichtman to be making incorrect predictions on 2008, isn't it?
Posted on 05/12/2005 1:00:07 PM PDT by areafiftyone
I had no idea who he was. Never read anything but I assumed Freepers would know more about him. Thanks for telling me that. NOW I WILL NEVER read anything of his!
What a surprise coming from this crackpot who attempts (and not very well) to pass himself off as a neutral observer. Has he ever said according to his theories anybody but the Commie would win?
A bit early for Lichtman to be making incorrect predictions on 2008, isn't it?
I wasn't being chastising . I looked up the POS and read a couple of other things he wrote. The prison scandal at Abu Ghraib was one he commented on. Another was how years ago Republicans were tolerant, now they are Christian right wingers. And it goes on and on with him.
Sounds like the same POS to me! ;)
He sure does! What's the date today? Thursday, May 12, 2005?
Unfortunately for that theory there is plenty of time between now and 2007 for a "Theodore Roosevelt and a Ronald Reagan" to appear.
Remind me again... How did Theodore Roosevelt get elected?
It has as much validity to me as Baghdad Bob.
Good ole Baghdad Bob! We had loads of fun with that guy! LOL! I guess you are right! This is only the beginning!
I guess I am a hopin and a wishin. Like I do that the Repubs will get some intestinal fortitude, or even that they somehow are told by the "Keeper of Knowledge" that they, the Republicans are now the majority and could do great things.
I'm afraid we just can't take a step back any longer. It may be the step off the cliff.
The truth is getting out, the story the democrats want to present as fact is regularly laid bare as fiction. More people awaken every day. No, the KEYS theory has to be re-normed for a diminished media role.
Hmmm...Despite anyone's ideological disagreements with this man, I cannot dispute the relevance of very many of these indicators....actually the only one I can dispute is the significance of midterm House elections.
A 3rd party challenge could materialize quickly...look at Ross Perot.
In recent years, midterm House elections have been a very weak predictor of the following Presidential election.
1966 Rep +47 1968 R wins Prez
1970 Dem +12 1972 R wins
1974 Dem +48 1976 D wins
1978 Dem +1 1980 R wins
1982 Dem +24 1984 R wins
1986 Dem +4 1988 R wins
1990 Dem +4 1992 D wins
1994 Rep +57 1996 D wins
1998 Dem +13 2000 R wins
2002 Rep +6 2004 R wins
History does show that a tough fight for the nomination forbodes a difficult election for the nominee...however in recent years, the nominees have been sewing things up rather quickly so that indicator is not as useful as it once was...
I don't doubt that lack of social upheaval, scandal, as well
presence of a good economy, foreign policy/war going smoothly, and charisma in the Republican candidate would point to a Republican victory. Incumbency does help as well.
didn't Clinton come out of nowhere to win his nomination, didn't he lose bigtime in Iowa [I didn't pay much attention to US politics at that time, correct me if I am wrong]
Yes, and Reagan lost in Iowa in 1980 but eventually each one the nomination handily. Congressional Quarterly Weekly Reports (and maybe some of their other published materials) has a summary showing that a difficult path to nomination indicates a difficult time in the general election.
Of course the standard of what constitutes a "difficult" path to the nomination has come down over the years; I want to say that they considered whether the candidate was an incumbent President or not as well.
For example, Buchanan in 1992 won very few delegates, but did get around 35% or so of the vote in several states; CQ cited this as a "difficult" path for Bush 41. By historical standards for an incumbent president, it was a difficult path.
I misread my World Almanac...that should have been Reps gaining 15 seats in 1978....however even going back to the mid-1800's, performance in mid-term elections is a very poor indicator of the next Presidential election.
Mike Pence!http://www.theconservativevoice.com/modules/news/article.php?storyid=2428
http://www.newsmax.com/archives/articles/2005/5/8/143759.shtml
That's fine. Now all he needs is name recognition, charisma, a good ability to debate, have facts and specify his plans for the United States policy, both domestic and foreign and he's on his way.
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.