Political Scientist project Donald Trump will get 362 Electoral Votes

[chibul]

https://www.newsday.com/opinion/commentary/donald-trump-2020-election-joe-biden-norpoth-prediction-1.43910576

Interesting. This political scientist projects a Donald Trump landslide.

[Amenhotep Bakari-Sellers]

Interesting,  the polls are predicting a Bidenslide and MSN.

Right now, the polls are all over the place. WI is the swing state

[Holmes]

Alright

[The Mikado]

THIS map is Trump 342. Flip VA and even then it's Trump 355.

What would Trump 362 even look like???

[ProudModerate2]

[Ronnie]

THIS map is Trump 342. Flip VA and even then it's Trump 355.

What would Trump 362 even look like???

Your map + Virginia + Connecticut/Oregon for Trump.

[TrendsareUsuallyReal]

Giving Dick Morris a run for his money I see

[The Other Castro]

Anyone projecting with that level of certainty in April shouldn't be taken seriously.

[Amenhotep Bakari-Sellers]

Trump isnt gonna win a landslide,  let alone win WI, and EC map again with elevated unemployment and a 44 percent approvals

[😥]

This result is almost impossible

I can't imagine Trump's win with this map:

[NHI]

[Amenhotep Bakari-Sellers]

More like Biden 362

[Arizona Iced Tea]

How can people project this early?

[Hammy]

The poll he's using with Trump's approval and coronavirus handling are almost three weeks old. It seems like he wrote this piece with the intention of waiting until Trump's numbers are down to put it out.

[Biden Stans Are Cringelords]

OP lied. There is nothing "interesting" about this.

[Amenhotep Bakari-Sellers]

If Hilary was in office, just like in 2010 when the unemployment was elevated, Rs would be complaining about the employmen rate. But, after 2009, the unemployment rate was going down
In 2008 and 2020, with the 2001 and 2017 unaffordable tax cuts, the elevated unemployment is rising

[Grassroots]

The Political Scientist in question is creating this prediction using one sole factor of evidence, the primaries. He is basically comparing Trump's numbers in the primaries directly to Biden's numbers, instead of comparing Trump to all of the Democrats total. This rather piss poor level of thinking is similar to people thinking California is in contention because Trump got more votes than Biden and Sanders. It's just flat out dumb. The only way this projection would be understandable is if everyone who didn't vote for Biden in the primaries voted against him.

Here's another little gem from the prediction author:

As of now, there is no sign of a crack in Trump support in the wake of the coronavirus outbreak. To the contrary, his job approval rating ticked up to 49% in a Gallup poll, the highest of his tenure in the White House in surveys by that organization. On the issue of handling the pandemic, Trump got an approval of 60%. What’s more, the “war” against this crisis is casting Trump as a wartime president, which may help his reelection prospects as it has done with other wartime presidents.

He appears to be cherry picking polls, and not just that. He's using Trump's ceiling approvals from March, at the beginning of the crisis. Since then, Trump's approvals have fallen to 44%.

[CellarDoor]

The Political Scientist in question is creating this prediction using one sole factor of evidence, the primaries. He is basically comparing Trump's numbers in the primaries directly to Biden's numbers, instead of comparing Trump to all of the Democrats total. This rather piss poor level of thinking is similar to people thinking California is in contention because Trump got more votes than Biden and Sanders. It's just flat out dumb. The only way this projection would be understandable is if everyone who didn't vote for Biden in the primaries voted against him.

Here's another little gem from the prediction author:

As of now, there is no sign of a crack in Trump support in the wake of the coronavirus outbreak. To the contrary, his job approval rating ticked up to 49% in a Gallup poll, the highest of his tenure in the White House in surveys by that organization. On the issue of handling the pandemic, Trump got an approval of 60%. What’s more, the “war” against this crisis is casting Trump as a wartime president, which may help his reelection prospects as it has done with other wartime presidents.

He appears to be cherry picking polls, and not just that. He's using Trump's ceiling approvals from March, at the beginning of the crisis. Since then, Trump's approvals have fallen to 44%.

I like how his methodology is based entirely on primaries, but in his analysis he references old polls and other things that have nothing to do with primaries.  This might be the silliest methodology I've seen.

[Alben Barkley]

Much more interesting is that the woman who almost perfectly predicted 2018 down to every last individual House seat has Biden winning at least 289 Electoral Votes:

https://www.niskanencenter.org/bitecofer-post-primary-update/

[Xing]

“Political Scientist” is wrong.

[GeorgiaModerate]

Much more interesting is that the woman who almost perfectly predicted 2018 down to every last individual House seat has Biden winning at least 289 Electoral Votes:

https://www.niskanencenter.org/bitecofer-post-primary-update/

Bitecofer undoubedly knows more about the topic than the author of the original article, and her projection is much more plausible IMO, but her success in 2018 seems to have made her somewhat overconfident.  She projects way too much certainty in the outcome at this early point in the election.

[Amenhotep Bakari-Sellers]

Trump does terrible with Latino voters he wont win CO, NV, or AZ or wont win VA

[Frenchrepublican]

Unfortunately a such scenario is pipe dream

[afleitch]

If it helps, a Norpoth based model called the UK GE wrong.

[Roblox]

Brad Parscale is a political scientist now?