The Student News Site of Stony Brook University

The Statesman

53° Stony Brook, NY
The Student News Site of Stony Brook University

The Statesman

The Student News Site of Stony Brook University

The Statesman

Newsletter

Political science professor forecasts Trump as general election winner

Professor of Political Science at Stony Brook Helmut Norpoth, above, moments after announcing his forecast at the SUNY Global Center on Feb. 22nd, 2016. Norpoth's findings with the electoral cycle method show the Republican Party winning with a three point lead in the general election. CHRISTOPHER CAMERON/THE STATESMAN
Political science professor Helmut Norpoth, above, moments after announcing his presidential election forecast at the SUNY Global Center on Feb. 22. Norpoth’s findings with the electoral cycle method show the Republican Party having a 61 percent chance of winning the general election. CHRISTOPHER CAMERON/THE STATESMAN

A professor of political science at Stony Brook University has forecasted that Donald Trump has a minimum 97 percent chance of winning the general election as the Republican nominee.

Professor Helmut Norpoth’s forecast presentation took place Monday evening in the SUNY Global Center in Manhattan, which was organized by the Stony Brook Alumni Association.

Norpoth created a statistical model of presidential elections that uses a candidate’s performance in their party’s primary and patterns in the electoral cycle as predictors of the presidential vote in the general election.

Donald Trump has a 97 percent chance of defeating Hillary Clinton and a 99 percent chance of defeating Bernie Sanders in the general election, according to Norpoth’s formula.

“The bottom line is that the primary model, using also the cyclical movement, makes it almost certain that Donald Trump will be the next president,” Norpoth said, “if he’s a nominee of the [Republican] party.”

Norpoth’s primary model works for every presidential election since 1912, with the notable exception of the 1960 election. These results give the model an accuracy of 96.1 percent.

Norpoth began the presentation with an introduction of the potential matchups in the general election, including a hypothetical Sanders vs. Trump general election.

“When I started out with this kind of display a few months ago, I thought it was sort of a joke.” Norpoth said referring to Trump and Sanders, as many alumni in the audience laughed. “Well, I’ll tell you right now, it ain’t a joke anymore.”

As the presentation continued, laughter turned to silence as Norpoth forecasted a 61 percent chance of a Republican win in the general election.

This forecast was made using the electoral cycle model, which studies a pattern of voting in the presidential election that makes it less likely for an incumbent party to hold the presidency after two terms in office. The model does not assume who would be the party nominees or the conditions of the country at the time.

“You think ‘This is crazy. How can anything come up with something like that?’ ” Norpoth said “But that’s exactly the kind of equation I used to predict Bill Clinton winning in ‘96, that I used to predict that George Bush would win in 2004, and, as you remember four years ago, that Obama would win in 2012.”

Norpoth then added data from the New Hampshire and South Carolina primaries to narrow down the forecast to specific candidates. As he brought up the first slide with matchup results, the silence was broken by muttering from the audience.

“Trump beats Hillary 54.7 percent to 45.3 percent [of the popular vote]. This is almost too much to believe.” Norpoth said, with a few members of the audience laughing nervously. “The probability of that [outcome] is almost complete certainty, 97 percent. It’s almost ‘Take it to the bank.’ ”

The primary model predicts a Trump victory with such certainty due to Trump’s relatively high success in the Republican primaries, Norpoth said. Clinton, in comparison, is in an essential tie with Sanders in the Democratic primaries. As a result, Sanders would also lose to Trump in a similar landslide if Sanders were to be the Democratic nominee, Norpoth said.

In contrast, Norpoth forecasted that a hypothetical presidential race with Ted Cruz or Marco Rubio on the Republican ticket would be a much closer race. The results showed Clinton with a 55 percent chance of winning the race against Cruz or Rubio with a 0.3 percent lead in the popular vote.

Norpoth’s model showed Sanders losing against Rubio or Cruz with a 0.6 percent gap in the popular vote, giving a Rubio or Cruz ticket a 60 percent chance of winning against the Vermont senator.

Norpoth added that while the non-Trump Republican ticket would be much more unlikely to win the general election due to differences in the popular vote and the electoral college vote, there is almost no chance that Trump would lose the electoral college vote with his forecasted lead in the popular vote.

“If you win by 54 percent [of the popular vote], you have a big majority in the electoral college,” Norpoth said. “Nobody who has ever gotten 54 percent has lost.”

Featured Image Credit: GAGE SKIDMORE/WIKIMEDIA COMMONS

935
View Comments (935)
Donate to The Statesman

Your donation will support the student journalists of Stony Brook University. Your contribution will allow us to purchase equipment and cover our annual website hosting costs.

More to Discover
Donate to The Statesman

Comments (935)

All The Statesman Picks Reader Picks Sort: Newest

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

  • R

    Rob MMar 19, 2017 at 12:54 am

    this guy predicted 9 elections straight

    Reply
  • L

    LurkerJan 26, 2017 at 10:06 pm

    Professor Helmut Norpoth actually got the Election wrong!

    He said TRUMP would win the popular vote! He shouldn’t play these silly games & just go by The Electoral College!! LOL

    Reply
  • R

    RuFus92Oct 23, 2016 at 10:52 pm

    I just hope that on Nov. 9th the headline reads Trump Triumphant ! ! ! ! !

    Reply
  • P

    PeteOct 17, 2016 at 11:50 am

    Looks like another Reagan type landslide in the making for the Donald! Democrats are switching to the Republican party by the thousands in Pennsylvania and Ohio. Even though the mainstream media is imposing a complete news blackout on the huge daily Wikileaks dumps, thanks to the internet, Americans are learning the truth about Hillary’s corrupt past, and how she says one thing in speeches to Wall Street bankers, about “covering their asses for 8 years”, while attacking them in public!

    Reply
  • K

    Kevin PerezOct 16, 2016 at 1:14 am

    So, uh, how’s that prediction thing working out for you?

    Reply
    • M

      Mike SpleenNov 9, 2016 at 12:51 am

      hmm don’t know yet

      Reply
    • T

      Trace FarleyNov 10, 2016 at 3:02 pm

      So, uh, It looks like it worked out pretty good.

      Reply
    • S

      SalNov 11, 2016 at 12:05 am

      Hi dummy

      Reply
  • C

    centefireAug 21, 2016 at 4:39 am

    I am in Ireland and I can tell you there is absolutely no leadership in the European Union, Germany, France or elsewhere except possibly in Britain. A Clinton lead USA will spread the European model right across the world and that will be a disaster for humanity.Only Trump can row back the damage already done

    Reply
  • N

    nbAug 17, 2016 at 9:41 pm

    I love this! I want REAL CHANGE and Trump with his business acumen, we’re going to go forwards not backward economically speaking, specially in my heart for those families that are left behind in Obama’s disastrous diservice to this country. NO CLINTONS, enough is enough of them, they should have never been allowed to run for office AGAIN, that was madness.

    Reply
  • S

    Scott AllenAug 5, 2016 at 10:00 am

    I could live with a Democrat. But a LIAR – that has gotten away with the long list of things that Hillary has….. will nauseate me to the core. I hope the Republicans get their Sh#T together ….. I am deeply pissed at the turn of events. If trump loses in November it will be his own damn fault cause he didn’t stay on message. Hillary is a political disaster. If she gets elected – it means Americans no longer give a Sh#t about honesty, integrity, justice or even the future of this country.

    Reply
  • R

    REPUBLICAN DISASTERSAug 4, 2016 at 5:20 am

    Hillary is 10 points ahead of the Republicans’ Narcissistic Cheetos Jesus.

    Reply
    • S

      SalNov 11, 2016 at 12:05 am

      Really? Hmmm

      Reply
  • M

    mathew mannAug 2, 2016 at 3:13 pm

    Unfortunately, Hillary is ahead of Trump in the most recent polls. This so called ‘model” was taken several months ago. Things change rapidly during the election. I hate to admit it, but Hillary looks like she’s going to win the election

    Reply
    • J

      Janice Carpenter AnayaAug 5, 2016 at 3:45 am

      If you really feel that way, then the pollsters have done their job well. I doubt that the American voter is as fickle as the polls like to make it appear. And the media that presents these poll results are also hoping that it has the affect of people being disheartened by what is being reported and they just stay home. Some time ago they stopped letting the news media project a winner before the polls were closed for that very reason. That’s why I pay little attention to the polls……they can change the mind, change your intention and perhaps the course of history.

      Reply
    • S

      Sand DickAug 5, 2016 at 7:46 am

      She has like 6 point spread right now and the election isn’t for 3 months. Calm down.

      Reply
    • M

      momthree789 .Aug 17, 2016 at 9:30 am

      Polls only poll likely voters…those who vote on a regular basis…and excludes the millions of voters who registered to vote this year for the first time….and the polls have been caught giving the undecideds to Hillary.

      Reply
  • J

    john aweJun 12, 2016 at 4:16 am

    Love it! Great prediction for Trump!!!

    Reply
  • P

    pragmatist3Jun 5, 2016 at 8:09 pm

    Correlation is not causation.
    F to the prof

    Reply
    • K

      KWM39Nov 10, 2016 at 12:45 pm

      YOU NEED TO CHANGE YOUR GRADE AND APOLOGIZE.

      Reply
  • J

    johnduboseMay 7, 2016 at 10:39 pm

    This is all historical correlation. Whether it is correct depends on whether the right correlations were checked. Got doubts.

    Reply
  • T

    transmasterMay 4, 2016 at 4:11 pm

    Check out Professor Helmut Norpoth, Professor of Political Science at Stony Brook University at his website “Primary Model” he has developed a statistical model that has been accurate for every election since 1912 when primary elections began. According to this model Trump has at least an 87% chance of beating Hillary.

    Reply
  • G

    GoldmundMay 4, 2016 at 1:26 pm

    Hahaha this is what happens when you want to get some attention, but stripping naked for the camera isn’t an option…

    Reply
    • M

      Max BeaverbrookMay 5, 2016 at 2:18 pm

      Did you look in the mirror?

      Reply
      • G

        GoldmundMay 5, 2016 at 3:01 pm

        Razor-sharp wit there.

        Reply
        • M

          Max BeaverbrookMay 10, 2016 at 8:25 pm

          “Thanks for your support”, old boy!

          Reply
  • N

    Niall BleheinMay 2, 2016 at 9:59 pm

    His model isn’t validated by any peers or external source. His claims of accuracy aren’t validated either. The article is entirely promotional and is at odds with all available scientific polling. Its unlikely to be useful in actually predicting the results of the election in Nov. The prof is hookin for business. Nothing more.

    Reply
    • M

      Max BeaverbrookMay 10, 2016 at 8:26 pm

      Yes it is. Reuters virtually came up with the same results. Another model gave to Bernie Sanders if he took the Democratic contest– not likely now.

      Reply
    • S

      Spartacus GruenMay 31, 2016 at 12:13 am

      The primary model has accurately predict the outcome of almost every election since 1912. Professor Norpoth use the model to predict the outcomes of the 96, 2004, 2008, and 2012 election.

      Reply
      • N

        Niall BleheinJun 11, 2016 at 7:30 pm

        His claim of accuracy is also not validated by any external source. The entire article is self serving PR. His model ignores who the actual nominees are and any actual polling concerning them. And even then his “certainty” is a 61% prediction.

        Models far more comprehensive than his (and with a MUCH better independently VALIDATED track record) are predicting the reverse. See fivethirtyeight.

        Reply
        • S

          Spartacus GruenJun 11, 2016 at 8:39 pm

          LOL Nate Sliver fail to predict the 2015 UK election. He also fail to predict who the Republican nominee was going to be.

          Reply
          • L

            left2rightJul 27, 2016 at 1:13 pm

            It’s good for you trumpettes to at least have some sliver of hope before he get blown out in a fairly exaggerated fashion. This model has a big problem in that, historically the candidates in question perform fairly consistently with various demographics, in relation to candidates from their same party. For example, the Republican candidate typically performs pretty consistently with Hispanic. Trump is the only candidate to be run through the model who does not – and who in fact underperforms drastically compared to former, fellow Republican candidates. If Trump were performing typically with these various demographic groups, he would have a very good chance to win. Unfortunately for him (and for you) due to his drastic underperforming with minorities (specifically hispanics), women, and many others, he is mathematically eliminated already. He cannot win. Also, this model fails to account for the share of the minority vote and how that share is distributed within states key to his victory. This further compounds his problems. For example, Nevada, Florida, and New Mexico are almost certainly “blue” this year due to the hispanic vote – that was never the case before.

            Now if you don’t really understand what I just explained, allow me to make it easy on you. Mitt Romney lost to Barack Obama in 2012. In order for Trump to win, he will need to outperform Mitt Romney with key core demographic groups. As it stands, he is WAY underperforming Romney’s numbers. How can trump win the presidency if he cannot even match Romney’s numbers, and is in fact way under Romney’s numbers with one of the most important groups (hispanics)? Trump is not going to win. He cannot win.

          • S

            Spartacus GruenJul 27, 2016 at 11:02 pm

            It’s good for you Hillary bots to have some hope before she gets defeat in a landslide election. This model has accurately predict the last 5 elections since it was introduce to the public in 1996.

          • R

            REPUBLICAN DISASTERSAug 4, 2016 at 5:28 am

            Another Trumpanzee in for a rough landing! Reality will bite you hard. Rigged!!!

          • S

            Spartacus GruenAug 4, 2016 at 9:05 am

            Keep on dreaming little dude. Hillary bots are going to be in for a rude awakening on election night. Expect the Hillary bots to come up with conspiracy theories on why Hillary lost in a landslide election. Oh btw I’m not a Trump supporter nice try though loser.

          • S

            Spartacus GruenAug 4, 2016 at 9:09 am

            @Spam

          • P

            PatriotMan68Aug 8, 2016 at 12:05 am

            Silver is done, after Trump wins his Liberal fan base will reject him.

        • C

          citizenrichJul 27, 2016 at 2:21 am

          Yes, because (((Nate Silver))) sure ain’t “hookin for business” (whatever the the hell that goofy shit means?).

          Yep, he’s a squared away guy with no biases. At all. He promises.

          Reply
          • Y

            YouPoorVictimJul 27, 2016 at 10:07 am

            Breitbart is ran by a Jew. Just so you know.

          • N

            Niall BleheinJul 31, 2016 at 8:56 pm

            lol. All you have done with your post is to make YOUR biases perfectly clear. I just noticed that the “news ” sites you follow are fringe right wing conspiracy sites like Breitbart. I can see now why you’re so emotionally invested in this broken model. And since most polling data clearly puts Clinton ahead in most of the battleground states, you have no use for that either.

          • C

            citizenrichJul 31, 2016 at 10:51 pm

            “Just noticed”, huh? No, I’m afraid you’re just another nosy little psycho.

            I keep my profile public because I get a kick out weirdos like you poking around.

            I wouldn’t waste my time looking but just out of curiosity- is your Disqus profile set to private?

          • N

            Niall BleheinJul 31, 2016 at 11:12 pm

            ROFL – its public.

            So you try to trash fivethirtyeight as biased, but you get all upset when I take a look at your public profile and see your own bias write large ? Thats enough to make a dog laugh.

            Thank you for confirming my point, You have nothing intelligent to say about the original topic – a self serving puff piece about an unvalidated election forecasting model that depends entirely on the claims of its author,

            Nice job on the namecalling.

          • C

            citizenrichAug 1, 2016 at 12:32 am

            You’re a pretty unhinged guy.

            I promise I’ll never make fun of Nate Silver again. Sorry.

          • N

            Niall BleheinAug 1, 2016 at 12:54 am

            ROFL from the man who spends his time calling people names and showing his obsession with a mythical “crooked Hilary” I’ll take “unhinged” thank you 🙂 Its gentler than your usual fare it would appear.

          • P

            PatriotMan68Aug 8, 2016 at 12:04 am

            Silver is a Liberal with a site designed to calm Liberals plain and simple.

          • P

            PatriotMan68Aug 8, 2016 at 12:03 am

            538 is biased because it is based on completely biased purchased polls.
            The average media polling bias right now is 4.2%
            Average CNN Bias 7.1%
            Average Reuters Bias 10.5% ! !
            See long room dot com slash polls for statistical analysis

          • Y

            YouPoorVictimAug 2, 2016 at 1:47 pm

            “Did you know that Sub-Sahara Africa never developed a single formal or written language? ”

            Why didn’t you respond to the list of written Sub-Sahara Africa languages I sent you?

            Where is my $1 million bet?

            “You must not be a good person and you probably have a dark heart. ”

            All of your comments are full of hate. Are all rich geniuses like yourself this lacking in self-awareness and factual knowledge about the world?

          • C

            citizenrichAug 2, 2016 at 3:27 pm

            I was wondering where my stalker went, I really was. Where were you? Did you blow your entire social security on drugs??

          • Y

            YouPoorVictimAug 3, 2016 at 9:41 am

            So, no comment on how you were caught spreading fibs on the internet again? Where did you learn that there were no Sub-Sahara Africa written languages? Please share your source.

          • C

            citizenrichAug 3, 2016 at 1:05 pm

            There were zero written languages for sub Sahara Africa save for one small corner of modern day Ethiopia were they used Arabic.

            I don’t care what you claim, weirdo.

          • Y

            YouPoorVictimAug 3, 2016 at 1:09 pm

            “There were zero written languages for sub Sahara Africa”

            Why won’t you share your source? Why do I find proof of dozens of written languages from that region when I do 5 minutes of research?

          • Y

            YouPoorVictimAug 3, 2016 at 1:21 pm

            Here’s a list for you.

            Proto-Saharan (5000 – 3000 B.C.)
            Wadi El-Hol or ‘Proto-Sinaitic’ (2000 B.C. – 1400 B.C.)
            Nsibidi (5000 B.C. – present)
            Tifinagh or ‘Lybico-Berber’ or ‘Mande’ (c. 3000 B.C. – present)
            Ge’ez or ‘Ethiopic’ (800 B.C. – present)
            ‘Old Nubian’ (800 A.D. – 1500 A.D.)

          • C

            citizenrichAug 3, 2016 at 1:42 pm

            Bunk list, weirdo

          • Y

            YouPoorVictimAug 3, 2016 at 1:55 pm

            “Bunk list”

            That was easy. Deny it all you want. Let me know when you have counter-evidence to share.

          • C

            citizenrichAug 4, 2016 at 4:13 am

            Most of our stuff is highly concentrated and therefore subject to event risk. The “issue” is very low cost basis for that stuff which as you know are the townhouses, the apt. bldg. and our condo. Unless NYC real estate drops more than 25%, it wouldn’t be worth selling, at all. Do you think it’s worth it to take the tax bill hit and diversify the real property? Regardless, I’m glad I listened to my dad when I graduated. 15 years on these commercial notes has flown by. I really got lucky with child unit 1 (I’ll still need to pay for Med School and he also wants an MBA). Child unit 2 is going to be a little trickier but she was chosen this week as captain for senior cheer (isnt that exciting!!?) She told us she’s the first sophmore to be made captain for the senior squad! All those dance lessons appear to be paying off. If she can score 95% percentile or higher, I think we’ll see some good offers / packages. Definitely DOES NOT want to go away which makes the mom unit very, very happy! NYU gave out a ton of generous packages to local kids this year so hopefully that’ll stay the same. My understanding is they still don’t have enough dorms so they fill up the class with townies. Personally, I’d like to see her @ Columbia. Cheer will help tremendously on her app. and give them a reason to give her a good deal. I’ll keep you posted, homie…

        • T

          Trace FarleyNov 10, 2016 at 3:03 pm

          Looks like his model was correct, and Fivethirtyeight was wrong. How about that.

          Reply
          • N

            Niall BleheinNov 13, 2016 at 1:55 pm

            his model also predicted that Trump would win the popular vote by almost 10%.

            Clinton won the popular vote.

            When there are only 2 possible outcomes – its easy to crow. But on the hard stuff – his model was way off.

    • J

      john aweJun 12, 2016 at 4:17 am

      Trump wins!!!

      Reply
    • S

      softunderbellyAug 14, 2016 at 10:29 pm

      Is the statistical model correct all the way back to 1912? If so, you lose.

      Reply
      • N

        Niall BleheinAug 20, 2016 at 8:30 am

        The self serving PR article is the only source that tells us its correct . No independent review or verification. My brother in law wrote similar (but more sophiticated) models like this for a living in Europe for political organizations. I have a very good understanding of how the academic peer review model works – apparently you don’t.

        Reply
        • M

          Mike SpleenNov 9, 2016 at 12:53 am

          lol

          Reply
    • A

      A ANov 7, 2016 at 4:31 am

      You sound scared

      Reply
      • N

        Niall BleheinNov 13, 2016 at 1:31 pm

        I am now that an insane bigot who has no interest in public policy is now the president elect. Many millions of americans are scared while the rest of the world is still stunned.

        The brits are delighted because we can’t make fun of them for Brexit anymore.

        Reply
    • S

      SalNov 11, 2016 at 12:06 am

      FAIL

      Reply
      • N

        Niall BleheinNov 13, 2016 at 1:51 pm

        The result of the election doesn’t contradict anything I wrote. The article was self promotional fluff. I never said he was going to be wrong – but its still true that there was no independent validation of his model.

        Reply
  • P

    Paul LApr 27, 2016 at 11:58 pm

    Professors of political science: sigh..they are the stupidest people ever. They are just Sanders’ supporters. They are all liberal ahos wishing Hilary to lose. Any fools can tell he does not know math.

    Reply
    • M

      Max BeaverbrookMay 10, 2016 at 8:26 pm

      Not the one writing this article. Maybe some of yours were.

      Reply
  • B

    babybunniesApr 24, 2016 at 7:38 pm

    You’d think an American Political Science professor would pay a lot more attention as to how American politics works. He obviously isn’t looking at the Electoral College, which has Hillary out in front by 380 to 191 (even just counting the LEANING and CERTAIN votes), with 290 needed to win.
    If it’s Trump or Cruz it doesn’t matter, it’s not even close.

    Reply
    • R

      rusaboyApr 25, 2016 at 4:04 am

      Perhaps so, but your Electoral vote tally does not compute. 380 + 191 = 571. There are only 538 Electoral votes. And it takes 270 to win.

      Reply
    • M

      Max BeaverbrookMay 10, 2016 at 8:27 pm

      How would you even know?

      Reply
    • J

      jar59May 23, 2016 at 5:40 am

      You’re assuming people in leaning blue states are still dumb enough to vote for Hillary Clinton.

      Reply
    • J

      john aweJun 12, 2016 at 4:19 am

      Dummy, it takes 270 to win. Shows how little you know. Can it!! Trump wins the election. Deal with it.

      Reply
  • G

    guyApr 13, 2016 at 8:58 pm

    Nonsense. Your primary margin of victory doesn’t forecast general election performance. I’m sure there’s a historical correlation to be found, though even that is probably overstated, but there’s no mechanism for how one affects the other.

    It’s as silly as saying the decline in high seas piracy caused goal warming.

    Reply
    • J

      john aweJun 12, 2016 at 4:20 am

      Trump wins.

      Reply
  • J

    JoeApr 12, 2016 at 11:15 am

    I cannot believe why the Blacks and Hispanics continue to support the Democrat party. I guess that they don’t know why the Republican Party came into exsistance. Well, let me tell you. The Democrat Party embraced slavery and wanted to keep slavery, another group wanted slavery abolished. When the Democrat party wouldn’t budge the Republican Party was born. This happened in 1854 and Abraham Lincoln became one of the first members of the Republican Party. So my Black brothers and Hispanics you keep supporting the party that wanted you as slaves. They still want you as slaves through food stamps and welfare as long as they get your vote. It is better to have a good job, dignity and self respect than food stamps and a cheese.

    Reply
    • G

      guyApr 13, 2016 at 9:02 pm

      Oh look, another Republican who doesn’t know about the Southern Strategy and the end of Jim Crow.

      The GOP IS the southern democrat party now, you idiot. They have been since Nixon. You are laughably ignorant.

      The best part is that this is freely available information, found in any relevant encyclopedia, and you”ll still choose to remain ignorant.

      Reply
      • J

        JoeApr 14, 2016 at 1:26 pm

        Without knowing who you are it is obvious to see what you are. The world is full of people like you. You are worthy of pity. When an intelligent vocabulary fails people like you, you resort to insults. I am sorry I didn’t know idiot was your last name.

        Reply
        • J

          JackApr 29, 2016 at 9:32 am

          His last name is not “idiot.” It is “puppet.” Far too stupid to understand much of anything, this moron repeats what he is told to repeat by his ruling masters at Media Matters, Huff Post, Salon, the DNC, or whatever group tells this useful idiot how and what to think.

          Reply
      • S

        stevenMay 1, 2016 at 11:36 pm

        That is just not true the kkk has always been the military arm of the democrat party al gores father filibustered the civil rights act and sen bird dem speaker of the house was a kkk grand wizard check your facts

        Reply
    • B

      babybunniesApr 24, 2016 at 7:39 pm

      If you looked at Abraham Lincoln’s REAL record, you’d hardly uphold him as a solid Republican. In reality, he was one of the worst Presidents the USA ever had. Unless you believe the rhetoric about him instead of looking at the FACTS

      Reply
      • R

        rpmiiMay 3, 2016 at 9:18 am

        Depends on your POV. Lincoln took us into the most devastating war, by far, of our history. To what purpose? “Keeping the Union”? Abolition was a side effect, no other nation had to kill off a generation of young men and impoverish half the country for 100 years to free slaves.
        Mainly Lincoln established that the Federal Government can do whatever it wants. If you are a believer in Big Government, that is a good thing. If you aren’t, not so.

        Reply
        • M

          Max BeaverbrookMay 10, 2016 at 8:29 pm

          Two wrongs dont’ get it right.

          Reply
  • W

    westerlingApr 10, 2016 at 12:33 pm

    Which really means that the odds of Donald Trump winning the election are unbeatable and he is thus the next President of the United States of America.

    Reply
    • B

      babybunniesApr 24, 2016 at 7:40 pm

      Just drink the KoolAid, and keep on believing.

      Reply
      • M

        Max BeaverbrookMay 10, 2016 at 8:30 pm

        You must have if you’re backing that Goldwater girl who wants to blow everybody up.

        Reply
  • M

    mathewsjwApr 3, 2016 at 4:01 am

    TOTAL BS.. Prediction Not based on Trump, details say Cruz also 97% Winner over Hillary/Sanders.. Prediction of Trump winning primary based on Super Tues ONLY, Not Convention so again BS

    Reply
    • M

      Max BeaverbrookMay 10, 2016 at 8:31 pm

      Prediction is real and you’ll find in November. I’d be willing to go Vegas and put money on it and clean off you stupid Hillzilla loving Yanks.

      Reply
      • M

        mathewsjwMay 12, 2016 at 7:55 pm

        So Trump Beats Hillary? Democrat House Impeaches Trump & VP, then Democrat Senate Convicts Trump & VP so you win

        Reply
      • M

        mathewsjwMay 17, 2016 at 6:08 pm

        #neverhillary so u r wrong, SMH

        Got No Worries if Trump Elected… Democrat House Impeaches Trump & VP within the Year, Shortly After Democrat Senate Convicts Trump & VP for installing SoH Pelosi as PotUS.. you reap what you sow

        #NeverTrump is never for ever btw
        .

        Reply
  • D

    drwhatnotApr 1, 2016 at 8:53 am

    Americans will elect a man who stands up and says AMERICA FIRST. If we are given a chance to vote. But the ruling class elite don’t want the will of the people to win out. Ask Nancy “You’ll have to pass it in order to read what’s in it” Peloshit.

    Reply
  • I

    IgnatzMar 27, 2016 at 8:08 pm

    “a minimum 97 percent chance of winning the general election”

    Minimum 97%?

    The prof could at least make his BS less obvious. Only someone who knows nothing about statistics would come up with a percentage that high, and not instinctively recognize that it must mean there was something wrong with the model.

    Reply
    • D

      drill waterMar 27, 2016 at 11:04 pm

      the model is completely fine

      it would be 100% certainty if JFK had not won in 1960

      are you saying hillary is as groundbrekaing and charismatic as JFK? lol

      Reply
      • G

        guyApr 13, 2016 at 9:11 pm

        Just because it matched up, that wouldn’t mean those primary elections CAUSED them to win those general elections. There’s no “Home Team Advantage”.

        You can draw correlations between all kinds of thing, like world series wins and the full moon. Only a complete boob wouldn’t grasp this.

        Or do you also believe in the octopus that predicted world cup games?

        Reply
        • D

          drill waterApr 23, 2016 at 8:41 am

          strawman. trump is doing even better than when this conversation was started it appears he was right

          Reply
      • M

        Max BeaverbrookMay 10, 2016 at 8:34 pm

        They don’t know what they’re saying. They drank the Hillzilla Kool Aid.

        Reply
    • C

      Cedrik ThibertMar 30, 2016 at 1:02 pm

      Trump is going to win. Period.

      The opposition sucks.

      Reply
      • I

        IgnatzMar 30, 2016 at 1:57 pm

        Trump doesn’t even have the support of the majority of REPUBLICANS, and has never gotten 50% in any Republican primary.

        Black people will vote against him OVERWHELMINGLY. Hispanics will vote against him OVERWHELMINGLY. Women will vote against him OVERWHELMINGLY. To win, he’ll need at least 70% of the white vote, and that’s pretty much impossible.

        I actually think the nomination of Trump will spell the end of the Tea Party, the loss will be so total. It will be like what McGovern’s loss did to the ’60s counterculture. After this, the Republicans will still be around, but the Tea Party will cease to have any influence on them. The GOP will regard them as noxious poison.

        And they, of course, will split into smaller and smaller groups as they fight among themselves for who is to blame.

        Reply
        • G

          guyApr 13, 2016 at 9:09 pm

          I think you’re thinking too small. This would be the best case scenario, among many disastrous scenarios for the GOP. Frankly, I see a non-zero chance of both parties taking a fatal blow, depending on how it all pans out.

          Reply
        • T

          Timothy Wade CorderApr 18, 2016 at 1:25 am

          Keep dreaming! He might not have the majority of Republicans, but when you consider all of the Democrats who are voting for him, he does have the majority of AMERICA, which is what it takes to win the GENERAL election. I think you need to educate yourself about who his supporters are. He isn’t filling up football stadiums with a few angry white guys from Alabama! TRUMP 2016! Be part of the Revolution!

          Reply
          • I

            IgnatzApr 18, 2016 at 7:36 am

            ” but when you consider all of the Democrats who are voting for him,”

            Almost none.

          • T

            Timothy Wade CorderApr 18, 2016 at 10:13 am

            You’re either living on a desert island or in a str8t up fantasy world!

      • M

        Max BeaverbrookMay 10, 2016 at 8:33 pm

        Exactly!

        Reply
    • D

      drwhatnotApr 1, 2016 at 8:52 am

      You just hate the fact that a real AMERICAN is running for president.

      Reply
      • I

        IgnatzApr 1, 2016 at 9:26 am

        And what makes him more American than all of the other candidates? His greed? His narcissism? His inability to control his temper? His seething hatred of brown people?

        If Trump actually becomes President (which he won’t), you might as well tear the Statue of Liberty down. That’s how “American” he is.

        Reply
        • D

          drwhatnotApr 1, 2016 at 10:03 am

          Well, one of the others was a Canadian until last year. And he is actually a stealth liberal who is pro open borders, like you, and the other one is a pro nafta, pro amnesty clown who barely won his own state and wants to grant amnesty to you and 12 million other illegals. thats just for starters my liberal psychopath friend. You should vote for Hillary and Huma and you should take ISIS refugees into your home. God bless.

          Reply
          • I

            IgnatzApr 1, 2016 at 5:05 pm

            ” And he is actually a stealth liberal who is pro open borders,”

            Ted Cruz is a stealth liberal?

            HAHAHAHAHAHA

          • G

            guyApr 13, 2016 at 8:59 pm

            Maybe in the sense that he scares people into voting democrat

          • M

            Max BeaverbrookMay 10, 2016 at 8:33 pm

            I’m a Canuck. What the Hell of it, Yank?

          • D

            drwhatnotMay 11, 2016 at 9:47 am

            Are you running for President? of the USA?

        • T

          Timothy Wade CorderApr 18, 2016 at 1:19 am

          Hey IGNUTZ-‘You have got to be tied for the world’s biggest idiot AND the world’s biggest liar at the same time! How does it feel to rise to the highest ranks on the ladder of extreme stupidity? I want to point out that EVERY SINGLE thing you said was incorrect. That kind of stupid takes talent. Have you ever thought of running for office? Have you ever thought…about ANYTHING? Trump is none of the things you said, and he WILL be the next president of the United States. The Statue of Liberty should not come down. It should stay right where it is to serve as a reminder that statues have more intellectual capacity than some of the people in this country (reference to YOU). TRUMP 2016!

          Reply
          • I

            IgnatzApr 18, 2016 at 7:37 am

            Why is it that Trumpites are incapable of saying anything specific, but can only answer question with a string of teenage insults?

            Seriously, grow up.

          • M

            Max BeaverbrookMay 10, 2016 at 8:32 pm

            Get therapy.

          • T

            Timothy Wade CorderApr 18, 2016 at 9:57 am

            I.said what I needed to say…that every single point you made is incorrect. At least I have gone to the trouble to research and think beyond the bias and outright lies that you are only able to regurgitate and repeat like a frickin parrot! It’s sad that this has put you and so many others on rhe wrong side of the revolution.

      • J

        JoeApr 12, 2016 at 11:40 am

        You said it right. Our political system needs repair. Donald Trump is the American to do it.
        Today our present system politicians get elected and they forget the very people that elected them . Take the Reverned Sharpton. I read that he owes the IRS millions and won’t pay. Yet he is not in jail. The IRS won’t try to collect because of the fear of riots. In the meantime Sharpton remains a fat cat. All Americans should obey the same laws. Gen . Patreaus violate the law of confidential information to his lover that was writing his autobiography and gets demoted and railroaded. Yet the liar Clinton had a personal computer/server which was not approved by the government and she is running for President. She also lied to the American people when Sec.of State and only God knows what else. She should be going to jail. I can assure you this would not happed with Donald Trump as President. The Republican Party bosses know that if Trump gets elected their milk tit is also going to get crushed and reminded that they also work for the people that elected them.

        Reply
      • G

        guyApr 13, 2016 at 8:59 pm

        Yeah. That must be it.

        Reply
      • B

        babybunniesApr 24, 2016 at 7:43 pm

        Nope, people who believe in FACTS know that people who make up stats with a 97% result based on nothing but a hunch are complete idiots.

        Reply
        • M

          Max BeaverbrookMay 10, 2016 at 8:31 pm

          You shoudn’t say that about yourself.

          Reply
        • M

          MassaMay 20, 2016 at 4:10 am

          Oh, like “97% of ‘scientists’ agree with AGW?” Hahaha.

          Reply
  • ?

    ??Trumpman??Mar 26, 2016 at 5:28 pm

    Hillary for prison 2016
    Vote for trump if you love America!!

    Reply
    • G

      guyApr 13, 2016 at 9:13 pm

      Or you can just not vote for either demon in a human suit.

      Reply
      • T

        THE TRUMP??Apr 13, 2016 at 9:55 pm

        I’ll be voting on Tuesday for trump!

        Reply
  • D

    David RussoMar 26, 2016 at 1:13 am

    Well, the ole Prof is gonna have egg on his face on this prediction.

    Reply
    • M

      Max BeaverbrookMay 5, 2016 at 1:31 pm

      Not in the least likely! Take it from a Canuck. Your Hitler in Drag, Hillzilla is as good as beat.

      Reply
  • W

    war_blurMar 25, 2016 at 7:37 am

    none of us will see another repug POTUS in our lifetimes: the demographic tide has turned. you can’t win without POC and Latinos.

    Reply
    • J

      Johnny ThorneMar 27, 2016 at 6:34 pm

      Blacks and Hispanics are done being toys of the Democratic Party. They are people too. Trump is the liberator. Making Americans great again. They never have to be the gimme dat people anymore.

      Reply
      • W

        war_blurMar 27, 2016 at 6:37 pm

        I recommend you talk to some black and Latino people, ask them why they support Democrats over you racists. you might learn something, but I doubt it.

        Reply
        • N

          Neal DoubleAAMar 29, 2016 at 3:02 pm

          Well, since I can just talk to myself and my family. We are voting for Trump because he is the only one that is standing up for minorities.

          Democrats keep minorities poor, broke, and stupid so they will vote for them. Sadly, most minorities don’t understand they are being played that the party democratic party.

          Trump is going the end the cycle so that we can be part of society, like everyone else.

          Vote for Trump- Vote for your freedom, start your new business.

          Reply
          • W

            war_blurMar 29, 2016 at 3:04 pm

            “Well, since I can just talk to myself and my family”

            …and that’s how your clueless white privilege keeps you uninformed and bigoted.

            are you afraid to talk to POC and Latinos, to find out why they support Democrats? I’m guessing you are. your fear is why people like drumpf have you by the place where your balls should be.

          • N

            Neal DoubleAAMar 29, 2016 at 7:20 pm

            I am Latino. Try rereading my post.

          • T

            Timothy Wade CorderApr 18, 2016 at 1:39 am

            Oh my God, such a RACIST! I need counseling and reparations because this RACIST made me feel unsafe! Somebody stop his RACIST HATE SPEECH! FREE SPEECH BE DAMNED! You RACIST!!

        • T

          Timothy Wade CorderApr 18, 2016 at 1:44 am

          You’re the frickin’ RACIST, man…hatin’ on Donald Trump just because he’s WHITE! Save your RACIST recommendations. Trump has got this thing won already, as the analysis in the article shows. Maybe you’d understand that if your RACIST ass wasn’t so busy being such a RACIST!!! Vote against the RACISTS!! TRUMP 2016!

          RACIST!

          Reply
        • M

          Max BeaverbrookMay 5, 2016 at 1:36 pm

          I do all the time. “Thanks for your support!”

          Reply
    • B

      babybunniesApr 24, 2016 at 7:48 pm

      Donald Trump doesn’t have Blacks, Latinos, or Women.
      And you can’t win without ANY of those.
      And to top that off, he doesn’t have LGBTQ vote either.
      Donald Trump has the vote of low information misinformed middle aged white, Christian, straight gun owners. The vote against Donald Trump is much larger than the vote for him, even if you look at those who already voted in the primaries.
      Even if you ignore all the other candidates, and just add the votes for Cruz and Kasich, they still have more votes than Trump when added together. Which means more Republicans are voting against Trump than are voting for him.

      Reply
      • M

        Max BeaverbrookMay 5, 2016 at 1:35 pm

        Donald Trump is getting blacks more than any GOP candiate in over half a century. He’s one with them. He’s bonded with blacks. Hillzilla is a world class racist, fascist, anti Semite, and just plain criminal.

        Reply
    • M

      Max BeaverbrookMay 5, 2016 at 1:33 pm

      If you don’t live until January 2017 it’s sad. We;ll miss you. Do have a good life.
      All the best. We Canucks hate all that US racism. Hey if it wasn’t for the likes of Hilzilla maybe all that would be history.

      Reply
  • T

    TK FellowsMar 24, 2016 at 11:09 pm

    I just LOVE how politically correct people, of all parties, are so overly concerned with the feelings of CRIMINALS and protective of criminals, the bad guys, that they are willing to sacrifice innocent’s blood, pain and suffering. They are even willing to sacrifice justice and DEMOCRACY and the very FABRIC that IS AMERICA. They say BLM is excused and valid to kill cops because they are social justice warriors, fighting the good fight against all whites who are racist. Muslim Terrorists are excused to kill and maim and behead because Israel occupies disputed land and America attacked them in wars. Trans sex criminals and illegal sex criminals are excused of committing crimes because they are unfortunate, poor, misunderstood and stigmatized… after all, Liberals argue, “they just want to be normal citizens with rights.” Well trannies are NOT NORMAL and using legislation in attempt to normalize them is like using laws to force people to do anything, it just makes things EXPENSIVE for every tax payer and complicates things and makes things WORSE. THIS IS WHAT LIBERALS AND PRO GOV people do not get: GOVERNMENT IS NOT THE ANSWER. Lawlessness is not an answer to America’s problems. Calling out the truth, seeing Right from wrong, COMMON SENSE, law abiding citizens ARE THE ANSWER. Illegals are called ILLEGAL for a reason: they are criminals who should NOT be here and are a danger to every American. We have no way of knowing if they have a criminal record or diseases or are terrorists or what. A country without a border is NOT a country. HOW can those opposed to a closed border and BLM being labelled a terrorist group argue that the way things are is GOOD? Cops do not deserve to die because of one or 2 are bad. THAT IS BIGOTRY AND HATE CRIME & M U R D E R. BLM is not the judicial branch of the USA, however much OBAMA, Beyonce et al would like them to be! WAKE UP AMERICA. The media IS NOT YOUR FRIEND, THEY DO NOT HAVE YOUR BEST INTEREST AT HEART. THE MEDIA IS NOT I REPEAT NOT WHO TO LISTEN TO in political matters. The media is bought & paid for by the special interest corporations that WANT TO KEEP their power over the masses. They do this through paying off politicians for specal favors. This is why the GOP never even TRIED to defeat Obamacare, mass immigration, etc etc. WAKE UP! They control nearly ALL the outlets and have brainwashed the general public masses dopes into believing the most important thing is to be NON OFFENSIVE, to be hip and have the latest gadgets, to look like everyone else and talk and vote like everyone else. WAKE UP! YOU ARE PUPPETS! WHY……? They want your money! They want you to feel you just gotta have the latest iPHONE, they want you to believe them when they tell you WHO IS SUITABLE to be President and who is not. This is not based on anything that is valid, it is all based on feelings and soft issues.Our country is in the toilet. Our economy, debt, joblessness is BEYOND DISASTAROUS. They are lying to you when they say everything if peachy keen and the most important thing is to keep the status quo with corrupt politicians who DO NOT WANT TO GIVE POWER TO THE PEOPLE, CORRUPT POLITICIANS WHO BLAH BLAH BLAH TALK TALK BUT NEVER tackle REAL problems such as the budget deficit, job loss through poor trade deals and illegal immigration and worldwide terrorism. GOD BLESS AMERICA GOD BLESS TRUMP.

    Reply
    • W

      war_blurMar 25, 2016 at 7:38 am

      LOL! delusional racist haz a sad.

      Reply
      • S

        sotiredofthebsMar 27, 2016 at 6:43 pm

        What interest do you have in this election?

        Reply
        • W

          war_blurMar 27, 2016 at 6:45 pm

          I live in this country. I intend to elect a sane adult as POTUS.

          Reply
          • D

            drill waterMar 27, 2016 at 11:07 pm

            how does it feel knowing he cancels your vote out

          • W

            war_blurMar 27, 2016 at 11:17 pm

            it feels great knowing that we won’t see another repug POTUS elected for a generation, or more: the demographic tide has turned.

          • D

            drill waterMar 27, 2016 at 11:58 pm

            says increasingly nervous man for the seventh time this year

          • W

            war_blurMar 28, 2016 at 12:03 am

            lol!

            yes, so nervous! I’m certain that Latinos, women and POC will suddenly flock to the party that despises them.

            #SOINCREASINGLYNERVOUS

          • D

            drill waterMar 28, 2016 at 3:59 pm

            someone didn’t see the nevada breakdown of latino voters…..

          • M

            Max BeaverbrookMay 5, 2016 at 1:40 pm

            I’d be nervous if Hillzilla were even close to winning. I hate nuclear war. It just blows everything up.

          • T

            Timothy Wade CorderApr 18, 2016 at 1:45 am

            Spoken like a true RACIST!!!

          • M

            Max BeaverbrookMay 5, 2016 at 1:39 pm

            What you feel and what’s real are two different things.

          • T

            Timothy Wade CorderApr 18, 2016 at 1:41 am

            The only person a RACIST like you would try to elect would be another RACE BAITING, RACIAL PROFILING, RACE MONGERING RACIST! YOU RACIST, so deep in your RACIST ideology! How can somebody live with themselves being such a damn RACIST!!

          • M

            Max BeaverbrookMay 5, 2016 at 1:38 pm

            You’ve got at least two choices– Donald Trump or Jill Stein.

  • W

    wilsonsandy2Mar 24, 2016 at 10:05 pm

    IT ONLY MAKES SENSE DEMOCRATS ARE DOWN VOTING BY 35% AND REPUBLICANS ARE WAY UP! TRUMP IS GOING TO WIN HE WILL BE AN AMAZING PRES NOBODY WILL OWN HIM AND HE WILL DO THE RIGHT THING. HE BUILT AN AMAZING BUSINESS WILL MAKE AMERICA SO GREAT!

    Reply
    • J

      joshMar 28, 2016 at 4:03 pm

      Lmao

      Sure except a lot of republicans won’t vote for trump no matter what

      And democrats will turnout to vote against him

      Reply
      • M

        Max BeaverbrookMay 5, 2016 at 1:41 pm

        No they won’t.

        Reply
        • J

          joshMay 5, 2016 at 3:16 pm

          Yes they will

          Look at he polls

          Reply
  • O

    oh godMar 20, 2016 at 10:38 am

    Hillary is not a good candidate.She is facing an FBI investigation for the emails and even worse a public corruption investigation.150 FBI agents assigned would be at a level only assigned to a crimanl mob case.Yet they keep saying she’s going to do fine.In addition, she has been in politics her entire career and cannot avoid things like foreign policy, economic problems, trade and failure to protect our serviceman at Benghazi.What has she done? Nothing good for country plenty good for herself and family.

    Reply
    • M

      Mark AndersonMar 24, 2016 at 2:27 pm

      Secretary Clinton helped restore America’s leadership and standing in the world during a time of global challenges and changes.

      Secretary Clinton made personal appearances in 112 countries, as she tried to repair the damage done to our nation by 8 years of failed foreign policy under Cheney and his sidekick, Bush.

      Secretary Clinton unveiled the Global Hunger and Food Security Initiative.

      Secretary Clinton advocated an expanded role in global economic issues for the State Department and cited the need for an increased U.S. diplomatic presence, especially in Iraq, where the Defense Department had conducted diplomatic missions.

      Secretary Clinton, through high-level and last-minute acts of diplomacy, got the two sides back to the table, when the signing of the Turkish-Armenian accord threatened to unravel.

      Secretary Clinton, through back channel negotiations, was responsible for the initiation of diplomatic talks with Iran over their nuclear program.

      Secretary Clinton built and maintained a coalition to enact the toughest sanctions in Iran’s history.

      Secretary Clinton re-established ties with Russia via Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov, which greatly improved US/Russian relations until Putin took office.

      Secretary Clinton played an integral role in the New START Treaty with Russia.

      Secretary introduced ambitious reform with the Quadrennial Diplomacy and Development Review.

      Secretary Clinton initiated the Women in Public Service Project, a joint venture between the State Department and the Seven Sisters colleges. The goal was to entice more women into entering public service, such that within four decades an equal number of men and women would be working in the field

      Secretary Clinton, in 2010, announced a partnership with the United Nations Foundation to provide some 100 million stoves around the world within the next ten years, and in subsequent travels she urged foreign leaders to adopt policies encouraging their use.

      Secretary Clinton went on Pakistani TV to diplomatically repair the US image in that country. The renewed diplomacy contributed to the hunt for and eventual execution of Osama bin Ladin.

      Secretary Clinton helped avert war in Gaza by negotiating a ceasefire between Israelis and Palestinians.

      Secretary Clinton, in March 2009, overrode VP Biden in an initiative to send in 21,000 extra troops to Afghanistan.

      Secretary Clinton played a role in bringing one war to an end and planning for the end of another.

      Secretary Clinton, Jan ’10, essentially called out China in a speech and defined our technology war on the internet openly. It was the first time the internet had ever been mentioned in the framework of international diplomacy.

      Secretary Clinton was the one who expanded the State Dept’s use of social media in order to reach out & empower others to a level such that people in crisis countries could then use it as an instrument of change within their governments. This had a huge impact… if not the sole catalyst… for the Arab Spring.

      Secretary Clinton was thrust into the forefront of the “Arab Spring” and played a key role in negotiating & navigating diplomatic pressures to accomplish US goals.

      Secretary Clinton was a key in overcoming internal administration opposition to military action in Libya and she used her influence with our allies to keep pressure on the Libyan rebels to overthrow Gaddafi.

      Secretary Clinton gave a speech in 2011 before the UN Human Rights Council regarding LGBT rights on a global scale. “Gay rights are human rights”.

      Secretary Clinton was critical in America’s “pivot to Asia” strategy.

      Secretary Clinton was the first Sec. of State to visit Burma since 1955, supporting democratic reforms there.

      Secretary Clinton elevated the cause of women’s rights to new heights. Hilary’s constant pressure, on a global scale, regarding women’s rights issues saw the entire world make HUGE changes in regards to how women are treated in many nations, most especially in the education of girls and women.

      Secretary Clinton was the first Secretary of State to ever implement the “smart power” approach toward US diplomacy matters… asserting US leadership and values on a global scale by combining military “hard” power with US “soft” power of global economics, development aid, technology, creativity, and human rights advocacy.

      Reply
      • C

        Christopher HudspethMar 24, 2016 at 4:58 pm

        Good god that was erious liberal cucked regurjitation righ there..Hillary is a Criminal that WILL be in Prison soon. She certainly wont be the next President, and if you think she is then you are delusional. Also, no one cares about you Hillary, no one Trusts you and frankly I really dont think anyone would miss you if you died..Go home Hillary, you lost, you vapid cow.

        Reply
        • M

          Max BeaverbrookMay 5, 2016 at 1:42 pm

          I’ve got news for you Hlllzilla is lying damn fascist and warmongering loony toons.

          Reply
          • C

            Christopher HudspethMay 10, 2016 at 5:35 pm

            That is not news.

  • O

    ObtruderMar 8, 2016 at 11:33 am

    That is exactly why the RNC is trying so hard to derail Trump from getting the Republican nomination. They have a pretty good idea of what would happen next.

    Reply
  • D

    DemocracyRulesMar 6, 2016 at 2:00 pm

    Well, pretty excited comments!
    If it’s impossible to use math to predict the past, then the entire man-made global warming theory is unproved. The mathematical climate models are about 20 years old. They predict the past quite well, but not the future. The earth’s climate has cooled for 18 years.

    Reply
    • S

      Sam BlassMar 8, 2016 at 11:15 am

      Mathematical models can be used to predict the past if the data used in making the model isn’t a part of the prediction. For example, if I use the last 20 years of data to predict something that happened 100 years ago, that’s fine. I can’t use the last 20 years of data to predict what happened in the last 20 years.

      Reply
      • D

        DemocracyRulesMar 8, 2016 at 12:33 pm

        Sam:
        Yes, you have a point. Predicting a data set with that same data set is not scientifically acceptable. My point is that it IS mathematically acceptable. Math is just a tool, and the scientist has to know to use it. The scientific problem is that the predictive validity of the math model would not be known until it is applied to a different data set. That’s what I meant about using math models to ‘fill in the blanks’. A good math model should fill in those blanks accurately, wherever they are in time.

        Predicting the past is OK, since that’s different data set. One common method is to use a ‘split half sample’. Take the existing data, and randomly split it into two data sets. Develop the model on one data set, and test it on the other data set.

        A more sophisticated method is to randomly select ten data sets. Then take 1/10 of the data to make the model, and test it on the other nine. There are also ’round robin’ methods, that are done by making 10 models, and testing them on one of the data sets that were not used to make each model. Lots of fun, and it gives a good idea about how robust the model is. If all the models are similar, with similar predictive power on the other data sets, then the model is pretty robust.

        But as I said in another comment, the first thing that jumps out, before doing any math, is that after a two-term president finishes, a candidate from the other party is usually elected president. That’s not just random chance, because if you ask the electorate who they will vote for, and why, many say that they are fed up with the current party in power.

        Reply
  • S

    Sam BlassMar 4, 2016 at 2:17 pm

    Did he create the model prior to 1912? Or did he use data to create a model, then say that his model predicted the data he used to create the model? Very poor science.

    Reply
    • E

      Eddie MoneyMar 21, 2016 at 8:53 am

      He probably created a mathematical model based on the primaries of 2008, (and predicted a winner for 2008). He then tested his model on prior elections to see if it was accurate, and seen it worked. The reason it didn’t work in 1960 (I’m guessing) is because of something most politicians weren’t prepared for, and that was televised debates. JFK won an upset victory over Nixon because nobody realized how important TV and body language would be in electing someone, but now they know… and every politician is prepared for it now. The same goes for social media in this election cycle and future election cycles, the only thing is, Trump is actually the only one prepared for it… and not only is he prepared, he’s changing the way elections will be won in the future. But anyway, the scientist predicted his winner in 2008 and 2012 and had it right.

      Reply
      • J

        janemarpleMar 21, 2016 at 12:18 pm

        You ignore the fact that the 1960 election was stolen by Kennedy through the Chicago vote. No doubt, Clinton will attempt to steal this one.

        Reply
  • J

    JeNaaitUtSteedsMar 3, 2016 at 11:07 am

    So, I’ve done some digging and the LAST two times HeLLmuth made a prediction he was OFF

    In 2012 he said that Obama would get 53.2 percent of the two-party vote and Romney would get 46.8 percent. ACTUAL numbers were 51.1% and 47.2%. which comes to 51.98% and 48.02% when adjust to a two-party vote, ignoring all the other parties.
    www. washingtonpost. com/news/wonk/wp/2012/08/31/forecasting-the-election-most-models-say-obama-will-win-but-not-all/

    Helmut actual Diff
    53.20% 51.10% 2.10%
    46.80% 47.20% -0.40%

    Helmut adjusted Diff
    53.20% 51.98% 1.22%
    46.80% 48.02% -1.22%

    In 2008 he was EVEN MORE off:
    www. sciencedaily. com/releases/2008/10/081016124256.htm
    Norpoth’s forecasted Obama predicting a 50.1% to 49.9% Obama victory
    Actual numbers were Obama 52.9% McCain 45.7%

    Helmut actual Diff
    50.1% 52.9% 2.8%
    49.9% 45.7% -4.2%

    In statistics, these differences are YUGE.

    Reply
    • G

      Gord CampbellMar 4, 2016 at 6:04 pm

      The reason everyone (every Republican that is) defends this guy is that they are either: uneducated, or very slow mentally or incapable of objective thinking.

      There is a basic point of logic that Grade School kids understand. ‘You cannot predict a recorded past event.’

      Also this guy is using the old Roma fortune telling trick. You tell people that you predicted this over a year ago. Very few people actually take the time and patience to check it out.

      Reply
    • E

      Eddie MoneyMar 21, 2016 at 8:42 am

      He still had the winning candidate correct, and that’s all he is saying.. and he has Trump winning by a lot, so there’s much room for error.

      Reply
      • J

        JeNaaitUtSteedsApr 27, 2016 at 9:41 am

        it’s just 2 choices, like a flip a coin. Also, predicting Obama would win wasn’t very hard, not in 2008, because any Democrat would have, and not in 2012 cos incumbents seldom lose.

        Reply
    • M

      Max BeaverbrookMay 5, 2016 at 1:45 pm

      Wrong! He predicted the winner every time but 1`960 which noone else could have predicted and didn’t.

      Reply
  • J

    JeNaaitUtSteedsMar 3, 2016 at 10:28 am

    So, I’ve done some digging and the LAST two times HeLLmuth made a prediction he was OFF

    in 2012 he said that Obama will get 53.2 percent of the two-party vote and Romney will get 46.8 percent. ACTUAL numbers were 51.1% and 47.2%, which comes to 51,98% and 48,02%.
    helmut actual Diff adjusted Diff
    53,20% 51,10% 2,10% 51,98% 1,22%
    46,80% 47,20% -0,40% 48,02% -1,22%

    Reply
  • J

    joshMar 2, 2016 at 3:30 pm

    This is he dumbest study I ever heard of. How do you account for all the republicans splitting the establishment vote. He must account for it some say bc Hillary has a much higher share of her parties vote then trump does.

    If he was my professor I wud never go to class again unless it was to mock him

    I have an Mba in statistics if someone had mentioned this in school they would have been laughed off campus

    Reply
    • L

      Lorelle HatcherMar 2, 2016 at 7:31 pm

      “Norpoth’s primary model works for every presidential election since 1912, with the notable exception of the 1960 election. These results give the model an accuracy of 96.1 percent.”

      Reply
      • J

        JeNaaitUtSteedsMar 3, 2016 at 10:13 am

        That is flawed, because that is like saying: I guessed correct the last 4 times so I have a 100% accuracy.
        My point is that 26 data points is NOT a whole lot to go on.

        Reply
        • M

          Max BeaverbrookMay 5, 2016 at 1:48 pm

          Other variables are in play. A Reuters computer model predcited that a Republican will win the presidency this year. Now what say you to that?

          Reply
          • J

            JeNaaitUtSteedsSep 28, 2016 at 6:24 am

            Didn’t Reuters say that more than half of Clintons visitors at the State Dept were also donor to the Clinton foundation ….. when they left out about 80% of her visitors at the State Dept ???

      • J

        joshMar 3, 2016 at 3:07 pm

        Do you really not think you could develope a model that accurate based on weather data. We have a insane about of data today. You can find any trend you want. A sample size of 25 is not even close to enough.

        I’m a statistician. That is not close to statistically significant for a sample size

        Reply
        • G

          Gord CampbellMar 4, 2016 at 6:14 pm

          You’re trying to pitch something to the predictably stupid. These people even defy simple logic.

          ‘No one can predict, past events.’

          If you can’t get that, the value of any discussion is pointless.

          Reply
          • J

            joshMar 4, 2016 at 8:02 pm

            I know I guess I can’t help trying. I mostly do this to just save the dumbest comments and show them to ppl

        • D

          drill waterMar 27, 2016 at 11:11 pm

          instead of explaining why a sample size of 25 is not enough, you tell us “I’m a statistician”

          lol and I’m marco polo

          Reply
          • J

            joshMar 28, 2016 at 12:08 pm

            Because it’s too small to be statistically significant plus it has not been tested

            You can find all types of trends in historical data

            I’m sure you could look at weather and pick an area and use it to predict pat elections as well

            It would not mean the weather predicted it

      • J

        joshMar 3, 2016 at 7:40 pm

        So I don’t get a thank you for explaining the professors flawed math to you ?

        Reply
    • E

      Eddie MoneyMar 21, 2016 at 8:41 am

      Splitting the establishment vote? There’s only one establishment candidate left and he is doing horrible…. don’t be a fool. There’s NO WAY you have an MBA.

      Reply
      • J

        joshMar 21, 2016 at 1:09 pm

        Lmao u are replying after Rubio left the race

        And Cruz has picked up a lot of the establishment vote even if he is an outsider just bc the establishment wants to stop trump from getting the majority

        Reply
  • T

    ToyBoxofGunsMar 1, 2016 at 11:04 pm

    So, how exactly does one measure the candidates’ performance during the primary when most of the states have yet to even vote?

    Professor Norpoth’s methods should be reviewed before they are given any weight. A lot of claims have been made, but basic facts aren’t adding up.

    Reply
    • L

      Lorelle HatcherMar 2, 2016 at 7:32 pm

      You need to read before commenting. “Norpoth’s primary model works for every presidential election since 1912, with the notable exception of the 1960 election. These results give the model an accuracy of 96.1 percent.”

      Reply
    • M

      Max BeaverbrookMay 5, 2016 at 1:48 pm

      You mean you can’t add them up.

      Reply
  • A

    Armand DumandMar 1, 2016 at 11:54 am

    Trump will win. Everybody knows it. You guys need to understand that the USA is not just San Francisco, L.A., Chicago, and NYC.

    Reply
    • H

      Hermana Shownolove JamesonMar 1, 2016 at 8:13 pm

      Well said.

      Reply
    • A

      AdamMar 2, 2016 at 2:16 am

      Trump has 60% unfavorability in polling aggregates. Everybody knows this is false.

      Reply
      • I

        Identitet14Mar 2, 2016 at 2:07 pm

        Hillary has a 52% unfavorability, according to some polls they have the same or hillary has more. But ofcourse as a liberal you will believe what you want to believe….

        Reply
        • J

          JackMar 2, 2016 at 3:39 pm

          Correction. As a liberal, he will believe what he is TOLD to believe.

          Reply
    • J

      joshMar 2, 2016 at 3:32 pm

      The polls show Hillary ahead of trump in the total pop

      Do you understand that the president isn’t decided by only republican primary voters?

      Reply
      • C

        CentralLogicMar 3, 2016 at 8:36 pm

        I’m voting for Hillary, but actually, if you go to “270 to Win” and fill in the map with the latest polling, Trump is ahead 287-251. Obviously, that will change with time but this election is not one to take for granted.

        Reply
        • J

          joshMar 3, 2016 at 9:10 pm

          What poll is polling by state ?

          Reply
          • C

            CentralLogicMar 4, 2016 at 3:27 am

            Google “(any state name) Trump vs Clinton poll”, and it will take you to a RealClear Politics page with the polls.

          • J

            joshMar 4, 2016 at 5:48 am

            Yes I was able to find that. If you only look at the reputable polls that are taken in the last month Clinton is way ahead of trump.

            you have to look at the date of the poll and which poll it is. Many of those polls were unknown polls with republican bias. If you look at those small polls nation polls they have trump ahead while even fox has Clinton 5 or more point ahead

            And even if you counted those polls Clinton is ahead

          • G

            grassy knollMar 7, 2016 at 6:17 pm

            “Reputable polls”
            LOL!

          • J

            joshMar 7, 2016 at 6:21 pm

            Why r u laughing ?

            What polls do u think are reputable

          • G

            grassy knollMar 7, 2016 at 6:55 pm

            None- especially nowadays.

          • J

            joshMar 7, 2016 at 7:01 pm

            Lol yep they were so wrong in 2012 and they have been so wrong showing trump ahead in all the states he won

            What r u talking about ?

          • G

            grassy knollMar 7, 2016 at 7:05 pm

            Nothing the msm reports on is trustworthy, polls are bought and paid for, etc…just like the diebold voting machines.
            You must have missed the part of the new Patriot Act where it allows the gov to use the media to push whatever agenda they like.

          • J

            joshMar 7, 2016 at 7:26 pm

            Lmao

            What does the patriot act have to do with polls ?

            And why are the accurate in predicting most election days in the primaries now and in 2012?

          • G

            grassy knollMar 7, 2016 at 7:29 pm

            The Patriot Act has everything to do with what is being reported by the media, who in turn happen to be the people who report the poll results.

            They are accurate because the same company that controls the polls, controls the voting machines- either directly or indirectly.

          • J

            joshMar 7, 2016 at 7:32 pm

            The polls are reported by the polls.

            What media station owns Gallup?

          • G

            grassy knollMar 7, 2016 at 7:39 pm

            The media station doesn’t own Gallup- the people who own the media station own Gallup.

          • J

            joshMar 7, 2016 at 7:45 pm

            Who?

          • G

            grassy knollMar 7, 2016 at 7:58 pm

            Honestly I dunno which corporate beast owns Gallup- But here’s a link to the media owners who indirectly run Gallup and the other polls.
            http://www.businessinsider(DOT)com/this-chart-shows-the-bilderberg-groups-connection-to-everything-in-the-world-2012-6

            and another that shows how they’re all connected

            http://www.businessinsider(DOT)com/this-chart-shows-the-bilderberg-groups-connection-to-everything-in-the-world-2012-6
            You’ll have to take my DOT out and replace with a proper one.

          • J

            joshMar 7, 2016 at 8:58 pm

            Why are u using non active links?

          • G

            grassy knollMar 7, 2016 at 9:02 pm

            They’re active after the link is fixed. I just pulled them off of their respective pages when I posted the comment.
            Remove the (DOT) and add a .

          • J

            joshMar 7, 2016 at 9:03 pm

            Why wud u not copy the link

          • G

            grassy knollMar 7, 2016 at 9:12 pm

            This site does not allow direct linking in their comment section. And yes, I actually graduated high school when they taught education.
            The same mfers that own the media own pretty much all aspects of info presented by the media which would definitely include Gallup.
            Its obvious you’re just a troll and don’t like what the links have to say- and rather than refute them because you can’t- you call the links fake and make a plss poor insult.

          • J

            joshMar 7, 2016 at 9:15 pm

            Who r these same mfers
            Is it a certain group u r trying to talk about ?

            And why are the polls consistently right?

          • G

            grassy knollMar 7, 2016 at 9:21 pm

            The polls are Gerrymandered just like the voting districts are. The pollsters go to the people they want to get the approved answer from.

          • J

            joshMar 7, 2016 at 9:24 pm

            Then why r they consistently accurate?

            The polls specifically poll a sample that reflects the populationGo read any polls methodology and see

            And what do you think all these polls are conspiring together and just so happen to consistently be right ?

          • G

            grassy knollMar 7, 2016 at 9:27 pm

            Its all part of the show to keep the ignorant sheep ignorant.
            The numbers could be drawn up to read anything they want and no one would know the difference.

          • J

            joshMar 7, 2016 at 9:36 pm

            The numbers are posted before the election.

            How can they draw it up?

            What r you trying to say ?

          • G

            grassy knollMar 7, 2016 at 9:45 pm

            Yea they are and the machines are setup accordingly for the desired result.

            It doesn’t matter how the people vote, it only matters who counts the votes- J. Stalin

            If voting mattered they would let us do it- Mark Twain.
            ETC…

          • J

            joshMar 7, 2016 at 9:48 pm

            Lmao u think the elections are all fixed lmao

            Every state every primary

            Lmao

            Wow

          • J

            joshMar 7, 2016 at 9:51 pm

            Why don’t u leave the country if the elections r fixed ?

          • G

            grassy knollMar 7, 2016 at 9:55 pm

            WTF would that solve? I’m not sitting here bashing the US- I’m bashing the corrupt media and gov’t.

            I’m a proud US citizen I’m just not ignorant to the blatantly obvious dishonesty that goes on on both sides of the political fence.

          • J

            joshMar 7, 2016 at 10:02 pm

            When did ppl start fixing elections?

          • G

            grassy knollMar 7, 2016 at 10:05 pm

            When we first started electing people into public office, if I had to guess maybe Roman times?

          • J

            joshMar 7, 2016 at 10:08 pm

            So u don’t think America has ever been a democracy ? But u love being an American

            Lmao u are entertaining I’ll give u that

          • G

            grassy knollMar 7, 2016 at 10:13 pm

            The United States has NEVER been a democracy….its been a representative republic since day 1.
            You’re pretty entertaining yourself for a leftist.

          • J

            joshMar 7, 2016 at 10:16 pm

            It’s a democracy how is it not lmao

          • G

            grassy knollMar 7, 2016 at 10:23 pm

            A democracy would take each citizens vote specifically and elect the candidate who ended up with the most actual votes.
            A democracy would also give you a vote in every law, general decision, and appointment made in the country. Mob rule at its finest.
            In a representative republic people elect representatives to go vote for them. This is what we have had since day 1.
            We do not live in a democracy and never have.

          • J

            joshMar 7, 2016 at 10:29 pm

            That’s not true

            The us is a representative democracy

            Jefferson and many other founding fathers call America a democracy

            Plus what u said is not the definition of a democracy

            U just have these pretend idea in your head

          • G

            grassy knollMar 7, 2016 at 10:32 pm

            Wrong- the US is a REPUBLIC- go ahead and say the pledge to yourself real slow and get back to me.
            Democracy is exactly what I said. You need to check Webster’s man.

          • J

            joshMar 7, 2016 at 10:33 pm

            A republic is a democracy

          • G

            grassy knollMar 7, 2016 at 10:37 pm

            LOL- no its not.

            A republic (from Latin: res publica) is a sovereign state or country which is organized with a form of government in which power resides in elected individuals representing the citizen body and government leaders exercise power according to the
            rule of law.

          • J

            joshMar 7, 2016 at 10:39 pm

            Which follows websters definition of a democracy

            Where did u get your definition ?

            Let’s see how they define democracy

          • G

            grassy knollMar 7, 2016 at 10:53 pm

            Their definition matches the b part of yours, BUT they are both “modern” definitions so to speak- I guess I can’t really call it inaccurate at that point. But with the way nominations are setup on at least the Dem side of the fence of all groups the people don’t actually have a vote because of the way they game the delegates and superdelegates.
            Article 4 section 4 of the Constitution prescribes that “the United
            States shall guarantee to every State in this Union a Republican form of
            Government.”
            That’s just the first example I could find in the Constitution- I cannot find the mention of the word “Democracy” in there but it may be somewhere.

          • J

            joshMar 7, 2016 at 11:01 pm

            Jefferson called America a democracy lmao was he using the modern term

            Lmao and u provide a definition for republic from a source the prove u wrong about a democracy lol

            Even with u crazy made up rules the Senate is elected by popular vote that’s a democracy

            Just grow a pair and admit u were wrong

          • J

            joshMar 7, 2016 at 10:35 pm

            Here is websters
            1
            a : government by the people; especially : rule of the majority
            b : a government in which the supreme power is vested in the people and exercised by them directly or indirectly through a system of representation usually involving periodically held free elections

            How dumb do you feel right now lmao

          • G

            grassy knollMar 7, 2016 at 10:39 pm

            A is the proper definition in this context.

          • J

            joshMar 7, 2016 at 10:40 pm

            It’s both lmao

            Why do u get to choose which

            Lmao

          • J

            joshMar 7, 2016 at 10:47 pm

            First u say get websters

            Now u nitpick which one when it proves u wrong

          • G

            grassy knollMar 7, 2016 at 10:55 pm

            I wasn’t nitpicking in the least- the b definition is incorrect for a proper democracy.

          • J

            joshMar 7, 2016 at 10:58 pm

            Then why did u tell me websters

            Why do u think you have the right definition lmao

            Such a fool

          • G

            grassy knollMar 7, 2016 at 11:11 pm

            Im a fool? You’ve got 2000 comments and 550 votes?
            You’re a pathetic fu cking troll who has zero knowledge about the countries history or even proper definitions of political terms.
            I definitely have the right definition.

          • J

            joshMar 8, 2016 at 6:56 am

            Upvotes lmao

            All those mean is that u post on pages like minded ppl go

            But let’s go over the fact tell me what below is wrong

            U tell me I need websters dictionary

            I give u the websters dedinition which proves me right and you wrong

            You then say only part is good and you ignore the party that proves you wrong

            Then u provide your own definition

            But when I ask for the definition of democracy from that source u have to admit that dictionary proves you wrong

            Now u say u know better then all the dictionaries and Thomas Jefferson

            Correct ?
            Lmao

          • J

            joshMar 8, 2016 at 7:07 am

            Why r u avoiding the issue that u references two sources both proved you wrong and you have presented zero evidence to support your arguement

            Lmao

            Let me guess it’s that media changing the definitions right
            Lol

          • M

            Max BeaverbrookMay 5, 2016 at 2:14 pm

            Asshat! I’m saying it now.

          • M

            Max BeaverbrookMay 5, 2016 at 2:13 pm

            When are you going to stop wasting your time?

          • J

            joshMar 7, 2016 at 10:29 pm

            democracy definition. A system of government in which power is vested in the people, who rule either directly or through freely elected representatives. Note: Democratic institutions, such as parliaments, may exist in a monarchy.

          • M

            Max BeaverbrookMay 5, 2016 at 2:12 pm

            The more time you waste on what some Canucks would call an asshat the more time you could better use with those with some common sense and decency.

          • M

            Max BeaverbrookMay 5, 2016 at 2:11 pm

            That it’s worse than not being able to spell. You need to learn some manners, Yank. If you were here in Canada I’d have to oblige you old boy.

          • J

            joshMay 5, 2016 at 3:29 pm

            I feel bad for you parents. They had such a special needs child

          • M

            Max BeaverbrookMay 10, 2016 at 8:49 pm

            As some Yanks would say “I’ve got your special needs.”

          • J

            joshMay 11, 2016 at 8:23 am

            Calling me a yank

            I’m very proud of it so thanks

          • J

            joshMar 7, 2016 at 9:26 pm

            And Gerrymandering is the reshaping of borders. Polls don’t draw borders.

            You are saying they skew their sample which they don’t and u can read about their methodology if u actually want to know the truth

            But it seems u are afraid of the truth

            You probably thing fox is in on it too showing trump behind

          • G

            grassy knollMar 7, 2016 at 9:30 pm

            Yes Gerrymandering is reshaping of borders- which calls by the pollsters can whichever district happens to have the voting block they are looking for.

            95 percent of US media is owned by 6 companies- that info was in the first link I put up.
            Fox is owned by one of those companies- who’s agenda do you think fox would be pushing?
            Certainly you don’t believe fox is pushing the truth do you?

          • J

            joshMar 7, 2016 at 9:42 pm

            The republicans agenda lmao and they have trump losing

            I think that why fox skews GOP and is more inaccurate the Gallup and cnn Etc but they all are usually in the same range.

            All those polls have trump far behind

            And why do the elections reasults consistently reflect the polls

          • J

            joshMar 7, 2016 at 9:43 pm

            And u keep pretending the media own everything they don’t

            Like you keep sayin media media media are u trying to call out a certain group of ppl

          • M

            Max BeaverbrookMay 5, 2016 at 2:10 pm

            Just go back to your spelling tutor. It’s a good start. Maybe one day you get past primary school.

          • J

            joshMay 5, 2016 at 3:28 pm

            Did you even elf radiate high school

          • M

            Max BeaverbrookMay 5, 2016 at 2:09 pm

            Now You can’t spell the word “you.” Oh the wonders of your “education.”

          • J

            joshMay 5, 2016 at 3:28 pm

            Lol

            I’m much more educated then you it’s called abreviatimg

          • M

            Max BeaverbrookMay 10, 2016 at 8:48 pm

            You called full of shit in the US ghettos.

          • J

            joshMay 11, 2016 at 8:22 am

            Lmao you don’t even know what your saying

          • M

            Max BeaverbrookMay 5, 2016 at 2:08 pm

            Do you know how to spell the word “are”? I know that one’s just plain wrong. Take off. Even you can spell that one.

          • J

            joshMay 5, 2016 at 3:27 pm

            Lmao so dumb

          • M

            Max BeaverbrookMay 10, 2016 at 8:47 pm

            Yes you are. Now go back to kindergarten if you can meet their
            “strict requirements.”

          • J

            joshMar 7, 2016 at 9:15 pm

            Why r the polls consistently accurate then ?

          • M

            Max BeaverbrookMay 5, 2016 at 2:07 pm

            They aren’t.

          • J

            joshMay 5, 2016 at 3:27 pm

            they had trump winning the were right

            They have been wrong only a few times out of all the primaries

          • J

            joshMar 7, 2016 at 9:16 pm

            U don’t think it’s a problem that u say it’s the same ppl but you don’t know who they are?

          • M

            Max BeaverbrookMay 5, 2016 at 2:07 pm

            But you can spell, and the other old boy seems to have a bit of problem unless my Yank is completely off. I use it now and then with my Amercan friends below the border.

          • M

            Max BeaverbrookMay 5, 2016 at 2:05 pm

            “Wud!” again! If I didn’t knbw better , and I don’t,I’d think you need a spelling tutor.

          • J

            joshMay 5, 2016 at 3:26 pm

            Lmao you don’t even know what an abreviation is do you ?

          • M

            Max BeaverbrookMay 10, 2016 at 8:46 pm

            I know what an arse is. You are doing “rather well’ on defining the term, now.

          • J

            joshMay 11, 2016 at 8:22 am

            Lmao you don’t even know the difference between a synonym and an abbreviation

          • J

            joshMar 7, 2016 at 9:06 pm

            Lmao is a group of 200 ppl

            What r u saying the ppl who own Gallup cud have been in the same group as the ppl from a media station

            Did u even graduate high school?

          • M

            Max BeaverbrookMay 5, 2016 at 2:05 pm

            I’m a bit fluent in Yank though I’m a Canuck. But “cud”! Isn’t that a misspelling even for Yank or American or in your case maybe Amurkan, the fascist version.

          • J

            joshMay 5, 2016 at 3:26 pm

            It’s an abreviation ppl use when on a smartphone

          • J

            joshMar 7, 2016 at 9:02 pm

            Lol you don’t know who but u are saying it lmao someone is fos

            And those links are fake

          • M

            Max BeaverbrookMay 5, 2016 at 2:00 pm

            Your mama. Oh, and wish a Happy Mom’s Day.

          • J

            joshMay 5, 2016 at 3:25 pm

            Lmao caught lying so make insults

            Even fox has him down 7 points

            But like most conservatives you lack a 1st grade understanding of math

          • M

            Max BeaverbrookMay 10, 2016 at 8:44 pm

            Bullshit! We voted to take out the Harperites like the Obamaites and Klantonites. You as usual don’t know what you’re talking about.

          • J

            joshMay 11, 2016 at 8:20 am

            Huh

          • J

            joshMar 7, 2016 at 7:34 pm

            Very little of the patriot act is still Leagal .

            What part of the patriot act are u even referring to

          • J

            joshMar 7, 2016 at 6:23 pm

            What states do u see him ahead that r taken in last 3 months ?

            I see Clinton way ahead

          • M

            Max BeaverbrookMay 5, 2016 at 1:58 pm

            Bad vision. Do see your eye doctor.

          • S

            Señor PieuPieuPieuMar 6, 2016 at 8:20 pm

            The general election.

          • J

            joshMar 7, 2016 at 6:22 pm

            The general election is not a poll

            Do you understand what a poll is?

          • M

            Max BeaverbrookMay 5, 2016 at 1:57 pm

            In English or American! In English an election is a poll.

          • J

            joshMay 5, 2016 at 3:21 pm

            Texhnically yes but in politics the term poll only refers to estimates for an election

        • M

          Max BeaverbrookMay 5, 2016 at 1:57 pm

          Yeah, it will be much more lopsided. Look for another 1988 or even a 1972 style election but worse for Hillzilla. At least George McGovern had integrity and ethics– something Hillzilla has none of.

          Reply
      • C

        CozetteMar 14, 2016 at 10:51 am

        Do you understand most polls are bought and paid for then disseminated via the bought and paid for media to drive a political narrative? If the elites in both parties actually thought Trump would lose the general election they would embrace him in order to bring in so many new voters. But they know he’d win and intends to clean house when he does. That means he has to be prevented from becoming the nominee. That’s why they are backing the most obnoxious member of their team, Cruz. The donor class in both parties don’t care who wins as long as it’s not someone who will actually try to make real changes.

        Reply
        • J

          joshMar 14, 2016 at 11:09 am

          Yea neither party seems to care right now lol

          And I wonder why all the legitimate polls agree trump has little to no chance in a general

          Reply
      • L

        LurkerMar 18, 2016 at 8:32 am

        Do you understand we have a heated Republican Primary fight & #NeverTrump BS going around that is skewing the polls up?

        Reply
        • J

          joshMar 18, 2016 at 12:03 pm

          Peoples opinions are not skewing things

          That’s what’s actually happening

          That’s like saying almost nobody liked Jeb bush that skewed the reasults

          Reply
          • M

            Max BeaverbrookMay 5, 2016 at 1:55 pm

            Then why is Hillzilla behind the Donald?

          • J

            joshMay 5, 2016 at 3:20 pm

            She isn’t

          • J

            joshMay 5, 2016 at 3:20 pm

            Even fox has trump training by alot

          • M

            Max BeaverbrookMay 10, 2016 at 8:41 pm

            No he isn’t training Hillzilla. She can’t be trained.

      • J

        Just SayingMar 21, 2016 at 7:41 pm

        Reagan was down by 25% at one point (this point?). This professor’s model will hold true in November.

        Reply
        • J

          joshMar 22, 2016 at 7:52 am

          like I said u can find weather patterns that determine elections 100% of the time over last 50 years

          Wud the weather determine your opinion lol

          Reply
          • J

            Just SayingMar 22, 2016 at 1:21 pm

            you are right, if the model had a history of being predictive, as this appeared to be. not the only factor, mind you.

          • J

            joshMar 22, 2016 at 2:07 pm

            With all the data we have today it easy to find data that appear to predict past events

            The thing is that most of the time it’s a coincidence

          • J

            Just SayingMar 22, 2016 at 3:10 pm

            agreed

          • D

            drill waterMar 27, 2016 at 11:13 pm

            ok. lets see it. lets see the weather pattern that predicts the election for the past 50 years.

            still haven’t found it?

            keep trying!

          • J

            joshMar 28, 2016 at 12:08 pm

            I’m sure there are 100s of data points you could use

          • D

            drill waterMar 28, 2016 at 3:58 pm

            ok. so do it

          • J

            joshMar 28, 2016 at 4:01 pm

            It’s a waste of time

            Anyone with a statistical background knows what I am saying

          • D

            drill waterApr 5, 2016 at 6:32 pm

            SOMEHOW i DON’T BELIEVE YOU ARE A GOOD JUDGE OF WHAT CONSTITUTES A WASTE OF TIME OOPS CAPS

          • J

            joshApr 5, 2016 at 9:52 pm

            So your arguement is about the fact I accidentally hit my cap button on my iPhone

            Good call talking statistics is probably going to be over your head.

          • D

            drill waterApr 23, 2016 at 8:40 am

            and your argument is not an argument at all, but an ad hominem.

          • J

            joshApr 25, 2016 at 8:05 am

            Wait you didn’t realize how dumb this arguement on your side now lmao

            Look at general election polling trump has no hand and is falling further and further behind Clinton and sanders

          • D

            drill waterApr 26, 2016 at 2:29 pm

            ah yes, the same polling data that had jeb as a shoe in

          • J

            joshApr 27, 2016 at 8:17 am

            Nope not the same at all once real polling data came out trump was ahead

          • M

            Max BeaverbrookMay 5, 2016 at 1:53 pm

            No he isn’t. He’s ahead of her right now. This is without the grand jury indictment for a felony or felonies or her husband’s war on women being exposed or the worst of Hillzilla’s past exposed. Can you say Goldwater girl?

          • J

            joshMay 5, 2016 at 3:19 pm

            No he isn’t . I’m sure you are using a biased poll nobody has ever heard of a an extreamly low sample size

          • M

            Max BeaverbrookMay 5, 2016 at 1:51 pm

            So am I, and I can’t agree with you.

          • J

            joshMay 5, 2016 at 3:19 pm

            Clearly not

            Trump can’t get more then

            40% millenial
            40% female
            25% black
            25 % Hispanic

            That on its own is enough to show he can’t win

          • M

            Max BeaverbrookMay 10, 2016 at 8:40 pm

            Will Rogers said it best. “It’s not what you kmow. It’s what you know that just ain’t so.”

      • M

        Max BeaverbrookMay 5, 2016 at 1:50 pm

        Actually the last polls shows Donald Trump ahead.

        Reply
        • J

          joshMay 5, 2016 at 3:17 pm

          No they don’t. Let me guess your using a poll that nobody has heard of and has a sample size of 1000 or less

          Reply
          • M

            Max BeaverbrookMay 10, 2016 at 8:39 pm

            Wrong I’m not using any of your stuffed polls. Go home to your mama.

          • J

            joshMay 11, 2016 at 8:19 am

            Then why did you reference polls

    • M

      Max BeaverbrookMay 5, 2016 at 1:49 pm

      Lay off San Francisco. Go for it on the others.

      Reply
  • T

    TemptressMar 1, 2016 at 8:26 am

    Wonder why he presented his model before an audience of civilians rather than publish a paper and submit it for peer review…

    Reply
    • P

      Powered by UNicorn flatulenceMar 1, 2016 at 5:50 pm

      Couldnt possibly be because only six people read those journals and the president affects a lot of people

      Reply
  • R

    Ralph W. BastedoFeb 29, 2016 at 7:57 pm

    As a doctoral graduate of the electoral behavior/ political psychology program at Stony Brook decades ago, I agree with Professor Tugwell.

    Reply
  • R

    Rexford TugwellFeb 29, 2016 at 6:05 pm

    Garbage in, garbage out.

    Reply
    • R

      Rusty ShacklefordMar 1, 2016 at 12:53 pm

      He did win…just as it had predicted.

      Reply
      • R

        Rexford TugwellMar 1, 2016 at 2:46 pm

        The same guy and model predicted a razor thin Obama win in 2008 but Obama won comfortably.

        Reply
      • D

        David BerkleyMar 2, 2016 at 10:39 am

        He didn’t win yet. This article is about the presidency, NOT super Tuesday or even the republican nomination.

        Reply
    • C

      CentralLogicMar 3, 2016 at 8:35 pm

      There was this little event that happened – the financial meltdown of 2008. Any Democratic candidate would have won by a larger-than-predicted margin.

      Reply
      • R

        Rexford TugwellMar 3, 2016 at 8:58 pm

        Your post sort of refutes the logic of attempting to develop a standardized model.

        Reply
    • M

      Max BeaverbrookMay 10, 2016 at 8:52 pm

      You have nothing in common with the real Rexford Tugwell. All this water carrying for Hilllzilla. Tugwell was a strong backer of Henry Wallace.

      Reply
  • C

    Carl Raymond SFeb 29, 2016 at 4:09 pm

    This outsider comment is from a resident of Sydney, citizen of Australia…feel free to tell me to bugger off, but it’s something US folks ought to factor on voting day…

    If Trump is elected, the USA loses the respect of every other civilised nation. The person you elect represents your nation when he/she travels, and I promise you that Trump will garner zero respect – like an inverse Angela Merkel. If you prefer not being looked down upon from abroad, you need to elect a non-racist, non-sexist, non-homophobe who is prepared to tackle the CO2 problem. People will still be perplexed by the American gun culture (a nation that rails agains abortion, but allows Sandy Hook – WTF?), but there we’ve come to accept that it’s something beyond the means of the president to cure.

    Reply
    • D

      David MaynardMar 1, 2016 at 1:27 am

      Honestly you cannot even begin to grasp how little I care what you or anyone else who is not a citizen of this country thinks. Bugger off? We have a far better word for it.

      Most of the world can remain as perplexed as they want, they still take the money. So how about you sitting quietly down there and let the big boy table take care of itself.

      Reply
      • C

        Carl Raymond SMar 1, 2016 at 1:32 am

        Take the money? Can you explain that please David. Have you any idea how little in taxes Google and Apple pay to the nations where they make half their profit?

        Reply
        • J

          Joshua SmithMar 1, 2016 at 3:13 pm

          I love it smart people shut up stupid mean people.

          Reply
        • P

          Powered by UNicorn flatulenceMar 1, 2016 at 5:55 pm

          Yup.
          Toys are made in Asia, but are expensive there.
          Why?
          Because they do NOT design them.
          If you lived in the country that INVENTED the internet I should be thanking you.

          Reply
    • A

      Anon AmousMar 1, 2016 at 9:16 am

      The US lost any and all credibility when it elected Hussain Obama as President.

      Reply
      • C

        Carl Raymond SMar 1, 2016 at 11:19 am

        Not at all – Barack Hussain Obama is well respected and loved around the world. He’s the reason we are gobsmacked you could even consider going from brilliant (Obama), to borderline crazy (Trump).

        Reply
        • R

          Rusty ShacklefordMar 1, 2016 at 12:57 pm

          Its interesting, half the country would like nothing more than to hang him, a good portion are outright disillusioned with him, with a small minority that think he actually did a good job.

          Reply
          • A

            AdamMar 2, 2016 at 2:24 am

            Nah… his approval rating by many sources is around 50%. The country does not have nearly as negative of an opinion of him as you do.

        • T

          Ti MiMar 2, 2016 at 1:32 am

          what planet do you live on? Obama is well respected around the world? and brilliant? oh my-thanks for the giggles… guess your head has been buried up your arse for way too long, and you just decided to come up for some fresh air for a moment?

          Reply
          • A

            AdamMar 2, 2016 at 2:23 am

            Are you brainwashed or something? Going by political opinion polling in foreign countries, the opinion of the U.S. went up dramatically, normally by double-digits with Barack Obama’s election. And it has only marginally gone down over his two terms.

            Looks like you’ve been watching too much FOX and letting it give your brain a good, deep scrubbing.

          • D

            David BerkleyMar 2, 2016 at 10:54 am

            These people are oblivious to the fact that Obama’s Nobel prize was a resounding statement about world respect following U.S. policies that basically lead the world into an unending war and a global recession. They probably have also never set foot on another continent.

          • G

            GuinnessmonkeyMar 4, 2016 at 2:05 pm

            If only there was a way to find out… Oh, wait, there is. Try Googling, “obama worldwide approval rating”. You’ll see there that, outside of a few countries like Russia, Venezuela, and North Korea, Obama is widely respected and liked around the world, getting particularly high marks in Europe, Africa, and most of East Asia. As a rule, the only countries that give him less than 50% approval ratings are countries with whose governments use anti-American propaganda (so he’s not unpopular for being Obama, but for being the POTUS): Argentina, China, Palestine, Pakistan, etc. or where a pro-American government is widely distrusted by the people (Jordan, for example).

            The main exception seems to be on climate change, where the rest of the world has started to lose patience with Obama’s inability to get anything that would mitigate climate change past the GOP Congress.

        • I

          irwincurMar 2, 2016 at 1:41 am

          Because he is a pushover. The world always likes weak American presidents, it represents an advantage for them. Frankly, the US should be negotiating from a place of power, it has earned that right and to do anything but is not properly representing the people.

          Reply
    • R

      Rusty ShacklefordMar 1, 2016 at 1:16 pm

      That is the big difference between the US and Europe/Commonwealth: US doesn’t care what the rest of the world thinks of them.
      Besides, the american people don’t want a Angela Merkel. Somebody who shows absolute contempt for the German and European peoples and their culture. Obama has been bad enough in that regard.

      Reply
      • C

        Carl Raymond SMar 1, 2016 at 3:54 pm

        I met a couple of lovely American ladies when we recently travelled to Ireland. They seemed to care what people thought.

        I mean, contempt can easily work both ways – the world’s cafes could adopt a ‘serve Americans last’ policy. They could make Thursday ‘spit on Americans’ day.

        All rather silly and horrible, don’t you think? So much easier and more pleasant if we all just treat each other with respect – and that does require giving a damn what the other thinks.

        Reply
        • A

          aperture_techMar 2, 2016 at 1:29 am

          Surprise, women cared what others thought while in their company. That’s almost every woman in the world.They could not care less after that vacation. America should not have to give a care about other nations.

          Reply
        • I

          irwincurMar 2, 2016 at 1:39 am

          Perhaps you should read a little into Trump’s history and why he is so highly regarded in business circles. It is that he is known as a strong but fair negotiator and listens to all sides while deal making. Sure he is bombastic, but in NYC you kind of have to be to stick out. He is well known to get input from the lowest of his employees when making decisions, like the grounds crew at a golf course he was building or a janitor in Trump Towers. How many global CEO’s do you know that even talk to the kitchen staff let alone ask for their advice?

          Reply
        • D

          Dudebro ZeroMar 4, 2016 at 11:20 am

          And you also recently took the plane from Australia to Ireland and back! Well, can’t say you didn’t at least try to cause global warming all by yourself. “WON’T SOMEBODY THINK OF THE CO2!!!” Carl Raymond S, posting from my iPhone on a plane

          Reply
          • C

            Carl Raymond SMar 4, 2016 at 3:33 pm

            I agree, planes are the most difficult to electrify – they are the highest hanging fruit. But there is low hanging fruit – cars, coal-power. Technology is moving fast, and by the time we have electrified and made renewable the easy stuff, the hard stuff will be doable.

          • D

            Dudebro ZeroMar 4, 2016 at 6:43 pm

            And when we’ve “electrified” everything the energy will be clean because it comes out of the wall, right? God damn it, hippie, the only reliable “renewable” energy at this point is nuclear. You want all power to be produced by nuclear facilities? Do you think our ridiculous power consumption can be satisfied with wind and solar? Absurd. We’ll be using fossil until it runs out and when it does we are entering an energy crisis.
            Also, you won’t live to see a plane that doesn’t burn some resource midflight. Should we equip planes with mini-reactors?

      • A

        AdamMar 2, 2016 at 2:21 am

        Uh, for someone who’s main “pro” being their ability to negotiate with foreign partners, Trump and his supporters should care deeply about what we are thought of, and their candidate (whom everyone else except the man this article is about agrees will lose in a landslide in the general).

        Reply
    • P

      Powered by UNicorn flatulenceMar 1, 2016 at 5:53 pm

      We dont want to piss off the world that counts on us for their safety?
      I get it.
      There a lot of beggar nations that want to tell us what to do.

      Reply
      • C

        Carl Raymond SMar 1, 2016 at 6:00 pm

        OR, we can all decide to be kind to one another – dismantle all those wasted armed forces, divert the resources to productive endeavours and live in harmony.
        I mean – who is going to bomb their kids Facebook friends?

        Reply
        • P

          Powered by UNicorn flatulenceMar 1, 2016 at 6:06 pm

          You say you dont know squat about world piracy, especially historically?
          You work for somali pirates or something?
          I was raised by idealistic communists, dude.
          I get your unicorn world.
          You wanna power all of sydney’s infrasructure with unicorn farts after you get rid of internal combustion?
          By the way, we are CARBON based life forms.
          CO2 is plant food, duh.
          In Star Trek they all live in peace and harmony.
          I live in the real world.
          My communist mother loves loves loves Obambi and so do Chinese dictators.
          My ma hates Trump.
          And communist dictators hate Trump, too.
          The FACT that you DONT like Trump is a big reason to LOVE him

          Reply
        • P

          Powered by UNicorn flatulenceMar 2, 2016 at 8:19 am

          We can hold hands and sing “Kumbaya”?
          What a freak =in moron

          Reply
          • C

            Carl Raymond SMar 2, 2016 at 8:54 pm

            Well, I’d pick a better song – one without references to imaginary beings, something with a good beat, but yeah, you’re starting to think now.
            The only thing that makes you American and me Australian is a logo on our passports. One day, with luck, you will wake up and discover that you’re an earthling – made of the same stuff as everybody else.

          • P

            Powered by UNicorn flatulenceMar 3, 2016 at 7:50 am

            You should talk you hypocrite.
            Australia’s immigration laws are far far far far stronger than the US ones.
            All those borders mean nothing and every country in the world has immigration laws.
            We arent in favor of eliminating our sovereignty in favor of one world government?
            How horrible

          • C

            Carl Raymond SMar 3, 2016 at 4:10 pm

            World peace would be horrible? How sad.

          • P

            Powered by UNicorn flatulenceMar 4, 2016 at 7:55 am

            You believe in unicorns, too?
            I was raised by communist hypocrites, but I repeat myself.
            Sorry, I dont fantasize about communism as you do, any longer.
            World peas?
            Yeah, I am for world peas.
            Muslim for Trump
            Make America great again

          • C

            Carl Raymond SMar 4, 2016 at 3:17 pm

            Nobody said anything about communism. I’m a strong believer in markets – government involvement is always the last resort (though occasionally unavoidable, such as the need to put a price on carbon pollution).
            At least we can agree on one thing – religion is bad. It’s hard enough getting everybody on the same page when we stick to seeing what’s actually there.

          • P

            Powered by UNicorn flatulenceMar 5, 2016 at 9:40 am

            Allahu Akbar.

          • C

            Carl Raymond SMar 5, 2016 at 12:01 pm

            lol – careful there. Casual reader might think you meant that.

          • P

            Powered by UNicorn flatulenceMar 6, 2016 at 6:30 am

            I did.
            I was born in this country, raised by atheist communist and I dared embrace the religion of Islam over 20 years ago.
            I was under the impression then that religion was something Americans had the freedom to choose for themselves.
            Be careful, some of us have the impression that freedom to chose your own religion is a cherished right in this country.
            Allahu Akbar means God is Greater (as in God is greater than anything you can imagine).
            Peace

    • P

      Powered by UNicorn flatulenceMar 1, 2016 at 5:59 pm

      If we dont like the leader of your nation can we tell you who your leaders should be?
      FWIW, Trump is where he is in large measure because Americans are tired and sick of being told “be nice” as the world pisses on us and even more sick and tired of being told who we should vote for.
      You sound like the GOPe scum we reject.
      Trump already got negative endorsements from the dopey pope and that HELPED

      Reply
    • P

      Powered by UNicorn flatulenceMar 1, 2016 at 6:01 pm

      CO2 problem?
      Without the USA you would live in a hut without running water without electricity without internet without satelite tv without cars, trains, planes etc.

      Reply
    • L

      Lord LemurMar 1, 2016 at 6:05 pm

      Translation: he loses the respect of an elite cadre of leftie cultural marxist types. I’m a kiwi and I love Trump. Wish there was one a few years ago here who would have kept Auckland from turning into an Asian supercity.

      Reply
    • I

      irwincurMar 2, 2016 at 1:34 am

      Not sure how you can say this with certainty. While the media portrayal of Trump is that of an idiot, he is a well know and well versed negotiator. He is very liked by those he goes toe to toe against in business negotiations, because while he is a Pit Bull, he is regarded as fair, willing to bargain, and never, ever rubs a win in anyone’s face. It has been said by some of his adversaries that after taking him on, they cannot help but like him and become friends and allies.

      Don’t buy into the media BS about Trump, look at his business accomplishments. You do not get to where he is by making equally powerful people your enemies.

      Reply
      • D

        David BerkleyMar 2, 2016 at 10:47 am

        He didn’t rub the win on Rubio’s face last night? He was fair to the small businesses he owed money to when his company filed bankruptcy repeatedly? He was fair to the American people when he hired undocumented immigrants? The most basic fact is that the constitutional checks and balances were created for situations like this. Trump will nut accomplish many of the totalitarian ideas he thinks he will (even IF he is elected). Government is not like business. Most of his ideas will be filibustered and republican senators are not going to side with him to break a filibuster for a wacko liberal plan. I don’t think he would even last a year before resigning if he were elected…BIG IF.

        Reply
      • C

        Carl Raymond SMar 2, 2016 at 4:58 pm

        Thanks irwincur – you are the first responder to make a comment which actually supports Trump. Other responses up and down this page suggest that Trump supporters are uncivilised, unscientific rednecks – the sort of mean spirited people you wouldn’t want as neighbours (especially if you didn’t have white skin). They have done nothing to help their preferred candidate.

        Reply
    • A

      AdamMar 2, 2016 at 2:20 am

      It’s a given. He’s a joke domestically, not just abroad. He would get zero respect from world leaders.

      He’s such a niche candidate it’s hard to believe he’s winning the nomination. Trump, A Republican candidate who favors big government more than Hillary Clinton!

      Reply
    • J

      JackMar 2, 2016 at 3:41 pm

      The USA has already lost the respect of every other nation – civilized or not. Obama did that all by himself, beginning with his “apology” tour.

      And what “CO2 problem?” You mean the one where people breathe?

      Reply
      • C

        Carl Raymond SMar 3, 2016 at 4:49 am

        Google “Keeling Curve” Jack, and start reading. I mean that CO2 problem.

        Reply
        • J

          JackMar 3, 2016 at 4:24 pm

          I would rather go back to your first comment. Bugger off convict. We don’t comment about Turnbull, and we don’t need an Aussie to denigrate our next President. You want to help solve the CO2 “problem?” Stop breathing. The world will thank you.

          Reply
          • C

            Carl Raymond SMar 3, 2016 at 4:27 pm

            I probably would stop breathing if it solved the problem and delivered my kids a planet a with a future. Unfortunately, fossil fuel usage is the (primary) problem, so I’d rather devote my best efforts to tackling that.

          • D

            Dudebro ZeroMar 4, 2016 at 11:15 am

            I’m sure living a jet set lifestyle between Australia and China helps lower CO2 massively, you obnoxious hypocrit.

          • C

            Carl Raymond SMar 4, 2016 at 3:29 pm

            Huh? I’ve never been to China. My last flight was in 2014.
            Last night, 5 adults (me, wife, in-laws, step-son) squeezed into an electric Nissan Leaf to make a half hour journey to attend an awards night. We could have driven the bigger Subaru (which now only gets used when the Leaf doesn’t have the range), but we do our best to minimise emissions.

    • P

      pantherblueMar 3, 2016 at 3:25 am

      Yes, all true but irrelevant as it looks like the majority of American voters may no longer care about International “respect.” I’m not saying I like this, I’m just reporting a stark truth. Americans have turned inward, if not isolationist. Many of them don’t like being lectured when the U.S. does something overseas, or when it doesn’t do something. The next election will be about domestic issues. And the day may come much sooner than you think when Oz has to face China alone. And then Canberra can plead with Beijing about the CO2 problem.

      Reply
      • C

        Carl Raymond SMar 3, 2016 at 4:37 am

        I’ve had more Chinese friends than American friends. Being afraid of China is a hangover from people who have war recollections – those tensions won’t be around forever. Young Chinese would rather trade with you, form a business partnership, or be your Facebook buddy. They are incredibly ethical, generous and loyal people and they are doing more towards the clean tech revolution than other advanced nations. China already has half a million electric buses on the road. Australia has one. I hope Tesla make a motza on the Model 3, because you can bet the Chinese will make one 90% as good for half the price – and that’s a global game changer.

        They gain nothing and lose much from invasion – it’s more a process of gradual interdependency. They can’t bomb Sydney without every third victim being one of their own. Each year, Australia gets a little more Asian and China gets a little more western. When I went to the in-laws place on the weekend, I fried noodles on the BBQ. I know it sounds naff, but ‘we are one’.

        Reply
        • P

          pantherblueMar 3, 2016 at 1:19 pm

          Excellent. So what’s the problem? Enjoy your life in the Greater East Asia Co-Prosperity Sphere and you won’t have to busybody worry yourself over what the miserable Yanks are up to.

          Reply
          • C

            Carl Raymond SMar 3, 2016 at 4:16 pm

            The problem, is that the CO2 generated by the USA, won’t stay there – we can’t put you in glass bubble. If every bus in China goes electric (they’re at half a million, and counting), it benefits not a jot if every bus in the USA is diesel.

          • G

            Gord CampbellMar 4, 2016 at 6:24 pm

            Lets see. The Yanks control an estimated 3500 Nuclear weapons.
            … The Yanks have about 6 full fleets comprised of about two super aircraft carriers each. A single aircraft carrier is as powerful in military terms as the entire 8th Air Force of WWII. And they have all types of vessels capable of taking out whole navies.
            … The Yanks have enormous fleets of jet fighters and bombers. they have the most powerful technically advanced airforce in the world. I don’t give a crap what Putin says.
            …. Now that power in the hands of Trump? Now you understand why the world is scared.

          • M

            Max BeaverbrookMay 10, 2016 at 8:55 pm

            No but I would if Hillzilla had her itchy fingers on the nuclear trigger, Goldwater girl that she was and is. She will start the big one if she gets it. Get it, old boy.

    • D

      Dudebro ZeroMar 4, 2016 at 11:13 am

      Holy shit, these liberal filter bubble opinions. Implying that Trump is “racist”, “sexist” and “homophobe”, and you don’t even feel the need to back any of those pathetic ad hominems up! And you think Angela Merkel commands respect – wooow. I’m from Germany and let me tell you, an “inverse Angela Merkel” is the best president any American could hope for. If that’s Trump they should all vote for Trump.

      Reply
      • C

        Carl Raymond SMar 4, 2016 at 3:21 pm

        I suggested they should vote for a non-racist, non-sexist, non-homophobe. I left it up to the readers/voters to decide if Trump fit the bill.

        Reply
        • D

          Dudebro ZeroMar 4, 2016 at 6:47 pm

          Don’t split hairs. You clearly imply that he is all three of those buzzwords, and that people shouldn’t vote for him for these reasons. And they’re all pure leftist fiction. Trump hasn’t said anything any particular race, against women or men, or against homosexuals. Feel free to prove me wrong, provide an actual quote of his. You can’t because he didn’t say anything of that nature. At the end of the day you just don’t like him because he’s not on the political “team” you cheer for. He has stated that he’s against political correctness and he questions some wars that the left has had to defend for years because they still view Obama as one of theirs and so they have to defend what he is doing. And what he is doing is waging war over oil in the Middle East worse than G.W.Bush ever did. Wow, so progressive.

          Reply
        • D

          Dudebro ZeroMar 4, 2016 at 6:50 pm

          Don’t split hairs. You clearly imply that he is all three of those
          buzzwords, and that people shouldn’t vote for him for these reasons. And
          they’re all pure leftist fiction. Trump hasn’t said anything against any
          particular race, against either sex, or against homosexuals. Feel free
          to prove me wrong, provide an actual quote of his. You can’t because he isn’t anywhere near as edgy as the left likes to pretend.

          At the end of the day you just
          don’t like him because he’s not on the political “team” you cheer for.
          He has stated that he’s against political correctness and he questions
          some wars that the left has had to defend for years because they still
          view Obama as one of theirs and so they have to defend what he is doing.
          And what he is doing is waging war over oil in the Middle East worse
          than G.W.Bush ever did. Wow, so progressive.

          Reply
          • C

            Carl Raymond SMar 4, 2016 at 9:12 pm

            If you feel he is none of those things, go ahead, vote for the man, with a clear conscience.

          • D

            Dudebro ZeroMar 5, 2016 at 2:57 pm

            He isn’t, and every US citizen should.

  • J

    JohnFeb 29, 2016 at 12:54 pm

    Trump – Landslide…
    Get over it.

    Reply
    • G

      GuinnessmonkeyMar 4, 2016 at 2:06 pm

      Dude can’t even get most Republicans to say they’re ok with him being the candidate. The chances of him having a landslide are essentially zero.

      Reply
      • J

        JohnMar 4, 2016 at 10:15 pm

        Dude…
        You wait and see.

        Reply
  • D

    David BerkleyFeb 28, 2016 at 2:52 am

    The problem with this prediction is that he is using methods that worked in previous primaries that did not involve so many primary candidates. This year is unprecedented. He also assumes Trump is having success in the primary because he is coming out on top; however, he is not winning a majority in any state. He has about 1/3 of the primary popular vote. Also, unlike previous years, Trump has inspired a triple division of sentiment amongst his party. There is the third that supports him, but the other two thirds are divided between those who want “anything but Clinton/Sanders” and those who are saying they will not vote for Trump, no matter what. That third group is a phenomenon unseen in any American election in history as far as I know.

    Trump is unelectable in the general election. He will ignite too much passion on the left and discourage too many moderates AND true conservatives on the right. Norpoth is using political trends to make this prediction. Trump is setting new trends. My name is David Berkley. Mark my prediction. Clinton beats Trump/Cruz. Rubio beats Sanders. Rubio/Clinton is too difficult to call at this point. Trump could potentially beat Sanders, especially if Bloomberg runs, but that also could result in the first independent president.

    Reply
    • C

      Cheryl GumulauskiFeb 28, 2016 at 4:27 am

      Trump defeats Rubio and Cruz in a two person matchup, and is currently ahead of all by double digits in all but 4 states in the union. He has more votes in most than Rubio and Cruz put together. So, the number of candidates do not matter. Moreover, this has been the case for the better part of nine months, particularly at the state levels (and this is a state by state contest). Moreover, in the NH primary Trump received more votes in a then 9 person race than Clinton did in a two person race. He will be the nominee in spite of the hundred million smear ad campaign being ran against him by the establishment right now. Dems have known this would be the case since August, and that is why they have smeared him so badly as well.

      Reply
      • D

        David BerkleyFeb 28, 2016 at 1:11 pm

        Again, I think my prediction is correct. We will know about the nomination by the end of March. If Trump wins then we will see what happens in November. My preference is Kasich, but I do not think the pay as a whole has enough sense to nominate him right now.

        Reply
        • D

          David BerkleyFeb 29, 2016 at 10:55 pm

          Pay= party

          Reply
      • T

        Tom SteeleFeb 29, 2016 at 6:29 am

        How do you figure that Cheryl? Cruz and Rubio are very similar candidates and it is a very reasonable question to ask, what would happen if you narrowed it down to Trump and Cruz or Rubio?

        That is what David is saying, that since we are seeing a multi-candidate result, we actually have 67% of republicans voting against Trump. What happens when it is Trump vs Cruz or Trump vs Rubio and arguably they might have joined forces.

        THAT is the point… and a very good question. Unfortunately, the Republican primary system (arguably better than the Democrats with their Super Delegates and caucuses) does not allow for run-offs, so until Rubio or Cruz drops out, we don’t find out the answer to this – maybe not until it is Trump vs Hillary.

        Reply
    • C

      ChrisFFeb 28, 2016 at 11:58 pm

      That third group may be a “phenomenon unseen in any American election in history”, at least in significant numbers, but it is no longer unique. Because there’s a similarly large and dedicated group on the other side who, despite being Democrats or liberal-leaning independents, claim they will refuse to vote for Hillary under any circumstances. So that particular roadblock to Trump’s success is balanced out by a comparable roadblock to Hillary’s.

      Reply
      • N

        nerodenFeb 29, 2016 at 2:05 am

        Bingo. Sanders v. Trump gives Sanders a chance precisely because Trump is handicapped by this and Sanders isn’t.

        Clinton v. Trump, she suffers most of the same damage as Trump from this… and she’s a bad campaigner.

        Reply
      • M

        Mike DouglasFeb 29, 2016 at 2:48 pm

        Disagree. The passion against Trump is much stronger than the anger against HIllary. While many may not like Hillary, people still know that she is a career politician that will not attempt to make Mexico build a wall and calls Mexicans rapists.

        At the end of the day, Trump is a complete wild card and cannot win the general election. We’ll find out.

        Reply
        • C

          ChrisFFeb 29, 2016 at 4:07 pm

          Based on this morning’s bit of news, I’m beginning to think you’re right, even if for the wrong reasons. Mitch McConnell made it clear that the Republican Party will not support Donald Trump in the general election, and Republicans running for office or reelection have his blessing (and presumably the party’s) to take an anti-Trump stance in their advertising, campaign speeches, etc. it’s pretty clear that the party leadership would rather see Hillary become president than Trump, and it’s hard to fight the power, money, and influence *both* parties can bring to bear, as Sanders is also discovering.

          Reply
        • R

          Rusty ShacklefordMar 1, 2016 at 1:56 pm

          The problem is that Trump is a wildcard that can and will finance his own general election run should the republicans screw him with a brokered convention…which means the Republicans lose regardless of who they choose.
          They have to know this.

          Reply
        • D

          Dudebro ZeroMar 4, 2016 at 11:25 am

          Trump doesn’t call Mexicans rapists. Can’t take you seriously when you twist people’s words to fit an obvious agenda.

          Reply
    • T

      Tom SteeleFeb 29, 2016 at 6:20 am

      This is what worries me too. The truth is that Trump has 60%+ of the republicans voting against him. Without a runoff, we have no idea how he would fare. In SC, it would have been very interesting to see if Cruz and Rubio (who are awfully similar) would have combined their supporters in a runoff and would Trump have fallen to second with a 40%-33% result?

      Reply
      • Y

        Yonit GefenFeb 29, 2016 at 3:07 pm

        It seems we will find out shortly but the assumption that combining votes in this way is valid is premature

        Reply
      • D

        David BerkleyFeb 29, 2016 at 11:13 pm

        I agree. It is a shame that this election cycle included some of the best republican candidates we’ve seen in a long time as well. Kasich, Bush and Rubio are men of character and I would have loved to see a debate with just the three of them. That primary would have brought stone great positive attention to the republican party and possibly grown the party to a point of strength not seen since Reagan.

        Reply
        • T

          Ti MiMar 2, 2016 at 1:36 am

          lol @ Rubio and Bush are men of characters. You must not be too good of a judge of characters then.

          Reply
          • D

            David BerkleyMar 2, 2016 at 11:00 am

            We have different measures of character then. If you are supporting Trump, that is obvious.

    • Y

      Yonit GefenFeb 29, 2016 at 3:06 pm

      As a statistician and survey researcher, I understand the impact of missing variables and your assumption that a model is invalid because you have found one, is not valid, although many of my students have tried to use it, No model 8s perfect and Statistical models never include all variables and nevertheless are routinely assumed to be the best predictive models – especially a model that has successfully predicted elections which no doug had unprecedented factors as well. Multiple candidates may work again Trump but other factors ay work for him [including strong populist anti-establishment sentiments, especially if Sanders does ot run, cascade effects, unprecedented dissatisfaction with both parties and the state of the country by members of both parties, unprecedented number of independents. Of course, we won’t know until November and many things can happen between now and then but disregarding this prediction completely may be comfortable to many but nevertheless inappropriate

      Reply
      • D

        David BerkleyFeb 29, 2016 at 11:09 pm

        In 2008 the nation was frustrated by an endless war, started under Bush and a collapsing economy. It was clear which direction the presidency was headed. The real election was the democratic primary. In 2012, despite the Fox News polls repeatedly indicating it was not the case, again, it was clear Obama was going to win. I think that the historical pattern might well indicate a republican leaning; however, the republican party does not seem to have received the message of the 2008 and 2012 elections. Patterns are good whet patterns fit, but this is not an issue of patterns. When progress is important (civil rights, gay rights, women’s rights) the nation well lean towards a progressive president. Currently, that would be the democrat. In all honesty, I think the republicans were going to have a challenge this time no matter what. A moderate like Kasich had a chance. Rubio may have had a chance. Bush was going to struggle against his name. When Trump, Cruz and Carson rose to the top it became very clear how this was going to turn out.

        Reply
    • J

      JackFeb 29, 2016 at 3:24 pm

      Do you really think that true Conservatives will sit this one out if Mr. Trump is the nominee? I believe they will line up in droves to keep Clinton from getting anywhere near Pennsylvania Avenue. You don’t need a predictive model for that one. It is common sense.

      Reply
      • D

        David BerkleyMar 2, 2016 at 10:59 am

        PLEASE!! Nominate a serious candidate! Then I can get behind this statement. I’m a swing voter. Swing voters decide elections. Very few independents are siding with Trump.

        Reply
        • J

          JackMar 2, 2016 at 12:34 pm

          And Hillary is a serious candidate? What is her motivation, other than power? Do you really think she cares about the people. Just read the accounts of ex secret service agents to understand who she really is.

          More to the point. You have two choices:
          1) Donald Trump
          2) Hillary Clinton

          The election is tied, and YOU cast the deciding vote of who will be President. Now choose.

          Reply
          • G

            GuinnessmonkeyMar 4, 2016 at 2:13 pm

            *eyeroll* Those are just stupid chain letters. Real secret service agents don’t give accounts of their charges. If there was anything to those old, debunked stories, there would have been major investigations into the Secret Service by Congress, as such nonsense puts those they protect at risk by making them think they can’t trust the Secret Service.

            It’s one of the dumber accusations against Clinton (which is saying a LOT), and it says a lot about you that you think it’s “proof” of anything.

            And yes, I do think “true Conservatives” will sit this one out. Clinton is a center-left Democrat. Not who’d they prefer, but whatever. Trump is a threat to the Constitution itself, and to our very system of government. The choice between them is pretty clear (if you’re sane and intelligent).

    • R

      Rusty ShacklefordMar 1, 2016 at 1:39 pm

      My personal opinion is that a Trump-Sanders ticket would be a much closer race than a Trump-Clinton due to 20% of Sanders supporters having Trump as their secondary choice.
      Trump inspires voters, much like a 2008 Obama had. Clinton is little more than a wet rag. Besides the anti-Clinton/dem hate vote is much stronger among conservatives than the anti-Trump vote this time around.

      In a brokered convention where Trump gets shafted, the republicans will lose the election and support for years to come. They already lose a good chunk to libertarians.

      Reply
      • G

        GuinnessmonkeyMar 4, 2016 at 2:09 pm

        Wow, that sounds like a totally made-up number (20% of Sanders voters picking Trump), one that will be even sillier once Bernie endorses Clinton and campaigns for her.

        Nor is your read of the electorate even sane: Trump hatred is so widespread that a MAJORITY of the GOP said they wouldn’t be satisfied if he was the nominee, with unprecedentedly huge majorities of Democrats saying they view him unfavorably as well. Large numbers of prominent GOP folks have already announced they would vote for Clinton over Trump, or would stay home.

        Trump may unite the American electorate, but against him.

        Reply
  • P

    Pappilli0n1943Feb 28, 2016 at 12:04 am

    well, at least Professor Norpoth didn’t use a ground hog for his statistical prediction for the next President of these United States of America. Trump is a good thing.

    Reply
    • Y

      Yonit GefenFeb 29, 2016 at 3:11 pm

      Predicting the unpredictable or the mathematic of uncertainty IS statistics. I’ve never thought of myself as immortal since receiving my Ph.D but do like the idea 🙂

      Reply
  • F

    FroggyFeb 27, 2016 at 6:20 pm

    Time for a trip back to August 2012, when a pair of Colorado University political scientists unveiled a model that had Romney beating Obama in the electoral college 325-213. A month before the election their updated prediction was Romney winning 330-208.

    And remember, that model had correctly predicted every election since 1980. Now except for one, I guess.

    Reply
    • B

      bonniFeb 27, 2016 at 6:50 pm

      Shows how they can rig things.. OBAMA never won anything..

      Reply
      • S

        Stephen DaughertyFeb 29, 2016 at 9:43 am

        So, you take a prediction model as credible over empirical results. Right. And while you’re at it, point to the massive operations that would be necessary to rig such an election, especially if they use the in-person voter fraud you folks obsess about.

        Reply
    • Y

      Yonit GefenFeb 29, 2016 at 3:15 pm

      Some models work better than others, This one has withstood the test of time but again you never know, Dewey and Truman proved that with no statistics. Post hoc analyses of 2012 raise questions

      Reply
      • B

        BogiraFeb 29, 2016 at 3:17 pm

        If anything he’s relying on popularity within primaries to justify his high-R. It’s a mess of a model in that it’s almost verging on truisms to be meaningful.

        Reply
      • T

        ToyBoxofGunsMar 1, 2016 at 3:04 pm

        “Withstood the test of time”

        Ah yes, all the way back to 1996.

        Reply
  • B

    Bromhidrosis AmericanFeb 27, 2016 at 9:57 am

    Why this professor never revealed his “Fortune Telling” skill during prior Presidential elections, Oh, That is right, he comes out from the closet.

    Reply
    • W

      WookieInHeatFeb 27, 2016 at 12:48 pm

      “Mar 13, 2012
      Helmut Norpoth
      Professor of political science, Stony Brook University
      The outcome of the New Hampshire Primary predicts that President Barack Obama will win a second term in the November election…”
      — Huffington Post

      wow, that was a difficult five second google search.

      Reply
      • C

        CharFeb 28, 2016 at 2:30 am

        lol liberals

        Reply
        • Y

          Yonit GefenFeb 29, 2016 at 3:17 pm

          Given their certainty, futures that predict the election are probably a good investment.

          Reply
      • T

        ToyBoxofGunsMar 1, 2016 at 3:07 pm

        Wait a second, wait a second…

        You mean he predicted the reelection of an encumbant who polled comparably well amongst his contemporaries at the same time in their first terms?!

        Why didn’t someone say so?!!

        Ohhhhhh Magic witch doctor!!! Grant us your powers!!!!

        Reply
        • W

          WookieInHeatMar 2, 2016 at 4:32 pm

          yup, and bush, and clinton, and retroactively every election back to 1912 except 1960.

          Reply
    • Y

      Yonit GefenFeb 29, 2016 at 3:15 pm

      He did

      Reply
  • D

    dcmFeb 27, 2016 at 9:26 am

    Why would they bring a third string, third rate school, unheard of professor of useless study that uses data based primarily on the the fact party change happens after a two term party cycle. News and the media, not science. The only thing more pathetic than his “science” is the media pandering. It is possible for a Trump presidency, 97%, I would like to see this jerk put his life savings and house on a bet, if he believes in his work, it is a no brainer, like him.

    Reply
  • A

    avocat27Feb 27, 2016 at 7:59 am

    Ah yes, the ever-popular back-tested model. Judging from Norpoth’s picture, I doubt he personally has been predicting election outcomes since 1912. As one other poster has noted, I can come up with a back-tested model that confidently predicts the Broncos will win the 2016 Super Bowl. Or, to give another example: the sun rose on November 4, 1980, and the Republican candidate, Ronald Reagan, was elected President that day. I predict that the sun will also rise on November 8, 2016, so it’s a virtual certainty that the Republican candidate will win this year too. Norpoth states that his credentials include that he correctly predicted Clinton’s re-election in 1996. Good grief! Any 10-year-old with a passing interest in politics could have done that. This reminds me of the University of Colorado professors who confidently predicted a landslide Romney victory in 2012, based on a (what else?) back-tested model, supposedly dating back to 1980, that in fact had only been developed just before the 2012 election. Color me sceptical on this one. Norpoth has obviously succeeded in drawing attention to himself with his 97% prediction, but I don’t think any serious observer would say that ANY candidate, Democrat or Republican, has a 97% chance of victory at this point.

    Reply
    • W

      WookieInHeatFeb 27, 2016 at 12:48 pm

      very astute observation, norpoth isn’t 104+ years old.

      his model has correctly predicted every president since billl clinton’s 1996 victory. liberals were rather more enthusiastic about his prognostications when he was forecasting an obama victory.

      Reply
      • A

        avocat27Feb 27, 2016 at 1:16 pm

        “His model has correctly predicted every President since Bill Clinton’s 1996 victory.” That’s not correct, and if you read the article, Norpoth himself doesn’t say so. In fact, he didn’t get 2000 right. The point I was making is that if you use a back-tested model, you can manipulate it to come up with any results you want. Just curious- but do you want to pick a candidate- any candidate- who at this point has a 97% chance of victory? BTW, is the shift key on your keyboard not working?
        ‘his model

        Reply
        • W

          WookieInHeatFeb 27, 2016 at 1:43 pm

          i lost my shift key in a poker game.

          actually norpoth did correctly predict the 2000 election results, which were then overturned by the supreme court.

          still struggling to wrap your head round the margin of error thing, eh? the model doesn’t predict trump has a 97% chance of victory, it predicts trump would beat clinton in a hypothetical match up with 97% accuracy, according to the professor’s numbers. the professor’s model gives whomever the republican nominee is a 61% chance of victory.

          “As the presentation continued, laughter turned to silence as Norpoth forecasted a 61 percent chance of a Republican win in the general election.”

          understand now, or do you need me to draw a picture?

          Reply
          • B

            Bryce AndersonFeb 27, 2016 at 1:55 pm

            He claims in an interview with Fox and Friends that he correctly predicted that Al Gore would win the popular vote. But remember, Gore only won the popular vote by 0.5%. I don’t know what percentage Norpoth predicted, but the actual result was “statistically too close to call,” so I’d be far more impressed if that was the result the model gave.

          • W

            WookieInHeatFeb 27, 2016 at 1:57 pm

            obviously 2000 is a bit of a grey area, you could argue either way.

          • A

            avocat27Feb 27, 2016 at 2:58 pm

            Apparently you’re the one who doesn’t understand. You stated earlier that Northop’s model has correctly predicted every PRESIDENT since Bill Clinton’s 1996 victory . That simply was not true in 2000, and Northop himself doesn’t claim that he did. You can draw all the pictures you want, but your earlier claim was still false.

          • W

            WookieInHeatFeb 28, 2016 at 2:25 am

            those are not my words, that’s what all the articles i’ve read say.

          • W

            WookieInHeatFeb 28, 2016 at 3:04 am

            “The Stonybrook University professor says his model has been only wrong once, since 1912.”
            — Fortune

            the election the model got wrong was 1960. so i guess the professor is lying since you obviously know better than him.

        • B

          BamasquestFeb 29, 2016 at 5:47 pm

          avocat27
          I don’t see a problem with his shift key or the using or not using of it! What is your problem??? And what does ‘his model mean in your comment??? Explain please!!!

          Reply
      • S

        Stephen DaughertyFeb 29, 2016 at 9:49 am

        Let me count the ways in which that argument is problematic:
        1) 1996
        2) 2000
        3) 2004
        4) 2008
        5) 2012

        Notice how many data points we have here? Just five. Of these, three of them were pretty easy to predict, just based on the political environment, with Clinton Clobbering Dole, and Obama clobbering the GOP in both contests.

        This model assumes that people want to switch to more conservative leaders, but with Trump doing what he’s doing, that might not work. He’s got more enthusiasm on his side than actual operational experience, and he’s just recently shot himself in the foot with the KKK comment.

        Reply
        • W

          WookieInHeatFeb 29, 2016 at 12:08 pm

          shot himself in the foot? lol the media have been trying the same attack – “trump is a racist!” – for eight months now, and you think it’s going to work this time? i’m starting to wonder if liberals have some sort of collective learning disability.

          Reply
          • M

            Mike DouglasFeb 29, 2016 at 2:51 pm

            wow, you’re a tool.

          • W

            WookieInHeatFeb 29, 2016 at 6:43 pm

            u mad bro?

          • S

            Stephen DaughertyFeb 29, 2016 at 4:54 pm

            First, if he misheard it, he should have complained. Any politician more intelligent than an idiot would complain about the bad audio on air, if for no other reason than to avoid misunderstandings. Second, if he didnt, then what’s the reasonable interpretation? I have to get back to you on David Duke, the KKK ?

            How freaking paranoid or stupid do you have to get that you think that was a gotcha question? The easy answer is to repudiate them. Failing to do so is not the liberal media screwing him over, that’s him screwing himself.

            You’re so obsessed with bias, and fighting back against it that you’ve abandoned common sense, and become extremely biased in your support of Trump.

            Oh, and by the way: it’s not liberals who are powerless to stop Trump, its conservatives. You’re citing a primary poll, not a general election poll. He will continue finding ways to alienate and discourage people.

      • B

        BogiraFeb 29, 2016 at 3:19 pm

        I’ll admit I’m a liberal but I’m also a political scientist and his modeling is using ‘traditional understandings of cycles’ mixed with a hefty dose of self-supporting R correlation to justify it.

        If Trump wins though, I’ll probably be looking for a new country because I don’t think I want to support living in a racist republic…

        Reply
        • J

          JackFeb 29, 2016 at 3:28 pm

          Say hello to President Trump and goodbye to Bogira. I hear Germany is open to all comers. Don’t bother to write.

          Reply
          • B

            BogiraFeb 29, 2016 at 3:45 pm

            Trust me, I’m pretty sure I’ll be keeping my tenure track position. But hey, when he loses, will you be moving to more receptive apartheid? 🙂

          • J

            JackMar 2, 2016 at 3:38 pm

            Apartheid? Where did that come from. I mentioned nothing other than “goodbye.”

            Oh wait, I get it. You were told Mr. Trump is a racist, therefore anyone who mentions anything positive about him must be one too.

            But you are the typical liberal piece of filth. A hypocrite that is quick to shoot his mouth off if Trump gets elected, but is too chicken stuff to leave their nice cushy permanent job where they can indoctrinate the mush brained youth with your liberal tripe.

            You disgust me. You cannot even live up to your own convictions.

            And funny, I don’t recall any Conservatives mentioning they were moving to Canada in 2008. I did not cause the rise of the candidacy of Donald Trump. You and the rest of the politically correct extremist liberal progressives did.

            The rest of America are tired of your BS. And your world will be changing very soon. Good luck in Canada, you lowlife liberal piece of garbage.

          • B

            BogiraMar 2, 2016 at 3:41 pm

            You’re a pathetic whelp who wrote this screed without a clue of understanding. Like I said, when Trump loses, where are you going to go? 🙂

            Oh that’s right, you’ll still be in your tar paper shack in whatever backwater shit hill of a state you call home being proud of your ignorance and poverty. Norpath’s model has no grasp of context and I will enjoy chatting with him when I run into him at the next conference for blowing such a call. But don’t worry troll-o, I’ll be right here educating the youth of America in facts, something your candidate has yet to do.

          • J

            JackMar 2, 2016 at 3:50 pm

            Everyone of my comments was responding to you, you liberal piece of filth, not any statistical prediction. And I live quite comfortably in the large home I designed myself, in a resort community. I earned my money the old fashioned way. I actually worked for it.

            You, on the other had, rely upon the handouts of the rich people you despite so much. You need their money for scholarships, grants, and endowments. I know plenty about your world, you sniveling little punk. And you know nothing about mine. And that is the issue. You are nice and safe in your ivory tower without the need to actually prove your value. Just like all the liberal weasel bureaucrats. You need people like me. You cannot exist without me. Yet you despise me.

            You are living proof why liberalism is a mental disorder. Go “blank” yourself, you extremist academic liberal piece of garbage. And get out of America. You do not deserve to live here.

          • B

            BogiraMar 2, 2016 at 4:03 pm

            Nice, ad hominems, so desperate to insult me when I chose to educate the world rather than be a crony and milk contracts and resources pretending you’re some Horatio Alger when you’re nothing more than a trust fund baby.

            Sounds like you’re older than dirt (and I loved my 2 foot tall mohawk all through college…my spouse loved it too). But thanks for playing the game, you think society needs you when you’re nothing more than a leeching cog in the system. You thrive off of ignorance and hate, trust me, I don’t despise you, I don’t care about you. You on the other hand hate me because you know I’m right and deep down you get that you’re a sniveling coward with nothing more than fat pockets because of friends and former wealth. Keep hiding behind your gate in your apartheid community.

            Lobbing insults inside your own prison is hilarious to people like me. 😉

          • J

            JackMar 2, 2016 at 4:15 pm

            Wrong plebe. No double comma kid. Born poor and brought up by a single mother, thank you. I earned my money. And one of my Alma Maters likes the checks I give them. As I said. You need me, but you hate me.

            And you really are a dumbass, aren’t you? I am not a cog. I AM THE SYSTEM, you disgusting lowlife. I am a citizen. Without my tax dollars, you are out of work.

            You on the other hand are a bureaucrat. A pawn. A zero. A nothing. You are not a has been. You are a never will be. You teach because you cannot offer anything else. You are a glorified babysitter, using a standardized curriculum – created by others – to occupy the short attention spans of the youth you indoctrinate.

            And you are so blinded by your disgusting gutter ideology, you actually believe anyone that is different than you is a racist, bigot, homophobe, xenophobe, or any other label you are told to use.

            As I said, by November, your world will be changing. You might actually have to contribute to our country, rather than consume. And as the typical liberal leech, I think you will find a more hospitable environment in Canada.

          • B

            BogiraMar 2, 2016 at 4:22 pm

            I’m a professor, dimwit, a bureaucrat works in a system. Good lord, if you’re going to make pointless ad hominem attacks atleast be accurate. That’s like claiming engineers or factory workers are bureaucrats because they exist in a vague system of corporate structure.

            I’ll be sure to remind myself to necropost this in november just to watch you blabber desperately…seeking an answer as to why Trump lost by nearly 400 electoral votes. But don’t worry hotshot, I’m sure your shriveled heart will make it atleast a while longer.

            Your pathetic strawman is so silly, insisting I hate you then pretending any disagreement automatically makes you a bigot. No, you’re a bigot because you support a bigot who supports white supremacy. It’s a pretty straightforward linear progression.

            Anyways, I love watching you try to equate teaching at the collegiate level with high school. It’s silly and shows how slow witted you really are. Maybe you should go back to remedial classes where you belong, let the big girls talk now since you clearly aren’t smart enough to handle actual discussion and instead want to fling feces.

        • W

          WatchAndLearnFeb 7, 2017 at 4:51 pm

          Did you move?

          Reply
    • Y

      Yonit GefenFeb 29, 2016 at 3:19 pm

      Please continue to believe that

      Reply
  • P

    PatBryanTX2Feb 27, 2016 at 3:27 am

    The “model” is not adequately revealed here nor elsewhere, and fails to take into consideration the intellectual disintegration of the Republican Party and its members. The Party has developed a powerful voter base contingent upon personality type, non-reality-based learned behavior and membership, and repulsion motivation. This base is continually stirred from the top by isolation propaganda. If the Republican base were your teenage child, you would have it committed for cult deprogramming.

    Reply
    • W

      WookieInHeatFeb 27, 2016 at 1:01 pm

      i guess the intellectual disintegration of the republican party is maybe less relevant than than the high republican turnout and low democratic turnout?

      Reply
      • S

        Stephen DaughertyFeb 29, 2016 at 9:52 am

        Trump will turn them out. Obama will throw his weight behind the winner, I guarantee, and he’ll campaign for them. As for high Republican Turnout? Trump has plenty of time to **** the bed between now and November, and I don’t think he’s going to pass up any opportunities to do so.

        Reply
    • C

      Christin HaleFeb 28, 2016 at 1:14 pm

      Lol. What?

      Reply
  • D

    DiagorasFeb 27, 2016 at 2:53 am

    Everyone else’s model says anyone who wins the general election will need the Hispanic vote. How is the Hispanic vote all of the sudden not necessary with this model? Because you know Mexicans are not going to vote for Trump after he called them rapists and no Hispanics but the Cubans are going to vote for Trump because of his immigration policies.

    Reply
    • D

      dk2852Feb 27, 2016 at 3:10 am

      Then how did Trump get the Latino vote in Nevada? Don’t underestimate this man.