Saturday, June 14, 2008
Lichtman's 13-Key System's Integrity is at Stake
Barack Obama has won the Democratic Party nomination for candidate for President, although he did so by losing the South Dakota primary. So now it is Obama vs McCain. So who's going to win? Allan Lichtman's system of 13 keys, or statements about conditions about the candidates or our country, tells us that Obama will win. Specifically the keys run like this:
1. 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. FALSE
2. There is no serious contest for the incumbent-party nomination. TRUE
3. The incumbent party candidate is the sitting president. FALSE
4. There is no significant third party or independent campaign. TRUE
5. The economy is not in recession during the election campaign. FALSE
6. Real per-capita economic growth during the term equals or exceeds mean growth during the previous two terms. FALSE
7. The incumbent administration effects major changes in national policy. FALSE
8. There is no sustained social unrest during the term. TRUE
9. The incumbent administration is untainted by major scandal. TRUE
10. The incumbent administration suffers no major failure in foreign or military affairs. FALSE
11. The incumbent administration achieves a major success in foreign or military affairs. FALSE
12. The incumbent-party candidate is charismatic or a national hero. FALSE
13. The challenging-party candidate is not charismatic or a national hero. FALSE
There are 9 false keys (we say the keys have "fallen") and 4 true ones (they have "stood"). If there are 5 false keys or fewer, the incumbent party wins. If there are 6 or more, the challenger party wins. In the case of 2008, the 9 fallen keys means that the challenger, Barack Obama, will win.
However, the current polls don't show this. They show a close race with the same pattern pretty much as 2000 or 2004. Perhaps it is race. Like it or not, there is still racism in this country, and that may make the election much closer than 9 keys suggest. This happened in 1960. Kennedy just barely edged out Nixon, even though 9 keys were down. In that year, it was religion: Kennedy was Catholic.
Further, there is one other thing about 1960. The year 2008's pattern of keys, when written as a string of symbols X for a fallen key and O for a standing one, is XOXOXXXOOXXXX. This is exactly the same pattern as for 1960. For that reason, the integrity of the entire keys system is at stake. In most years, if the prediction of the keys turns out to be wrong, the keys could be modified perhaps by omitting a few keys, and perhaps a key system that would predict all the elections could be created in that way. Not this time. If McCain should win the election, there would be two years with exactly the same pattern of keys, namely 1960 and 2008, but with different results. It follows from that that no set of keys among the 13 keys can ever possibly get every single election right; every system would have to get either 2008 wrong or 1960 wrong. This coincidence of key patterns has occurred once before: the 1928 and 1988 elections had the same pattern of keys. Fortunately, they had the same conclusion: a Republican victory. If McCain wins this time, there is no way of fixing the keys by omitting some of the keys, and so another key from somewhere, such as "Prejudice is not a major factor in the campaign" would have to be included. And deciding which key may very well mean rerunning the factor analysis model that selected the 13 keys to see which combinations do the best at predicting the President. Lichtman would have to start all over again.
That is what I mean by the key system's integrity being at stake. Hopefully, Obama will win in November.
1. 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. FALSE
2. There is no serious contest for the incumbent-party nomination. TRUE
3. The incumbent party candidate is the sitting president. FALSE
4. There is no significant third party or independent campaign. TRUE
5. The economy is not in recession during the election campaign. FALSE
6. Real per-capita economic growth during the term equals or exceeds mean growth during the previous two terms. FALSE
7. The incumbent administration effects major changes in national policy. FALSE
8. There is no sustained social unrest during the term. TRUE
9. The incumbent administration is untainted by major scandal. TRUE
10. The incumbent administration suffers no major failure in foreign or military affairs. FALSE
11. The incumbent administration achieves a major success in foreign or military affairs. FALSE
12. The incumbent-party candidate is charismatic or a national hero. FALSE
13. The challenging-party candidate is not charismatic or a national hero. FALSE
There are 9 false keys (we say the keys have "fallen") and 4 true ones (they have "stood"). If there are 5 false keys or fewer, the incumbent party wins. If there are 6 or more, the challenger party wins. In the case of 2008, the 9 fallen keys means that the challenger, Barack Obama, will win.
However, the current polls don't show this. They show a close race with the same pattern pretty much as 2000 or 2004. Perhaps it is race. Like it or not, there is still racism in this country, and that may make the election much closer than 9 keys suggest. This happened in 1960. Kennedy just barely edged out Nixon, even though 9 keys were down. In that year, it was religion: Kennedy was Catholic.
Further, there is one other thing about 1960. The year 2008's pattern of keys, when written as a string of symbols X for a fallen key and O for a standing one, is XOXOXXXOOXXXX. This is exactly the same pattern as for 1960. For that reason, the integrity of the entire keys system is at stake. In most years, if the prediction of the keys turns out to be wrong, the keys could be modified perhaps by omitting a few keys, and perhaps a key system that would predict all the elections could be created in that way. Not this time. If McCain should win the election, there would be two years with exactly the same pattern of keys, namely 1960 and 2008, but with different results. It follows from that that no set of keys among the 13 keys can ever possibly get every single election right; every system would have to get either 2008 wrong or 1960 wrong. This coincidence of key patterns has occurred once before: the 1928 and 1988 elections had the same pattern of keys. Fortunately, they had the same conclusion: a Republican victory. If McCain wins this time, there is no way of fixing the keys by omitting some of the keys, and so another key from somewhere, such as "Prejudice is not a major factor in the campaign" would have to be included. And deciding which key may very well mean rerunning the factor analysis model that selected the 13 keys to see which combinations do the best at predicting the President. Lichtman would have to start all over again.
That is what I mean by the key system's integrity being at stake. Hopefully, Obama will win in November.
Comments:
<< Home
Remember, polls between Reagan and Carter were neck and neck until the end. As it turned out, Reagan beat Carter decisively.
I see parallels here. A lot of people will be unsure about Obama because of his youth, his lack of experience on the national stage, etc... Similarly, in 1980, people were concerned that Reagan was too old, an actor, inexperienced in politics, etc... The 1980 debates reassured many Americans, enough to make Reagan's win decisive, with long coattails (the complete landslide had to wait another four years).
Again, I see lots of parallels; an unpopular President, a strong sense in the country that we are heading the wrong way, the incumbent party running on fear, and a charismatic opponent.
I hope I'm right.
I see parallels here. A lot of people will be unsure about Obama because of his youth, his lack of experience on the national stage, etc... Similarly, in 1980, people were concerned that Reagan was too old, an actor, inexperienced in politics, etc... The 1980 debates reassured many Americans, enough to make Reagan's win decisive, with long coattails (the complete landslide had to wait another four years).
Again, I see lots of parallels; an unpopular President, a strong sense in the country that we are heading the wrong way, the incumbent party running on fear, and a charismatic opponent.
I hope I'm right.
# posted by 
: 6:59 PM
: 6:59 PM
Here are how the keys fared in 1980:
1. 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. FALSE (big GOP gains)
2. There is no serious contest for the incumbent-party nomination. FALSE (Ted Kennedy)
3. The incumbent party candidate is the sitting president. TRUE
4. There is no significant third party or independent campaign. FALSE (John Anderson)
5. The economy is not in recession during the election campaign. FALSE (Stagflation)
6. Real per-capita economic growth during the term equals or exceeds mean growth during the previous two terms. TRUE (strong first two years)
7. The incumbent administration effects major changes in national policy. FALSE
8. There is no sustained social unrest during the term. TRUE
9. The incumbent administration is untainted by major scandal. TRUE
10. The incumbent administration suffers no major failure in foreign or military affairs. FALSE (Iran failed hostage rescue)
11. The incumbent administration achieves a major success in foreign or military affairs. TRUE (Camp David accords)
12. The incumbent-party candidate is charismatic or a national hero. FALSE (Carter not charismatic)
13. The challenging-party candidate is not charismatic or a national hero. FALSE (Ronald Reagan was charismatic)
There were a lot of keys (8) against Carter, so he lost to Reagan. Not the same pattern, though. I can see the parallels here too. So Obama is like Lincoln, Kennedy, and Reagan. I call the latter three dominant, as they were the major Presidents of their turnings.
Post a Comment
1. 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. FALSE (big GOP gains)
2. There is no serious contest for the incumbent-party nomination. FALSE (Ted Kennedy)
3. The incumbent party candidate is the sitting president. TRUE
4. There is no significant third party or independent campaign. FALSE (John Anderson)
5. The economy is not in recession during the election campaign. FALSE (Stagflation)
6. Real per-capita economic growth during the term equals or exceeds mean growth during the previous two terms. TRUE (strong first two years)
7. The incumbent administration effects major changes in national policy. FALSE
8. There is no sustained social unrest during the term. TRUE
9. The incumbent administration is untainted by major scandal. TRUE
10. The incumbent administration suffers no major failure in foreign or military affairs. FALSE (Iran failed hostage rescue)
11. The incumbent administration achieves a major success in foreign or military affairs. TRUE (Camp David accords)
12. The incumbent-party candidate is charismatic or a national hero. FALSE (Carter not charismatic)
13. The challenging-party candidate is not charismatic or a national hero. FALSE (Ronald Reagan was charismatic)
There were a lot of keys (8) against Carter, so he lost to Reagan. Not the same pattern, though. I can see the parallels here too. So Obama is like Lincoln, Kennedy, and Reagan. I call the latter three dominant, as they were the major Presidents of their turnings.
<< Home
