Posted on 10/14/2015 9:26:55 AM PDT by wright2bear
Elections are not mysterious events subject to the whimsy of unpredictable candidates and voters. They’re actually highly predictable, with a set of variables that influence outcomes in familiar ways.
Because of that, we can say, with reasonable confidence, that a Republican will be moving into the White House in 2017.
(Excerpt) Read more at blogs.reuters.com ...
Thanks for posting. What took you so long?
Dems are good for at least 4-5% fraud vote.
They forgot to take into account the felons, illegal aliens, muslims, and the dead who will all be voting, in most cases multiple times.
A bit of static analysis based upon how things were before Obama foisted eight years of CHANGE on us.
Dems now solidly control 47% of the vote as Mitt Romney rightly observed. Student Loan Forgiveness will easily get them the rest.
My only warning about this is by every objective rational standard Obama should of been slaughter at the Polls in 2012.
We have tipped over into new territory in US Politics. Voters feelings now play a far larger role in elections then reason
Yes based on history the Republicans should win in 2016. Based on history they should of won in 2012 also.
Disagree with the article. This election cannot be predicted on those models. It is totally unique and something that we haven’t ever seen before.
I agree, their reasoning was interesting. I don’t think combining the results of elections in so many countries makes for a stable model, though.
A member since 2004 and this is your first post? Kudos on that.
Never been one to post much on the internet. Always kept a low profile. Faithful to FR since 2004. read daily...or shall I say hourly. I accidently locked my account out a few years back, and finally Jim worked his magic..so here I am.
Two simple reasons
Hillary
Clinton
After all, they don’t want IDs to prove that a person can vote. So they must be protecting people who are committing voter fraud.
And why would they protect law breakers? Because Democrats benefit from cheaters and law breakers.
I don’t know about this. Ole Bernie is offering a lot of free $h!t.
Their "spinalysis" is twenty some years out of date. Clinton's election in 92' marked a whole new role for media in Presidential politics.
It's not even that they are engaged in advocacy for their favorite candidate; they're engaged in marketing their favorite candidate.
Three reasons, actually.
1. The Purpose of the Democrat Party is to elect thieves to office so that they have access to the public treasuries in order to loot them.
2. The public treasuries are about empty.
3. Republicans will have to be elected so they can put money back into the public treasuries.
Then, the Democrats will be back.
They’re like locusts.
There were a dozen "models" and predictors that said Obama should have lost---but none of them factored in Mittens and his inept, unwilling-to-fight campaign.
This is indeed new territory in American politics. Never before have elections been so...managed. It’s all scripted and the voters are just playing a part, and that is the part of background scenery.
Voters no longer vote based on reason because we have become an irrational country.
I’ve said all along that I think it probable that the Republican nominee will “win” the election in 2016, because Obama Democrat fatigue among the voters is so huge.
Of course, weighted against that is the fact that one should never underestimate the ability of Republicans to pull defeat from the jaws of victory.
Having said all that, I still don’t think that anyone running in the GOP contest really understands what is needed to turn this country around, or is fully committed to actually doing it.
Well, regardless of WHY a Republican wins in 2016, the important thing is that one wins. Our country simply cannot tolerate or survive another clueless dem (dim) Prez.
This is my thought. We should have won 2012 (I believe we did), but when a precinct get 104% vote for Obama, you just can’t defeat theft.
I agree with the other poster, 47% will vote dem, free college tuition for illegals and other handouts will swing the other 4%.
“There were a dozen “models” and predictors that said Obama should have lost-—but none of them factored in Mittens and his inept, unwilling-to-fight campaign. “
I am trying to think of ANY type of model that was historically accurate : )
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.