Allan Lichtman:If Bernie Sanders secures the nomination it's bad news for the Democrats

[bigdarryl]

Shit!!! I've followed this guy every four years in his predictions on the popular vote winner he's gotten every election right starting back to Reagan. http://www.opednews.com/populum/pagem.php?f=Climate-Change-and-the-201-by-Karyn-Strickler-2016-Elections_Agreement_Climate_Climate-Change-150916-922.html

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

1. I hope Bernie gets the nomination and we get to find out if Lichtman's right.

[bigdarryl]

4. Trust me he is right the only way we win in that senerio is

We loose the popular vote and win the electoral votes.Other than that we are screwed

[DisgustipatedinCA]

15. Trust you? Or we'll "loose"? Ok.

[DemocratSinceBirth]

62. Here we go again.

Don't blame bigdarryl for not distinguishing between lose and loose, blame the public school system that failed him.

[cali]

23. bwahaha. no.

[JRLeft]

26. You can't loose but you can lose.

[99Forever]

40. Trust YOU?

Bwahahahahahahaha.

That's some funny shit right there, I don't care who you are.

[Pope Sweet Jesus]

53. I'd rather trust the people than a random guy I've never heard of

making a dire statement.

[gateley]

77. Sheesh, people -- that is one guy's opinion (Big Darrel's)

He could be wrong, and he obviously is saying something you don't like. But why behave like little Republicans and jump on him w/nasty things to say like bullies in a schoolyard? You're better than that. WE'RE better than that.

[restorefreedom]

2. oh no! another "bernie can't deliver" opinion piece!

can we not see the writing on the wall?

he wrote a piece in 2014 called "why democrats need hilary clinton in 2016"

WE ARE ON OUR OWN, people. the establishment has decided for us who our next leader should be, and they're going to do everything they can to protect their interests. We are on our own. We have to get the vote out, we have to get people to understand the progressive message, and we have to convince people that we can remove the corporate stranglehold over our politicians and our politics . But we're not gonna get any help from establishment hacks or so called neutral third-partys. There's a reason the corporate stranglehold has been in power for so long. This is going to be a hell of a fight.

[reformist2]

27. Yep, they're going to keep singing that song until the convention.

[artislife]

60. ^^ this nt

[sorechasm]

78. We don't select Presidents by Turning over Key Leaves, Tea Leaves, or the Lady of the Lake.

His methods were quite subjective (Bernie is not Charismatic, Hillary would win if she had no opponent, etc.)

This is the 21st Century.

[LWolf]

3. No it's not.

If Bernie secures the nomination, he wins the GE. He gets the Democratic vote, and more independent and other crossover votes than any other Dem primary candidate.

If Bernie secures the nomination, he has some incredible coat-tails.

Lichtman should have been listening to Bernie explain how to energize, motivate, and get voters to the polls yesterday in NH.

Edited to add this, because what I already posted doesn't really address your concern.

Bernie is an outlier. Lichtman's system doesn't work on him.

This happens regularly to systems that have worked for a certain period of time: introduce factors that don't follow the norm, and the system doesn't work as well as it did previously.

I'm watching this happen to a colleague of mine right now. He's had a system that worked for him for about 6 years. He's completely invested in this system.

Along come some significant changes, and his system isn't working. He's tearing his hair out, trying to force these new factors into the system, instead of adjusting the system to suit. He's a smart guy, so I know he'll get it done eventually. For now, though...his results are not as good as he's used to getting.

[yeoman6987]

5. How do you explain his 100 percent prediction since 1980?

[LWolf]

7. I don't explain anything about Lichtman, but

I did add some to my response while you were typing yours.

[yeoman6987]

8. Great points in follow up. Thanks!

[Hortensis]

83. I'm sure Lichtman is redoubtable, but the people are restless

and change is in the air. I wonder, and I wonder if he does too. If he's wondering not so much, he's weighting the "system" stronger at this point.

BTW, for perspective, at least my version, a system as a stabilizing force, even if keeping us from accomplishing all we would wish this election, is not an entirely bad thing. A ship of state needs ballast.

[bigdarryl]

13. He's a historian on the Presidents on there past performances

While in the WH leading up to reelection.He even predicted Gore would win the popular vote in 2000 at that time he had the Democrats down 5 keys one short of defeat and of.coarse he did win the popular vote by 500,000 votes

[cali]

24. he's hardly singular in that.

[marlakay]

31. Times are different

More than any other election, you can tell on both sides with Trump and Bernie people are sick and tired of being fed lie after lie by politicians just after money.

Bernie won't take money except from the people and Trump has his own.

In all those elections you talked about was there even one candidate who did it all this way?

[reformist2]

43. Your observation about Trump and Bernie's funding is so interesting!

Trump's is a self-funded campaign, no reliance on others - how Republican!

Bernie's is a campaign that depends on small donations from thousands and thousands of people - how Democratic!

[bigdarryl]

6. You should read his key system because what your talking about doesn't matter

It's all about the performance of the incumbent party in the WH it doesn't matter what Bernie or Hillary for that matter do in a campaign and talk issues.

[LWolf]

10. I think that's exactly what I was referring to.

His system is "all about" one or more factors, and works...until factors change.

It doesn't have to be about individual candidates. It's more about the electorate than it is about the candidates. The electorate is a factor in elections, whether they are included in someone's system or not. When the electorate changes, when the perceptions and motivations of the electorate changes, the results are going to change.

[restorefreedom]

34. very well said.

and let me add "neiner neiner" to lichtman and his pro hillary slant

[redstateblues]

65. I love how you come up with your predictions

about winning independents and your "incredible coat-tails". It's nice to blow sunshine but where is your data to back up your predictions? At least the guy has a system- I'd like to hear a candidate with a plan to win back the state houses. Taking back control of the voting process is the only way we get rid of voter suppression. It doesn't matter which Dem wins the GE as long as the Rs control either the House or the Senate.

[LWolf]

85. You are partially correct

in that I didn't spend the time collecting the data for you; I was lazy. I figured since it's been all over DU in various forms I'd skip that step.

I'm not going to apologize, though, because I DID get my paper finished and submitted for a current class I'm taking, and now I'm going to work.

I'm sure if you really wanted to see it, you'd have noticed it yourself.

[highprincipleswork]

9. of course he didn't mention if Hillary were to be nominated, did he?

[DCBob]

11. So is he saying Hillary is better?

I dont get the key stuff??

[cali]

19. the key stuff is just bizarre bull.

[MineralMan]

12. I disagree. If Bernie Sanders can muster enough support

to win the nomination, he will have an excellent chance of winning in the general election. Most Democrats, including myself, will be in full support of the Democratic nominee, whoever it ends up being.

[bigdarryl]

17. It's about the delegates a candidate has to secure

One fith of the delegates on the first try on the nomination process if not the nomination key will be false even if Hillary or Bernie even Biden gets the nomination

[MineralMan]

20. I have no idea about "keys."

I understand the delegate selection process, though, from long experience in the Democratic Party. That process has been developed over a long period, in its own democratic process.

[reformist2]

38. Allan came up with a "model" that uses 13 or so "keys" to getting the nomination.

I guess if your candidate has enough of these "keys", then they are guaranteed to win the election, at least based on the historical record. One of these keys is that the nomination is not challenged, apparently. If it isn't a coronation/cakewalk, then we don't get that key. So sad.

[liberal_at_heart]

14. Holy shit you're right. I better switch my vote right away. You have shown me the light.

[John Poet]

16. Hillary would also be in trouble,

if there is a prolonged contest with Sanders, is what he doesn't say here--- although that is the basis of that particular "key"-- whether or not there is a prolonged contest for the nomination in the incumbent party.

[bigdarryl]

21. Yep its like for instance 1968 during the democratic party convention

With the riots the dems came out of that convention fractured even though.McGovern was the eventual nominee.Another historical.pattern is in Carters reelection Kennedy challenged Carter for the nomination even though Carter won he was defeated in the general.That why we ended up with the Reagan democrats they were so fed up with the Democrats that they switched to vote for Reagan for change

[merrily]

30. .

http://www.democraticunderground.com/128046511 (In politics, the conventional political wisdom may be neiither conventional nor wisdom: Discuss.)


Those anti-democratic, Democratic Party line memes just don't stand up to examination, bro.

[Roy Ellefson]

42. McGovern was not the nominee in '68

Humphrey was the nominee in '68...McGovern was '72.

[merrily]

70. The only thing that matters is coming to the conclusion that Hillary must be the nominee.

How one gets there is immaterial.

For some posters, anyway.

[Roy Ellefson]

87. yep

sure seems that way

[cali]

18. wow. what a load of shit. he says that a third party challenge against the dems

is undecided and that's one of his keys. He also says a military victory by the incumbent is necessary before the election and that that is one of the keys.

Fuck that shit to Hell.

[restorefreedom]

35. i can't improve on this. nt

[Fawke Em]

22. .

[merrily]

29. !

[restorefreedom]

36. lo freakin l! nt

[Pope Sweet Jesus]

55. !

[sadoldgirl]

25. Sorry,but I think that there is

a strong social unrest in the country, which he
seems to deny. The fact that the usual politicians
don't fare too well proves it.

He only started this 13 point analysis in 1980. There
are other indicators though that say that every
80 - 100 years this country goes through a semi-
revolution. Last time it happened with FDR in
the thirties.
Should Bernie lose, I guarantee that within
2-4 years people will be out on the streets
to demand radical change. Unfortunately
mother Nature may not be able to wait that
long.

[bigdarryl]

32. Social unrest is riots in the streets like in the 1960,s

That's the criteria.You haven't read his book obviously

[liberal_at_heart]

33. He needs to get with the times. Today social unrest means social media.

Do you know how I found out about Bernie Sanders? I found about Bernie Sanders from my then 19 year old daughter who said she had read some stuff about Bernie Sanders on Reddit. The Democratic establishment is trying to stifle his campaign by limiting his access to traditional media such as prime time debates, but his message is getting through anyway by social media and by word of mouth. Social media is also seriously challenging Citizens United. Millions of people are donating and funding campaigns now.

[artislife]

63. Terrific that you are willing to learn from your daughter

That is totally cool and ...open! To add, I learned about Bernie through Air America all those years ago when it was on the air...then a mention here and there through the years. But I started to get posts to my wall with his quotes from one or two people, then a few more...now the deluge. I don't get any other politician from my fb friends.

[merrily]

28. Bernie has a much better chance of winning the general than does Hillary.

[restorefreedom]

37. way better. but shhhh its a secret......nt

[merrily]

47. I don't know why it's a secret. I've been posting it for months.

[restorefreedom]

48. willful ignorance. nt

[merrily]

49. Ah, I always forget about that one, given that I am always struggling for more info.

No matter how cynical you get, it is impossible to keep up.

Lily Tomlin

[restorefreedom]

50. LT ...a wise woman. nt

[merrily]

51. And gifted and funny. I adore her.

Every time I would post about being cynical, the late, great Jackpine Radical would reply to me with that quote. He was so special.

[Warren DeMontague]

68. beltway conventional wisdom experts say no, the all powerful values voter will determine who wins

also the big issues will be the Louisiana purchase and the question of whether or not to go to war with Spain over Cuba.

[merrily]

69. In politics,

the conventional wisdom may be neither conventional nor wisdom: Discuss. http://www.democraticunderground.com/128046511



I understand you have decided to join the most evil cult group in the world, Bernie's supporters. The poobah of the DU chapter has asked me to welcome you and teach you the secret handshake.

[Warren DeMontague]

72. I'm not what you'd call much of a joiner, but yes. I am supporting Sen. Sanders for the nomination,

As of now.

I even put together a tastefully subdued "Steal Your Bern" avatar, there.

So thanks!

[merrily]

75. You're welcome. Happy to be on the same side.

"As of now."

I favor subdued avatars as well. That's why I chose mine.

[cherokeeprogressive]

39. EVERYONE has a perfect record predicting presidential races...

Until they're wrong.

[reformist2]

66. That's why if you come up with a "system," people think you have an edge, lol.

[Rosa Luxemburg]

41. This is a very different election

we have never known this before so all the keys are out of sync with what is going to happen.

[unblock]

59. they say that just about every election cycle

only when a rather popular president is running for re-election do people feel confident in the result. otherwise, people can always find a reason to think "this time is different".

[Gothmog]

44. Lichtman is an interesting scholar

I have been following his work for some time

[Rosa Luxemburg]

46. Yes

he was in our living room - when he ran in the election some years ago.

[jfern]

45. His key system is a joke

His system says incumbent party wins with 8 or more of the 13 keys.
Ford almost won re-election with just 5.
Humphrey almost won with just 5.
Nixon almost won in 1960 with just 4.
Wilson came extremely close to losing in 1916 with 10.
The Republicans retained the White House in 1876 with just 4 keys, but Litchman counts the popular vote, which they lost.

[reformist2]

52. When you come up with a "model", no matter how hokey, you gain credibility. ;)

I actually bothered to look at it, and it's so arbitrary and subjective as to be basically worthless.

[unblock]

61. his model isn't designed to determine closeness.

closeness has nothing to do with it.

[jfern]

64. If it was any good, it would be close for the close calls

[unblock]

79. that may be your intuition, but it simply doesn't apply to this sort of model.

had he wanted to design a model to predict the *size* of victory of one side or another, the model would have been very different.

there is certainly merit to the idea of ignoring the size of the victory, because, technically, it doesn't matter. coattails matter to congress, and that's usually strongly linked to the size of the presidential victory, but in terms of the presidential race itself, technically it doesn't really matter.

[merrily]

73. The incumbent advantage is huge, so the 8 key bit is very conservative.

Also, Nixon was a war time incumbent. A war time incumbent has never been voted out of office in the history of the US.

That could be one of the reasons we now require never ending war. The less change there is, the better financial markets like it. At least, that was the theory of Professor Carroll Quigley, whom Bill Clinton cited as one of his biggest influences, right up there with LBJ.

It will be interesting to see if a never ending war time incumbent gets voted out.

[GusFring]

54. U need someone to tell u a socialist cant win any southern or midwestern states?

I thought this was common knowledge

[merrily]

71. That's neither common nor knowledge.

It was once common knowledge Obama could not win either the nomination or the general. More recently, it was common knowledge that no one outside Vermont was going to be interested in Sanders--and maybe Hillary would take Vermont too.

We'll just have to see how it plays out.

[GusFring]

80. Bernie Sanders is not Barack Obama. You guys are going to mess around

and secure a conservative supreme Court forbthe next 20yrs.

[merrily]

82. Neither is Hillary. And?

The point is not that Sanders is Obama. He is not. Duh. The point is that "common knowledge" often turns out to have been bs.

[RBInMaine]

56. Obama ALREADY has TWO major foreign policy wins: Iran and Cuba. Especially Iran.

Are you telling me the Iran international peace accord isn't a major foreign policy victory? Of course it is. As well as re-opening Cuba. That key is WON.

[bigdarryl]

84. Yeah that's the only thing I disagree with Lichtman on

[RBInMaine]

57. Sanders will not mount a third party challenge. He will support the Dem nominee.

[unblock]

58. the basic idea is if the country is in a mood for a change, the white house switches parties.

the presidency can certainly go from one democrat to another, but generally this happens only when the country is happy with the status quo.

a major primary challenge in the incumbent party, and/or a significant third-party challenger are both signs of discontent with the status quo and those are two of lichtman's keys.

by this theory, sanders and/or biden are problems from the democrats only because it's clear that clinton isn't giving up without a fight, so the only path to an easy primary for democrats is if hillary wins.

mind you, this is only one key, but lichtman's model has us pretty close.

[Warren DeMontague]

67. well if Allan Lichtman says so, I guess that means now we know how Allan Lichtman feels about it.

....who's Allan Lichtman?

[reformist2]

74. Political scientist, extraordinaire, whose unquestioned model shall go unquestioned.

[gateley]

76. Was he saying Bernie would be gone in a week and Trump wouldn't last

longer than two?

This one seems to stump the "experts".

[HassleCat]

81. Sanders would do well in the general

Progressive politics can bring in independents and even Republicans. It happened before, a long time ago, but it happened.

[GeorgeGist]

86. Bad keys?

7. Policy change: The incumbent administration effects major changes in national policy. (2016 -- FALSE)
ACA doesn't count?

12. Incumbent charisma: The incumbent party candidate is charismatic or a national hero. (2016 -- FALSE)
Sanders isn't charismatic?

[bigdarryl]

88. I disagree with him on key 7 in fact I'm goting to e-mail him as to why he's not giving that key to

The President To say that the Iranian nuclear deal isn't major change is crazy.It's the first time in 30 some years we have negotiated a deal with them. Also what about the opening of negotiations on Cuba.Allan is saying that a deal with other nations on climate change would secure the key.

[emsimon33]

89. Interesting

[DisgustipatedinCA]

90. I'll match my socialist against their psychopath any day of the week. Next.