History shows Hillary unlikely to win

[pbrower2a]

The White House is a metronome in one very important way.

Since the 1928 election, the following trend has been consistent.

Parties peak, and slowly lose power until the other party takes over, and peaks and slowly loses power.

Even when one party won many elections in a row, it followed this pattern.

So Truman in 1948 won less votes then FDR in 1944, who won less votes than he did in 1940, who won less votes in 1936. Papa Bush got less votes in 1988 than Reagan did in 1984.

There can always be an exception, but it seems to be a mistake to assume that an exception is the likeliest outcome.

One pattern was that incumbents either add to their popular and electoral vote totals or lose altogether. President Obama did neither in 2012.

I got caught by one of the 'rules' that I discovered: I found a hole in the electoral results of elections from 1900 to 2008 in which the winner of the Presidential election got either more than 65% (McKinley)  of the electoral vote or less than 57% even if the mean was almost in the middle. I figured that the nominees projecting to win 40% of the electoral vote would either take desperate efforts to win and likely fail even to hold onto some of what he had (think of McCain in 2008) or make the vote much closer (the Ford charge in 1976).  Someone projecting to win 30% or so of the electoral vote was going to have a lackluster campaign; someone close was not going to gamble big on high-risk plays.

The 2012 Presidential election fit very well into the 'void' that proved non-existent. Had Romney won Florida, ny theory would have held.    

[pbrower2a]

(Modified to fit 2016):

Never-Wrong Pundit Pick(ed) Obama to Win in 2012

fromhttp://www.usnews.com/news/blogs/washington-whispers/2011/08/30/never-wrong-pundit-picks-obama-to-win-in-2012



“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.

Lichtman’s prediction helps to explain a quirk in some polling that finds that while Americans disapprove of the president, they still think he will win re-election. ...


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.”

Lichtman’s earned quite the reputation. In 1992, it seemed likely former President George H.W. Bush would be re-elected, having reached historic highs in popularity after he launched a war that pushed Iraqi troops out of Kuwait. But Lichtman thought otherwise and that factored into former Arkansas Gov. Bill Clinton’s decision to challenge Bush.“I got a call from this woman with a thick southern drawl. It was Clinton’s special assistant. She wanted to know if it was true that a Democrat could win. I assured her it was and I sent Clinton a copy of my book and a memo and the rest is history.” [See photos of the Obamas behind the scenes.]

In 2005, Lichtman also hit a home run when he said that the political stage was looking so bad for Republicans that Democrats could pick a name out of the phone book and win in 2008, the year a little known first-term senator became the first African-American to win the presidency.

Below are each of the keys and how it falls for Obama Hillary Clinton.

Party mandate: After the midterm elections, the incumbent party holds more seats in the U.S. House of Representatives than it did after the previous midterm elections.

Definite failure for any Democrat.


Contest: There is no serious contest for the incumbent party nomination. Says Lichtman on Obama’s unchallenged status, “I never thought there would be any serious contest against Barack Obama in the Democratic primary.” Obama (Clinton probably) wins this key.


Incumbency: The incumbent party candidate is the sitting president.

Definitely not.

Third Party: There is no significant third party challenge. Obama wins this point. If there will be a significant Third Party it will be a challenge to the GOP.


Short term economy: The economy is not in recession during the election campaign. Here Lichtman declares an “undecided.”

So would I.


Long-term economy: Real per capita economic growth during the term equals or exceeds mean growth during the previous two terms.

Too early to tell.

Policy change: The incumbent administration effects major changes in national policy. “There have been major policy changes in this administration. We’ve seen the biggest stimulus in history and an complete overhaul of the healthcare system so I gave him policy change,” says the scholar.

Not likely.

Social unrest: There is no sustained social unrest during the term. Says Lichtman, “There wasn’t any social unrest when I made my predictions for 2012 and there still isn’t.”

Not happening, so a plus.

Scandal: The incumbent administration is untainted by major scandal. “This administration has been squeaky clean. There’s nothing on scandal,” says Lichtman. Another Obama win.
Foreign/military failure: The incumbent administration suffers no major failure in foreign or military affairs. Says Lichtman, “We haven’t seen any major failure that resembles something like the Bay of Pigs and don’t foresee anything.” Obama (Clinton likely) wins again.

Foreign/military success: The incumbent administration achieves a major success in foreign or military affairs. “Since Osama bin Laden was found and killed, I think Obama has achieved military success.” Obama wins his eighth key.

Obama has time to make this happen this time. If he must cut a deal with Iran to smash ISIS, then he will. Just not yet.

Incumbent charisma: The incumbent party candidate is charismatic or a national hero. Explains Lichtman, “I did not give President Obama the incumbent charisma key. I counted it against him. He’s really led from behind. He didn’t really take the lead in the healthcare debate, he didn’t use his speaking ability to move the American people during the recession. He’s lost his ability to connect since the 2008 election.” Obama loses this key. [See political cartoons about President Obama.]

Hillary Clinton seems to have charisma.

Challenger charisma: The challenging party candidate is not charismatic or a national hero. Says Lichtman, “We haven’t seen any candidate in the GOP who meets this criteria and probably won’t.” Obama wins, bringing his total to nine keys, three more than needed to win reelection.

No Republican offers charisma, and no Republican is a national hero.

Six positives; seven wins.