I am sharing a NY Times opinion piece. Poo Poo it. Or not.
This is a prediction from “Allan Lichtman, the American University historian who’s been dubbed the Nostradamus of presidential election predictions for his near-perfect 40-year track record…. The confidence is rooted in Mr. Lichtman’s simple, history-driven model, which tunes out polls and pollsters and instead focuses on 13 true-or-false questions that he says hold the “keys” to the White House.”
Tap here:
https://www.nytimes.com/2024/09/05/opinion/allan-lichtman-trump-harris-prediction.html?smid=em-share
Try this gifted link:
https://www.nytimes.com/2024/09/05/opinion/allan-lichtman-trump-harris-prediction.html?unlocked_article_code=1.IU4.3A5q.ztzrXBUo8F0e&smid=url-share
The Bulwark today hate hate hated this prediction and I didn't read the whole thing (I can only read so much so I pick and choose what to read, what to breeze through, and what to note and skip) but from a glance it looked like the objection is they dislike the method and don't consider it to be credible, and there seemed to be a subtext of "if people feel it's a foregone conclusion they may relax about getting to the polls to vote". Clearly the prediction is not intended to get people to slack from going to the polls. It's intended to predict what will happen if people do in two months what it looks like they are going to do as of right now. It's the problem scientists have where the observer can influence the observed. Whatever - jump and up and down, squeal a little even though it will probably over excite the dog, and then make sure you are registered to vote. And vote.