Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

brooklynite

(94,535 posts)
Wed Jul 8, 2020, 11:03 PM Jul 2020

The following does not reflect the opinion of the management and staff of this station...

Trump Has 91 Percent Chance of Winning Reelection: Political Science Professor

President Donald Trump is almost certain to win reelection in 2020, according to a political science professor whose “Primary Model” has correctly predicted five out of six elections since 1996.

“The Primary Model gives Trump a 91 percent chance of winning in November,” Stony Brook Professor Helmut Norpoth told Mediaite Tuesday. He noted that his model, which he introduced in 1996, would have correctly predicted the outcome of all but two presidential elections in the last 108 years: “This model gets it right for 25 of the 27 elections since 1912, when primaries were introduced.”

The exceptions include John F. Kennedy’s election in 1960 and George W. Bush’s election in 2000, when Bush won a majority of the electoral college despite losing the popular vote.

Not only will Trump win, Norpoth’s model suggests, the president will expand his margin in the Electoral College from 304 electoral votes in 2016 to 362 in 2020. That would be nearly identical to the 365 electoral votes former President Barack Obama won in 2008.

https://www.mediaite.com/news/trump-has-91-percent-chance-of-winning-reelection-political-science-professor/
12 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies

Nevilledog

(51,097 posts)
1. And how does this model handle an ongoing pandemic and increasing racist rhetoric?
Wed Jul 8, 2020, 11:06 PM
Jul 2020

I don't buy it for a second.

 

Hoyt

(54,770 posts)
7. I agree. I've alerted on one post here, and it was one of mine that I
Wed Jul 8, 2020, 11:29 PM
Jul 2020

thought better of after an hour or so.

Obviously, there are some that deserve it, particularly threats or outright lies about Democrats. But, as long as we can comment in opposition, alerts should be rare.

Demsrule86

(68,565 posts)
5. He is a Trumper and a Fox guy...you do know this right?
Wed Jul 8, 2020, 11:25 PM
Jul 2020

Here is what he said after the 2017 elections..

"Hence when it comes to personal legacies, the Democrats who won governorships in Virginia and New Jersey this month owe a big thank you to the respective incumbent of their states. It was not just Trump. All in all, with local factors in play and no Democratic surge evident in Virginia and New Jersey, the recent elections were no catastrophe for Trump and the GOP, nor the beginning of a golden era for the Democratic Party.

Helmut Norpoth is professor of political science at Stony Brook Universty" And a Trumper!

JHB

(37,160 posts)
8. If models were god then most engineering disasters would never have happened
Wed Jul 8, 2020, 11:35 PM
Jul 2020

Architects and engineers make a lot of calculations (modeling) when designing things. It's relatively rare for them to simply be wrong.

What happens more often is that the assumptions of those models cease to reflect reality. Sometimes it's because the design pushes the envelope and factors that hadn't been major considerations in earlier designs manifest themselves in a bigger way than expected. Just ask "Galloping Girtie", the Tacoma Narrows Bridge.

The other most common reason is changes, intended or unintended, to the design specs. Substandard materials, construction crews using different techniques than were stipulated, etc.

In circumstances like that, reality falls outside the parameters used by the model. And when that happens, reality wins, the model loses, and things fall down.





fishwax

(29,149 posts)
11. Given that the model relies on early primary results, I'm not overly concerned
Thu Jul 9, 2020, 12:08 AM
Jul 2020

That's not to say the election is in the bag or that we should let up in any way. Stay vigilant, etc.

But there are enough exceptional circumstances to explain both the fact of Biden's poor performance in the early primaries (the hugely crowded field and the fact that there were more candidates jockeying for position in his lane as opposed to Sanders/Warren) and its significance (the general unity of cause among the party right now and trump's huge disapproval ratings overall) that I can't be feel too worried about a model that's organized around it.

There is a lot of time between now and the election, of course, and I suppose that anything could happen ... but for trump to get to 362 would take some pretty historic seismic events, even by 2020 standards.

PoindexterOglethorpe

(25,855 posts)
12. Let me just say this.
Thu Jul 9, 2020, 01:01 AM
Jul 2020

If Trump wins this election, there is clearly no point in researching countries to move to, as no one else will be willing to accept us. Instead, I'll be researching painless suicide.

Latest Discussions»General Discussion»The following does not re...