Posted on 08/30/2011 2:31:49 PM PDT by SeekAndFind
“Even if I am being conservative, I don’t see how Obama can lose,” says Lichtman, the brains behind The Keys to the White House…
Working for the president are several of Lichtman’s keys, tops among them incumbency and the scandal-free nature of his administration.Undermining his re-election is a lack of charisma and leadership on key issues, says Lichtman, even including healthcare, Obama’s crowning achievement.
Lichtman developed his 13 Keys in 1981. They test the performance of the party that holds the presidency. If six or more of the 13 keys go against the party in power, then the opposing party wins.“The keys have figured into popular politics a bit,” Lichtman says. “They’ve never missed. They’ve been right seven elections in a row. A number that goes way beyond statistical significance in a record no other system even comes close to.”
They’ve been right seven elections in a row about the popular vote. See Wikipedia’s precis of what the Keys predicted for Bush and Gore in 2000. For fair-use reasons, I can’t excerpt Lichtman’s analysis of how the 13 Keys will play out for Obama next year, so follow the link up top and read through. He’s got The One winning on nine of 13 counts:
1. No contested primary
2. Incumbency
3. No third-party candidate
4. Major domestic-policy changes in his first term
5. No social unrest
6. No major scandals
7. No major foreign-policy failures
8. Major foreign-policy achievements in his first term (killing Bin Laden)
9. Little charisma by his likely opponent
The GOP wins three categories:
1. The incumbent’s party lost seats in the last House election
2. The long-term economy looks poor
3. Little charisma by the incumbent
One other criterion, the state of the economy during the campaign, is undecided because no one knows yet how the short-term trends will look. In other words, if I’m reading this correctly, the GOP will be within one Key of winning the presidency if (a) economic indicators look bad next year, which is only too grimly plausible, and (b) they nominate someone charismatic, like, say, Rick Perry. (What the threshold is for measuring “charisma,” I have no idea.) In which case, how can Lichtman seriously say, “I don’t see how Obama can lose”? Especially since, surreally, he’s counting the stimulus, which the public reviles, and ObamaCare, about which the public is deeply suspicious, as a point in Obama’s favor because they are, after all, major “changes” to American domestic policy. By that standard, even the dumbest, most hated piece of legislation should be treated as an asset to a presidential campaign so long as it’s significant enough to constitute “major change.” If you flip that Key to the GOP, then you’ve got six for the Republicans — enough to take the White House by Lichtman’s own metrics.
All of which assumes, of course, that this will be an ordinary election like the past seven were. Maybe it will; maybe there’s no such thing as an extraordinary election. But the state of the economy is surely extraordinary, poised as it is for a double-dip, and unemployment is extraordinary compared to any other era over the past 75 years. That is to say, we’re assuming that these “Keys” are equally weighted in election after election, no matter the circumstances, when basic awareness of the current political climate suggests the two economic Keys will be weighted way more heavily than any of the others. Can’t wait to see how it plays out. If, heaven forbid, we do end up in another recession and The One wins anyway, then maybe Lichtman really is a genius.
“Our job, and the job of the Republican candidates, is obvious: bypass the MSM.”
Indeed. And FR is a good place to start.
We have smart people knowledgeable in PR, publishing, writing, SEO, web design, blogs and other communication skills. We just need a way to knit it all together and go kick obuma’s Kenyan butt.
(Good post, ArrogantBustard)
You have FReepMail
My favorite answer to a question like this is to hide and watch.
I'd love to tell you but not in an open forum like this. If you really want to know FReepmail me and I might tell you. I wouldn't want everybody to move there and spoil it for me. I've been looking at this certain country for the past year and learning as much as I can about it. It looks promising.
“Based on his “13 keys” model, quantitative historian Allan Lichtman “
THIS GUY? OMG, he is a HUGH leftist. A real maroon. Don’t believe anything this bozo says.
>>> Every streak comes to and end, especially the remarkable ones.
It boils down to “The incumbent always has an edge”. That’s why you need a credible candidate as your challenger.
>>> Dude, it’s Allan Lichtman, I wouldn’t expect anything else out of him but a prediction of victory for Obama, they’re on the same team.
Yeah everybody is an enemy and everything is a conspiracy. But I recall nobody objected in 2004 when this guy’s system said GWB would win.
1. After the midterm elections, the incumbent party holds more seats in the US House of Representatives than it did after the previous midterm elections. Bush 1; Kerry 0.
2. There is no serious contest for the incumbent party nomination. Bush 2; Kerry 0.
3. The incumbent party candidate is the sitting president. Bush 3; Kerry 0.
4. There is no significant (more than 5 per cent) third-party candidate. Bush 4; Kerry 0.
5. The economy is not in recession during the election campaign. Bush 5; Kerry 0.
6. Real per-capita economic growth during the term equals or exceeds mean growth during the previous two terms. Bush 5; Kerry 1.
7. The incumbent administration effects major changes in national policy (on a New Deal or Reagan Revolution scale). Bush 5; Kerry 2.
8. There is no sustained social unrest during the term. Bush 6; Kerry 2.
9. The incumbent administration is untainted by major scandal (i.e., touches the President personally). Bush 7; Kerry 2.
10. The incumbent administration suffers no major failure in foreign or military affairs (9/11 counts, as did Pearl Harbor). Bush 7; Kerry 3.
11. The incumbent administration achieves a major success in foreign or military affairs (Afghanistan counts even if Iraq does not). Bush 8; Kerry 3.
12. The incumbent party candidate is charismatic or a national hero (on a JFK, Eisenhower, Reagan scale). Bush 8; Kerry 4.
13. The challenging party candidate is not charismatic or a national hero. Bush 9; Kerry 4.
“So even though the latest polls put Kerry up to 5 per cent ahead of Bush, Lichtman thinks the President is a shoo-in with his nine keys.”
counts:
1. No contested primary
2. Incumbency
3. No third-party candidate
4. Major domestic-policy changes in his first term
5. No social unrest
6. No major scandals
7. No major foreign-policy failures
8. Major foreign-policy achievements in his first term (killing Bin Laden)
9. Little charisma by his likely opponent
He gets 1, 2 and 4. The rest are losers for O. He may face a challenge; there is always a 3rd party; social unrest is at a fervent pitch; scandals occur daily; Bin Laden was a Bush achievement; Sarah is the meaning of charisma.
We will see. I am ready to vote right now.
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.