Guess Who Wins the Presidency According to School With 100% Prediction History

[tecelote]

Western Illinois University, home of the Fighting Leathernecks, has been engaging with political prediction polls for decades. And since 1975, the school has managed to accurately predict the winner of every single Presidential election in a statistic that is likely to make even Nate Silver jealous.

So with the newest installment tallied and in the books, who does Western Illinois University believe will be taking the stage to declare victory the night of November 8th, 2016?

None other than President-Elect Bernie Sanders, with Vice Presidential candidate Martin O’Malley right by his side.

The students at the school have predicted that Sanders would defeat Hillary Clinton in 22 out of a possible 26 primary states.

More:
http://www.mediaite.com/print/guess-who-wins-the-presidency-according-to-school-with-100-prediction-history/

[UglyGreed]

1. Nice to hear!!!!

[VanillaRhapsody]

2. Well with ONLY an 8% chance....

better start hoping for the demise of HRC...

http://predictwise.com/

[Freddie Stubbs]

130. He's down to 7% now

http://predictwise.com/

[upaloopa]

3. This calls for a smilie

[tecelote]

5. Me too. A real big smile.

Western Illinois University, home of the Fighting Leathernecks, has been engaging with political prediction polls for decades.

Here's another bit of history.

November 4, 2008

Hillary 44%
Obama 22%

But what's real fun is to look at the trajectory:
http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2008/president/us/democratic_presidential_nomination-191.html

For those that don't like the site itself, here is Wikipedia:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nationwide_opinion_polling_for_the_Democratic_Party_2008_presidential_candidates

America doesn't need the pick of the oligarchy and corporate media.

America needs a President of the people, by the people, and for the people.

America for Americans.

[Codeine]

9. Control-V for Victory!!

Copypasta isn't as compelling as you think.

[Aerows]

24. Neither is Clinton. n/t

[Gothmog]

125. Thanks for the laughs

You do know that DNC rules call for proportional allocation of delegates and yet the article has Sanders winning 100% of the delegates in states where is not likely to get any delegates such as Texas (you need to get at least 15% to get any delegates).

[George II]

45. Smile? How about a guffaw?

[Freddie Stubbs]

4. They are predicting that Sanders will win Mississippi

Does any sane person think that this will happen?

[Fred Sanders]

11. No, no sane person, but unrequited love is insane.

[tecelote]

12. And since 1975.

And since 1975, the school has managed to accurately predict the winner of every single Presidential election...

Where does unrequited love come into this?

[Fred Sanders]

14. Just saying.......

http://www.cracked.com/article_20139_6-bizarre-factors-that-predict-every-presidential-election.html

I do not believe in mythology, but I sure do enjoy the telling of the elaborate yarns....who doesn't!?

[tecelote]

16. Cool

'Let me know who they're predicting.

[bjobotts]

21. Just as long as it is a democrat but I prefer Bernie.

[mountain grammy]

49. Love the Oscars one..

[happyslug]

31. This is the PRIMARY, thus excludes right wingers...

Furthermore, if you are in a state dominated by one party, moderates tend to join that party and moderate it on the local level. Thus further end of the political spectrum tend to join the other party. Thus most liberals (and they are SOME in Mississippi) tend to be Democrats but moderates, who in other states would be Democrats, are members of the GOP in Mississippi.

What this leads in PRIMARIES, that the "Radicals" of the left and right in such states tend to dominate the minority party in such states. Thus while most Mississippians would vote for Hillary over Sanders, most DEMOCRATIC REGISTERED Mississippians will vote for Sanders over HIllary.

Now, the down side of this argument is the Rural Counties along the Mississippi River are overwhelming African American. African Americans tends, at the present time, to support Hillary over Sanders (just like they supported Obama over Hillary in 2008). How this will work out is anyone's guess, but do NOT count Sanders out of willing the DEMOCRATIC Primary in Mississippi.

[Freddie Stubbs]

123. No, they are actually predicting that Sanders will carry the state in the General Election:

http://wiumpe.com/

[Scootaloo]

79. And that Republicans will take Hawaii.

I was left scratching my head at these results.

[NuclearDem]

6. Sanders wins Oklahoma but loses Illinois?

[madokie]

105. I'm here in OK

and I hear a lot of republicCONs say they'll vote for Bernie because he is saying what they want to hear. I've yet to hear anyone say they'll vote for Hillary, in fact when her name comes up all I hear is I don't trust her and damn sure won't vote for her. This is on the ground here in Oklahoma where I'm hearing and seeing this.
Personally I'll vote for our nominee no matter who it is

I hear no more bushes, no more Clinton's and Carson is a Nut and a hearty laugh when tRumps name is mentioned. None of the other clown car occupants even rate a mention around here.

[1StrongBlackMan]

7. No mention of the school's predictive methodology ...

Should probably give one pause.

Unless of course, the results are what you want to hear.

[Hiraeth]

10. Did you make this same comment in '08 or '12?

[1StrongBlackMan]

19. I don't recall the post being posted in '08 or '12 ...

But that said ... If you read of my posts on polling, you would probably discern that I am big on methodology. In fact, I do not (well, rarely) comment on polling that does not link to the poll ... So yeah! If this had been posted in '08 or '12, sans methodology ... and I had seen it ... I would have raised the lack of methodology.

[Hiraeth]

50. I truly doubt that. I really believe if you are THAT interested, you would research it for yourself.

You just don't come across as that interested.

You just think it sounds smart to question the methodology this time around because you don't care for the results.

Pretty sure the same methodology was used all three times. I wouldn't think that would change a methodology that has worked all the other times.

[1StrongBlackMan]

76. Once again a segment of DU, substitutes what they "truly doubt/believe" for what is ...

I must say ... that must be quite the gift!

I did a bit of research and only came up with there findings, which led me to this:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1251&pid=791205 (See: the South Carolina line ... their model comes up with a 1/3, 2/3 split in favor of Bernie; whereas, the polling has HRC up by 50+ points)

That is reason to be suspect.

Pretty sure the same methodology was used all three times. I wouldn't think that would change a methodology that has worked all the other times.

That may be true ... but a google search of: "Western Illinois University Mock Election + Methodology"

Resulted in: Nothing of use ... the one promising hit was this:

http://thebernreport.com/bernie-sanders-wins-wius-accurate-mock-election/

And when one clicks on "Read about their methodology and results here", one finds the findings; but, not a word on the methodology.

How hard must one work?

[Gothmog]

126. DNC rules call for proportional allocation unless a candidate fails to get 15% in district or state

I doubt that Sanders will get many if any delegates in Texas and this article has Sanders getting 177 delegates out of 228. Sanders is polling horrible in Texas and there is a chance that Sanders will only break 15% level in a couple of urban districts.

[LonePirate]

13. The predictive methodology is certainly questionable given that unorthodox map.

Anybody can come up with a model that gives the Dem candidate the win in the GE. The details and supporting numbers can vary widely and these details make this model an outlier to say the least. There is no way the Repub ticket is Bush/Rubio (no way two mainstreamers from the same state are on the ticket). The Libertarian candidate is not getting 10%. IL, MD and PA will be solidly blue. MS, SC and TN will be solidly red. The details in this model are headscratchers to say the least and make the entire model suspect apart from a final prediction of the Dem candidate winning.

[Fred Sanders]

15. Here are 6 more "predictive models" that have "predicted" many Presidential races:

http://www.cracked.com/article_20139_6-bizarre-factors-that-predict-every-presidential-election.html

[1StrongBlackMan]

23. What ... I was expecting chicken bones and toad entrails ...

and a Priestess named, Madam Rita!

[1StrongBlackMan]

20. You found the details of the model? Where? n/t

[1StrongBlackMan]

41. This ...

http://www.scribd.com/doc/287497355/Democratic-National-Convention-Official-Results

Has me more than skeptical about the methodology (See: South Carolina)

[JTFrog]

35. Hey, they have a promo video...

http://wiumpe.com/

Dr. Rick Hardy and Dr. John Hemingway have been leading Mock Presidential Elections since 1975. During that time, students who have participated in these mock elections have chosen the winning party with 100% accuracy and have an astonishing record in selecting presidential winners.

The promo video is on the right side of the page starring Jeb Bush.

Not much history though.

[Major Hogwash]

80. Because 35 years of being right is not good enough!

[1StrongBlackMan]

82. Uhmm ... No, it's not ...

http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1251&pid=790827

[prayin4rain]

8. Interesting. I'd be happy with Hillary or Bernie, so that's great news to me! n/t

[Orrex]

17. Of course, this assumes that he'll win the primary

Hardly a done deal regardless of their track record.


Once the primary is over, I suspect that they'll update their projection to show Clinton as the next president, and they'll claim that their prognostication streak is unbroken.

[MohRokTah]

18. They've never predicted any presidential race correctlly.

I'll stick with statistical accuracy from 538, thankyouverymuch.

[ornotna]

25. You must have missed this

And since 1975, the school has managed to accurately predict the winner of every single Presidential election in a statistic that is likely to make even Nate Silver jealous.

[MohRokTah]

32. That is an outright lie.

The presidents who win never win the states this college predicts. They've never been accurate.

[ornotna]

37. Yeah, sure. Whatever you say

"Western's MPE may be the most accurate political bellwether in the country. In 2007, Western students accurately elected Democrat Barack Obama president of the United States—one year before it actually happened. In 2011, WIU students accurately predicted a narrow Obama reelection over the Republican ticket of Governor Mitt Romney and Congressman Paul Ryan," WIU Centennial Honors College Director Richard Hardy explained. "Once again, this year, students from every college at Western and virtually every school and department on campus participated by helping to organize the MPE and attending the sessions. The MPE not only showed them the importance of civic engagement, but also provided them with an in-depth understanding of how the entire presidential election process works."

http://www.wiu.edu/news/newsrelease.php?release_id=13059

[JTFrog]

36. No that is not accurate... From their own website....

http://wiumpe.com/

Dr. Rick Hardy and Dr. John Hemingway have been leading Mock Presidential Elections since 1975. During that time, students who have participated in these mock elections have chosen the winning party with 100% accuracy and have an astonishing record in selecting presidential winners.

[ornotna]

38. And the post I was replying to

Do you think it was inaccurate as well?

[JTFrog]

39. I was replying to you. n/t

[ornotna]

40. And I'm replying to you

I asked you a question.

[humbled_opinion]

22. The potential is exhilarating ...

I too think that many Democratic voters will in the end rationalize Bernie as the better more trustworthy candidate and the one that can win in the GE. Hillary camp will claim they have momentum and polls on their side but where the rubber meets the road they have to admit the flaws in the character of their chosen one.

[JTFrog]

26. Democrats. They have a 100% prediction history of picking the WINNING PARTY. n/t

[sabrina 1]

27. The PEOPLE support BErnie, not the Establshment!

[MohRokTah]

33. Actually, that's not true.

Every poll shows the PEOPLE's support for Sanders is lacking and the PEOPLE really give much more support to Hillary.

[sabrina 1]

34. Lol, okay, keep on thinking that. I guess the scientific polls that only poll people over 50

with landlines, registered Dems know more than those who are in the real world. It's good though, just as they are shocked and 'puzzled' as Chuck Todd said about Bernie's amazing success, being out of touch with the people makes it easier to keep on signing up all those new voters for Bernie.

[MohRokTah]

59. Poll denial is a right wing trait

We saw it in all its glory during the 2012 election.

[Fearless]

84. It's also a Hillary supporter trait

Which we saw in all its glory for more than a month after she already lost last time.

[MohRokTah]

85. Um, no. eom

[Fearless]

92. Except yes

[MohRokTah]

93. Only it's still no. eom

[Fearless]

95. No it's not.

[MohRokTah]

96. Correct, it is no. Thanks for agreeing. eom

[Fearless]

97. Seriously? Are you twelve?

[MohRokTah]

98. Seriously? Are you eight?

[Fearless]

100. Are you drunk?

[MohRokTah]

101. Are you?

[Fearless]

102. No actually, I don't drink.

You are literally trying to have the argument of a seven year old. I have no desire to banter with a seven year old. IF you find something you'd actually like to discuss, give it a shot, otherwise, just stop. The immaturity is making us all look like fools.

[MohRokTah]

103. Neither do I.

You are attempting to have the argument of a kindergartner. I have no desire to converse with somebody who quite possibly missed their afternoon nap. IF you have something to discuss, give it a shot. Otherwise just stop, the immaturity is making us all look like fools.

[Fearless]

104. You are the person who is acting like a child.

I post coherent arguments and you go "nuh-uh" and plug your ears.

Just go away.

[MohRokTah]

108. You initiated childishness.

Who are you to tell me to go away?

[Fearless]

110. You responded to my coherent post with nonsensical clamoring.

Do you have something worthwhile to say or not?

[MohRokTah]

112. You have just described precisely what you did.

[Fearless]

113. You can keep kicking this thread to the top all you want.

You've yet to say anything useful, but the OP is getting great exposure.

[MohRokTah]

114. Good!

I love it when OPs that quote absurd articles that are meaningless in support of the candidate with zero chance of winning get more exposure.

[Fearless]

116. I bet it felt good when Obama dismantled Hillary in the primary in 08.

[MohRokTah]

117. Cool that you mentioned it!

I made my first donation to the Obama campaign on February 10, 2007.

Had Barack Obama not announced that day and decided instead to sit it out, my support and donations would have gone to Hillary Clinton. Their views were so similar that my choice became one of personal necessity rather than anything else. I have familial connections to the Obamas.

Supporting Hillary this year feels like I'm supporting a third term for the best and most liberal president of my lifetime.

[Fearless]

118. So you were AGAINST Hillary in 2008?

[MohRokTah]

119. Did you even read my post?

[Fearless]

120. Yes. So you were against Hillary in 2008?

[MohRokTah]

121. No. i wasn't.

I was FOR Barack Obama.

One stance does not require the other.

[Fearless]

122. It literally does actually. You voted for Obama

You voted against Hillary whether you like it or not.

[tecelote]

43. Corporate owned media.

Bumper stickers, t-shirts and yard signs show overwhelming support for Bernie. Go look for yourself.

BTW - you can't trust everything you hear on the TV.

[MohRokTah]

60. ROFL!!!!!!

Those were the reasons Romney was going to win in 2012!!!!!

[tecelote]

62. Good unsubstantiated remark!

[MohRokTah]

63. Sanders supporters seem to hate the truth.

Much like their candidate.

[tecelote]

66. Good slam.

Got me thinking of voting for Hil now, for sure.

[redstateblues]

107. That settles it. Everybody I knew voted for McGovern

and Nixon won-How was that possible?

[SheilaT]

55. Polls also show that Hillary is widely disliked and distrusted,

even by the people who say they'd vote for her. Polls also show Sanders doing better head-to-head against specific Republicans.

[MohRokTah]

61. Sanders can't run if he's not nominated.

[SheilaT]

73. And someone can't win if 60% of the Democrats themselves distrust her.

Keep in mind that at this point in 2007 Hillary was also Inevitable. Want to review what happened, and why she's not currently finishing out her second term?

[DemocratSinceBirth]

94. Citation, please

Citation, please

And someone can't win if 60% of the Democrats themselves distrust her.

Thank you in advance.

You actually have the numbers backwards:

https://d25d2506sfb94s.cloudfront.net/cumulus_uploads/document/f5io906oik/econTabReport.pdf

pg. 116

Why would you make a statement that is demonstrably untrue and why should I ignore the admonition: "Falsus in uno, falsus in omnibus" ?

[NorthCarolina]

67. The French Aristocracy never saw it coming either. eom

[MohRokTah]

71. .

[Major Hogwash]

81. Fuck no, they lost their heads over it.

[Action_Patrol]

28. Where's the results from before 2007?

I see nothing anywhere before that.
http://www.wiu.edu/news/newsrelease.php?release_id=12957

Press release from the school only mentions 2007 and getting anything right for the last two elections (that being a school in Illinois picking Obama as winning).

Can you find any other data?

[katmille]

29. That's like 6 presidents

And Reagan, Clinton, W Bush were incumbents. Not really that unpredictable. I think my son's elementary has as good a record.

[George II]

48. Good observation. ..and pssst...there wasn't an election in 1975!

[Hiraeth]

52. No but, there was one in '76 and the outcome was predicted in '75.

Jesus but, you are derpy.

[George II]

54. You calling Jesus "derpy"?

[Hiraeth]

56. LOL ... dodge is more than just a car.

this place is a hoot.

[Dem2]

30. Awesome!

It will indeed be something to be in awe over if Bernie wins. I predict Hillary will win, but I like Bernie on several issues over Hillary, so it would be quite the election if he could pull it off.

[patsimp]

42. I notice so many of these types of predications only to see them be wrong

and then no one ever mentions the accuracy again.

[lame54]

44. They also predict Jeb to be their guy...

don't see that at all

[Freddie Stubbs]

129. Jeb keeps dropping in the polls

[George II]

46. Since 1975? Who was elected in 1975?

[Hiraeth]

51. This is 2015. See how that works. Think about it.

[tecelote]

58. As mentioned above by Hiraeth. The prediction was in 1975.

Guess which election it was for?

[yallerdawg]

47. When you just can't get enough BS!

https://www.facebook.com/wiumpe/

[Hepburn]

53. Great to hear!

I do like that ticket and would totally support it!

[AzDar]

57. We said "NO" to Hillary in '08. She obviously didn't get the message, so we'll have to speak

more clearly this time:
Hill, don't go away mad...just go away!

[Z_California]

64. Well, they didn't pick the correct party in 2000

I mean they picked the party that successfully STOLE the election, but not the party that actually WON the election.

[tecelote]

69. Good point!

[Mnemosyne]

65. Very weird. I don't usually click to see votes, but when I did just now, it said 0 recs went back

and clicked again twice and the fourth try it finally said 57, jumped from 50 that I first saw.

Just a weird glitch I noticed.

Oh, interesting info about their predictions.

[relayerbob]

68. Running against Bush?

That alone destroys the credibility of this. Additionally, I rather suspect that a run-off between Clinton and Bush would result in much the same result.

[Action_Patrol]

70. Incredibly misleading headline.

Surprised so many sites are running with this.
They held their first mock election in 1975. Predicting Carter over Ford in a Government Affairs Class of 400 people.

It doesn't look like there was another mock election until 2007.

http://westerncourier.com/10924/news/students-predict-election-results/

I can't find anything other than the 3 elections from '75, '07 and '11.

[Ed Suspicious]

86. It's just a fun experiment. Relax.

[restorefreedom]

72. hell yeah

sanders/om or om/sanders. what an awesome progressive ticket, either one!

[tecelote]

74. Agreed.

America would have hope again.

[restorefreedom]

75. much needed hope. nt

[red dog 1]

77. While I do recommend this post, and I do hope Bernie does become POTUS,

I'm very doubtful about these Western Illinois University's predictions.

I don't see Jeb Bush getting the Republican nomination; his campaign is in disarray right now

Donald Trump and that idiot Ben Carson are far ahead of all the other GOP contenders.and either one of them has a much better chance of getting the GOP nomination than Bush.

As far as Bernie Sanders goes, I support him and have contributed to his campaign. however, unless the polls change drastically, my guess is that Hillary will likely win the nomination.

If she does become the Democratic nominee, picking Bernie as her running mate would "unite" the Democratic Party.

IMO, If she wins, and picks someone other than Bernie as her running mate, the Democratic Party would be split, and the Republicans would probably win the November 2016 election, regardless of who the GOP nominee is.

[Live and Learn]

78. K&R nt

[MynameisBlarney]

83. I posted the same thing yesterday

[CanonRay]

87. Western Illinois University Class of '73

and a Political Science grad, no less. They didn't do the survey when I was there, however, I think it started in 1975.

[avaistheone1]

88. k&r

[TBF]

89. Sanders/O'Malley has a ring to it -

I'd love to see a VP from midwest or west to balance the ticket, but O'Malley is young and has been a governor which makes him a very attractive VP candidate.

[heaven05]

90. we will see

yep, that we will.

[Lunabell]

91. Yikes!

We still have work to do to make sure this is the reality!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

[merrily]

106. Let me guess:

[redstateblues]

109. Party on Bernistas!

Who cares if it's real- if it makes you feel good for a while believe it.

[merrily]

111. My guessing that Sanders won this poll = what in your mind, now?

[WillyT]

115. HUGE K & R !!! - Thank You !!!

[Gothmog]

124. The idiots who did this mock election do not understand the rules for awarding Delegates

Under the rules for the Democratic Party, delegates are awarded proportionately. This silly but ignorant poll has Sanders winning 100% of the delegates in most states



The only way that a candidate can win 100% of the delegates in a state is if no other candidate gets 15% either in a district or statewide. The idiots who did this mock election do not understand the rules of the Democratic Primary

[Freddie Stubbs]

127. So, they think that Clinton will get less than 15% in Arkansas?

[Gothmog]

128. This poll/mock election is completely worthless

The idiots who conducted this poll think that sanders will get most of the Texas delegates. It is sanders who has to worry about not meeting the 15% threshold

[Derdog]

131. Lol

Remember?