This is mine as of today, so we are close
Posted on 10/24/2020 11:39:50 AM PDT by Signalman
Most political prognosticators delay their final predictions for a presidential race until the morning of Election Day. In 2016, for example, Nate Silver of FiveThirtyEight and Nate Cohn of the New York Times released their final projections during the wee hours of November 8. One forecaster, however, routinely publishes his predictions six months in advance. Professor Helmut Norpoth of Stony Brook University in New York issued his last word on the Trump–Clinton contest 246 days before the voters went to the polls. In March 2016, Norpoth confidently predicted that Donald Trump would be elected president. He not only contradicted Silver, Cohn, and countless other experts, he had the effrontery to be right.
Helmut Norpoth’s “Primary model” has been right 25 of 27 times, and it predicts that, in 2020, President Trump will defeat Joe Biden 362-176 in the Electoral College.
Professor Norpoth just as confidently predicts that Trump will trounce Joe Biden in November. Specifically, he gives the president a 91 percent chance of winning the election with an unambiguous 362-176 Electoral College margin. If this seems implausible, considering the avalanche of polls that portend Trump’s imminent political demise, it will seem less so when Norpoth’s track record is taken into account. The 2016 election was by no means his first foray into political projections. His model has correctly predicted five of the last six presidential elections, and projected the correct result in all but two of the last 27 contests when pre-election data were fed into his “Primary model.”
This model ignores the polls, which Norpoth believes are no longer representative of the electorate, and does not attempt to calculate the political effect of transient events like economic fluctuations or natural disasters. Instead, it is designed around long-term electoral cycles and early primary results of particular contests under scrutiny.
(Excerpt) Read more at spectator.org ...
I agree. Colorado for Trump.
Question is, does it compensate for cheating on a massive scale?
From his mouth to God’s ears.
I pray he is correct.
Very encouraging!
we have a cushion without John Roberts approved fraud in Pennsylvania
What is that cushion you speak of? 8>)
PA is 20 EVs If like was mentioned Trump is in the 350 +/- range, the 20 in PA wont matter as much
“does not attempt to calculate the political effect of transient events like economic fluctuations or natural disasters”
—
Not sure you can ignore elephants in the living room, but I hope the guy is on to something here.
He must be over 100 years old to predict 25 presidential four-year contests.
Oh yeah okay, I’m with you now. I had forgotten he had also provided the EC counts as well. 8>)
I like his prediction.
Thanks again
I have found the thread where I want to be on election night! This is excellent
I like his prediction too. I hope and pray he is right.
Just heard someone tonight trashing the Electoral College. Said we should have a national popular vote.
I asked, but what about states like Wyoming? That means they won’t have a voice.
“Yeah, but they don’t have that many delegates anyways.”
Well, if there was a national popular vote, only New York and Los Angeles would be deciding our elections.
“Yeah, but I think the popular vote would be better.”
But that’s not how our government is designed.
I didn’t even get into the vote fraud aspect. Oh and this person already voted.
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.