Congratulations, Alan Lichtman.

[Beet]

A seemingly random list of 13 arbitrary criteria he came up with decades ago has outperformed all scientific polling.

[○∙◄☻¥tπ[╪AV┼cVê└]

Still a total LOL when you apply it to the 1856 election.

[muon2]

Except that his system is designed to predict the popular vote winner, and right now Clinton is winning the PV.

[○∙◄☻¥tπ[╪AV┼cVê└]

Except that his system is designed to predict the popular vote winner, and right now Clinton is winning the PV.

Oh right, I forgot about that. He had Gore in 2000, and used it as a save. He can't have it both ways. And I think his system only gives like 4 keys for the incumbent Democrats in 1856.

[BlueSwan]

Except that his system is designed to predict the popular vote winner, and right now Clinton is winning the PV.

Oh right, I forgot about that. He had Gore in 2000, and used it as a save. He can't have it both ways. And I think his system only gives like 4 keys for the incumbent Democrats in 1856.

I'm sure he will find a way to somehow have it both ways, so that in 2020 he will again be called the "never-wrong" pundit.

[rafta_rafta]

Meh. It's an arbitrary set of criteria which happened to be a right  predictor.

[SWE]

His Trump prediction was based on the assumption that Johnson would poll more than 5%, which didn't happen. (Of course this also haw to take into account that he arbitrarily redefined the primary challenge key because he was uncomfortable with calling it for Trump)

[Nym90]

Except that his system is designed to predict the popular vote winner, and right now Clinton is winning the PV.

Yes, but since Johnson got under 5 percent of the vote, the third party key flips back to the Dems so he did predict a Clinton win.

[TheElectoralBoobyPrize]

His Trump prediction was based on the assumption that Johnson would poll more than 5%, which didn't happen. (Of course this also haw to take into account that he arbitrarily redefined the primary challenge key because he was uncomfortable with calling it for Trump)

And I still don't get this....he says in the book that the nominee has to have 2/3's of the delegates on the first ballot. Clinton didn't. She was close, but Carter in '80 was closer, and he still lost the key.

Interpreting the key according to his standards results in six negative keys for the Democrats.

[SteveRogers]

Except that his system is designed to predict the popular vote winner, and right now Clinton is winning the PV.

Yes, but since Johnson got under 5 percent of the vote, the third party key flips back to the Dems so he did predict a Clinton win.

Well, no, he didn't "predict" a Clinton win because you can't predict something that's already happened. It's ridiculous to call Lichtman's test a predictive tool if at least one of the keys can never be determined until after the election.

[Attorney General & PPT Dwarven Dragon]

His Trump prediction was based on the assumption that Johnson would poll more than 5%, which didn't happen. (Of course this also haw to take into account that he arbitrarily redefined the primary challenge key because he was uncomfortable with calling it for Trump)

[○∙◄☻¥tπ[╪AV┼cVê└]

His Trump prediction was based on the assumption that Johnson would poll more than 5%, which didn't happen. (Of course this also haw to take into account that he arbitrarily redefined the primary challenge key because he was uncomfortable with calling it for Trump)

Sooner or later his luck is going to run out, whether just barely or epic fail like it would applied to 1856.

[Oswald Acted Alone, You Kook]

His methods were wrong but the keys still applied.

[Meclazine for Israel]

You have to give him credit.

He predicted a Trump win and one of the factors was the satisfaction of the performance of the incumbent.

I am paying him for the right choice on this occasion. No on predicted Trump.

Hillary only lost by 107,000 votes.