The Keys to the White House is a prediction system for determining the outcome of presidential elections in the United States. It was developed by American historian Allan Lichtman and Russian mathematical geophysicist Vladimir Keilis-Borok in 1981, adapting prediction methods that Keilis-Borok designed for earthquake prediction. The system is a thirteen-point checklist that assesses the situation of the country and political system ahead of a presidential election. When five or fewer items on the checklist are false, the incumbent party nominee is predicted to win the election. Some of the items on the checklist involve qualitative judgment, and therefore the reliability of this system relies heavily on the knowledge and analytical skill of whoever attempts to apply it. Using the system, Lichtman correctly predicted the outcomes of nine presidential elections from 1984 to 2020, with the sole exception of the 2000 election.

From the content of the system, Lichtman says voters select the next president mainly on how they feel the incumbent president has governed the country. If the voters are satisfied with the condition of the country, they will re-elect the incumbent president or the nominee of the incumbent party. If voters are dissatisfied, they will transfer the presidency to the opposing party. Lichtman has said that election campaigns have little if any meaningful effect on voters, who are pragmatic and not swayed by the spectacle of campaigning and vote retrospectively rather than prospectively.

Development

Vladimir Keilis-Borok
Allan Lichtman

While attending a dinner party at Caltech in 1981, Allan Lichtman met Vladimir Keilis-Borok, a leading Russian geophysicist. Both men were Fairchild Scholars at Caltech.[1] Keilis-Borok was interested in applying his prediction techniques to democratic political systems. This was not possible for him to do within the Soviet Union, which was a single-party autocracy, and a guest at the party referred him to Lichtman. Lichtman attracted Keilis-Borok's interest because he was a quantitative historian who mathematically analyzed trends in American history. Lichtman agreed to help Keilis-Borok apply his prediction techniques to American presidential elections.[2]

Lichtman and Keilis-Borok examined data collated from every presidential election from 1860 to 1980 to identify factors that seemed predictive of election outcomes. From his own studies of American presidential elections, Lichtman had come to the conclusion that voters are in fact not much swayed by election campaigns and instead vote according to how well the incumbent president has performed in office. Lichtman also noticed that even if a president did not seek re-election, his failures would taint the prospects of the nominee of his party. These insights shaped how he and Keilis-Borok conducted their research.[3]

Lichtman and Keilis-Borok published their prediction model in a 1981 paper, and at this stage their system had just 12 items.[4] They later expanded it to 13. Some of the keys are objective, such as economic growth, while some are subjective, such as candidate charisma.[5]

In 1982, Lichtman published his first prediction, that Ronald Reagan would win the 1984 election.[6]

The thirteen keys

The Keys to the White House is a checklist of thirteen true/false statements that pertain to the circumstances surrounding a presidential election. When five or fewer of the following statements are false, the incumbent party candidate is predicted to win the election. When six or more are false, the incumbent party is predicted to lose.[7]

  1. Midterm gains: After the midterm elections, the incumbent party holds more seats in the U.S. House of Representatives than after the previous midterm elections.
  2. No primary contest: There is no serious contest for the incumbent party nomination.
  3. Incumbent seeking re-election: The incumbent party candidate is the sitting president.
  4. No third party: There is no significant third party or independent campaign.
  5. Strong short-term economy: The economy is not in recession during the election campaign.
  6. Strong long-term economy: Real per capita economic growth during the term equals or exceeds mean growth during the previous two terms.
  7. Major policy change: The incumbent administration effects major changes in national policy.
  8. No social unrest: There is no sustained social unrest during the term.
  9. No scandal: The incumbent administration is untainted by major scandal.
  10. No foreign/military failure: The incumbent administration suffers no major failure in foreign or military affairs.
  11. Major foreign/military success: The incumbent administration achieves a major success in foreign or military affairs.
  12. Charismatic incumbent: The incumbent party candidate is charismatic or a national hero.
  13. Uncharismatic challenger: The challenging party candidate is not charismatic or a national hero.

Key 1: Midterm gains

Key 1 (midterm gains) is true when the incumbent party had achieved a net gain of seats in the U.S. House of Representatives than after the previous midterm elections. For example, Lichtman refers to the 1982 U.S. House elections in the middle of Ronald Reagan's first term where Republicans lost 27 seats. However, the party had gained 35 seats in 1980, leaving them with a net gain of eight seats and leaving the key true.[8]

Key 2: No primary contest

Key 2 (no primary contest) is true if the incumbent party nominee wins at least two-thirds of the total delegate vote on the first ballot at the nominating convention. Lichtman states that a party's ability to unite behind a consensus nominee is reflective of the performance of the incumbent president even if the incumbent is not running. If the incumbent party nominee meets this threshold the key can still turn false when there are deep and vocal party divisions, such as Hubert Humphrey's nomination by the Democrats in 1968. Of the 13 keys, Lichtman has said that this key is the single best predictor of an election outcome. Conversely, if there is competition for the challenging party nomination, it does not hurt the challenging party's election chances.[9]

Key 3: Incumbent seeking re-election

Lichtman notes an incumbent president has the ability to set the national agenda and attracts far more media attention than a non-incumbent. An incumbent can also benefit from the rally 'round the flag effect in times of crisis. Unless the incumbent president is seen as very vulnerable, the strongest candidates from the challenging party typically refrain from running. When key 2 (no primary contest) is false and a president is running for re-election, the incumbent party has always lost.[8]

Key 4: No third party

A third party is a political party other than the Democratic Party or the Republican Party. Most American presidential elections since 1860 have effectively been binary contests between Democrats and Republicans, as no third party has come close to winning.[10] Lichtman notes that if a third party is unusually popular, it signals major discontent with the performance of the incumbent party and counts against them. Lichtman defines third parties as either "perennial", having small and loyal constituencies, or "insurgent", rising in response to particular circumstances. Key 4 is turned false when a single third party candidate is likely to win 5% or more of the popular vote.[10] Because third party candidates typically underperform their polling by around half as they "tend to fade in the voting booth as voters focus on the major-party contenders," Lichtman says this key turns false when a third party candidate polls at over 10%.[11][12] Lichtman considered this key false in 1948 for Harry S. Truman despite no third party candidate reaching 5% nationally because Henry A. Wallace and Strom Thurmond both ran notable insurgent campaigns, with Thurmond carrying four states.[8]

Keys 5 and 6: Strong long-term and short-term economy

Key 5 (strong short-term economy) is turned false when there is a widespread perception that the economy is in recession during the election campaign. Lichtman cites the early 1990s recession as an example, which had ended in 1991, but a Gallup poll in September 1992 found that 79% of respondents still believed the economy was in recession, which turned the key false for George H. W. Bush. Lichtman notes that no incumbent party has won when the economy was in recession during the campaign season and it is the only false key with a 100% loss rate.

Key 6 (strong long-term economy) is true when real per capita economic growth during the term equals or exceeds mean growth during the previous two terms. Lichtman states that slow economic growth is indicative of an administration's lack of strength.[8]

Key 7: Major policy change

Key 7 (major policy change) is true if the incumbent president redirects the course of government or enacts a major policy change that has broad effects on the country's commerce, welfare or outlook. It does not matter whether the change is popular with the public, nor does it matter what ideological mold it was cast from. Examples include Abraham Lincoln abolishing slavery and Franklin D. Roosevelt enacting the New Deal.[7] This key often correlates with other keys: a president who fails to take vigorous action during a time of national crisis might prolong an economic recession, which in turn could lead to social unrest and his party losing seats in the House of Representatives. One case in point is Herbert Hoover and his handling of the Great Depression.[13]

Key 8: No social unrest

Key 8 (no social unrest) is turned false when there is widespread violent unrest that is either sustained or leaves critical issues unresolved by the time of the election campaign, which makes the voters worry that the fabric of the nation is coming apart. The American Civil War, the racial and anti-war riots of 1968, and the protests of 2020 triggered by the murder of George Floyd were all severe and widespread enough to turn the key false. By contrast, the 1992 Los Angeles riots sparked by the beating of Rodney King were too localized to turn this key false.[13]

Key 9: No scandal

Key 9 (no major scandal) is turned false when there is bipartisan recognition of serious impropriety, as the voting public ignores allegations of wrongdoing that appear to be the product of partisan politicking. While the Watergate scandal began during Richard Nixon's first term, it did not affect his re-election bid in 1972 because at the time, the voting public thought it was just a partisan ploy by the Democrats (Nixon was a Republican). After Nixon's re-election, new information about the incident emerged that raised concerns among Republicans as well, and the Watergate affair thus turned into a full-blown scandal that contributed to the Republicans' loss to the Democrats in 1976.[14]

Keys 10 and 11: Foreign/military failure and success

Key 10 (no foreign/military failure) is turned false when a major disaster occurs that is perceived to undermine the standing of the United States and erode trust in the president's leadership. Lichtman refers to the Bay of Pigs invasion in 1961, the Vietnam War, and the 1979-80 Iran hostage crisis as events that turned the key false. In contrast, failed diplomatic initiatives will not turn the key false.

Key 11 (major foreign/military success) is true when an achievement is seen as improving the prestige and interests of the United States. Lichtman cites the formation of NATO under Harry S. Truman, Dwight D. Eisenhower negotiating an end to the Korean War, and John F. Kennedy's handing of the Cuban Missile Crisis as successes that turned the key true.[8]

Keys 12 and 13: Candidate charisma

A charismatic candidate is a candidate with an extraordinarily persuasive or dynamic personality that gives him or her very broad appeal. Lichtman considers James G. Blaine, William Jennings Bryan, Theodore Roosevelt, Franklin D. Roosevelt, John F. Kennedy, Ronald Reagan, Bill Clinton, and Barack Obama to have been charismatic candidates. Having studied the political careers of all historical presidential candidates, Lichtman found that these seven candidates had charisma that was exceptional enough to make a measurable difference in their political fortunes. By contrast, Lichtman said that Donald Trump had an intense appeal with only a narrow slice of the electorate.[15] It is also possible for candidates to lose the charisma key: Lichtman said that Barack Obama exuded charisma in the 2008 election but failed to achieve the same connection with the public in 2012. As for being a "national hero", the candidate must be seen by the public as having played a critical role in the success of some national endeavour. Lichtman considers Ulysses Grant and Dwight Eisenhower to have been national heroes as both were great war leaders.[16] Lichtman believes that John Glenn, the third American in space and first to complete an orbit around the Earth, would have qualified as a national hero had he run for president shortly after his spaceflight in 1962.[17]

Lichtman's prediction record

Using the 13 keys, Lichtman has correctly predicted the winner of every American presidential election since 1984 with the exception of the election of 2000.

In 2000, Lichtman predicted that Al Gore would be elected president.[18] Gore won the national popular vote but lost the Electoral College and did not become president. Lichtman argued that in 2000 he specifically predicted the winner of the national popular vote, which Gore won.[19] In his 1988 book The Thirteen Keys to the Presidency, Lichtman defined his model as predicting the outcome of the popular vote.[20] However, he did not remind readers of this nuance in his journal articles wherein he made his prediction for 2000.[21][18] He simply predicted that Gore would win. Lichtman further argues that Gore was the rightful winner of the 2000 election, and lost because of improper ballot counting in Florida. Had Gore won Florida, he would have received the additional electoral votes he needed to win the election.[22]

In 2016, Lichtman predicted that Donald Trump would win the election. Donald Trump won the election but lost the popular vote. Lichtman says that after the 2000 election, he stopped predicting the outcome of the popular vote and simply predicted who would be elected president, explaining that discrepancies between the Electoral College and the popular vote had dramatically increased.[23][24][25]

Predictions of United States presidential election outcomes by Allan Lichtman[26][27][28][29]
Year Incumbent party nominee Challenger party nominee Midterm gains No primary contest Incumbent seeking re-election No third party Strong short-term economy Strong long-term economy Major policy change No social unrest No scandal No foreign or military failure Major foreign or military success Charismatic incumbent Uncharismatic challenger False keys Predicted winner Elected president
1984 Ronald Reagan

(Republican)

 Walter Mondale

(Democrat)

 True True True True True False True[lower-alpha 1] True True True False True True 2 Ronald Reagan
1988 George H. W. Bush

(Republican)

 Michael Dukakis

(Democrat)

 True True False True True True False True True[lower-alpha 2] True True[lower-alpha 3] False True 3 George H. W. Bush
1992 George H. W. Bush

(Republican)

 Bill Clinton

(Democrat)

 False True True False[lower-alpha 4] False False False True True True True False True 6 Bill Clinton
1996 Bill Clinton

(Democrat)

 Bob Dole

(Republican)

 False True True False True True False True True True False False True 5 Bill Clinton
2000 Al Gore

(Democrat)

 George W. Bush

(Republican)

 True True False True True True False True False[lower-alpha 5] True False False True 5 Al Gore George W. Bush
2004 George W. Bush

(Republican)

 John Kerry

(Democrat)

 True True True True True False False True True False[lower-alpha 6] True[lower-alpha 7] False True 4 George W. Bush
2008 John McCain

(Republican)

 Barack Obama

(Democrat)

 False True False True False False False True True False[lower-alpha 8] False False False 9 Barack Obama
2012 Barack Obama

(Democrat)

 Mitt Romney

(Republican)

 False True True True True False True[lower-alpha 9] True True True True[lower-alpha 10] False[lower-alpha 11] True 3 Barack Obama
2016 Hillary Clinton

(Democrat)

 Donald Trump

(Republican)

 False False[lower-alpha 12] False True[lower-alpha 13] True True False True True True False False True 6 Donald Trump
2020 Donald Trump

(Republican)

 Joe Biden

(Democrat)

 False True True True False False True[lower-alpha 14] False[lower-alpha 15] False[lower-alpha 16] True False False True 7 Joe Biden

Reception

Media coverage

Lichtman's model received significant media coverage in July 2010 after he released his forecast for the 2012 election, predicting that Barack Obama would win re-election.[34][35]

Lichtman again received considerable media attention for being one of the few forecasters to correctly predict Donald Trump's victory in the 2016 election.[36][37] Following the election, Trump sent Lichtman a framed copy of his prediction in The Washington Post signed with the message, "Professor - congrats, good call."[38]

Criticism

Statistician Nate Silver stated that several of the keys are very subjective, particularly candidate charisma, and that several more keys chosen for the system, such as long term economic growth, could be seen as data dredging and overfitting, saying, "It’s less that he has discovered the right set of keys than that he’s a locksmith and can keep minting new keys until he happens to open all 38 doors." Silver also stated that while the system has accurately predicted the winner, the margin of victory for parties that had the same number of keys has varied widely. For example, the elections of 1880, 1924, 1972 and 2004 all had nine keys in favor of the incumbent party but were won by margins between 25-points and one-tenth of a percent; conversely, the 1960 election had a record nine keys turn false for the incumbent Republicans but was lost by a narrow 0.17% margin. As of the 2008 election, the overall confidence interval for the system was a very wide +/-16-points. He also criticized only two of the keys being based on economic factors despite the economy being the main concern of a majority of voters.[39] Lichtman responded by saying the system is based on a theoretical model and avoids random data-mining. He also stated the system is not designed to predict the margin of victory and flattens for landslide victories.[40]

Theoretical conclusions

Lichtman says that the lesson of 13 keys is that governance, not campaigning, is what determines who will win a presidential election. If voters feel that the country has been governed well for the preceding four years, then they will re-elect the incumbent president or the nominee from the incumbent's party; otherwise, they will vote for the opposition party. Given this insight, Lichtman says that candidates should invest less money and effort in their election campaigns since these actually have little effect on the outcome. Likewise, observers should ignore analysts, polls, and media strategists whose careers revolve around the campaign and marketing; Lichtman refers to such people as "hucksters". Sitting presidents should not be afraid in proposing and implementing new policy ideas, because the keys show that voters do not care about specific policies, only the broad results.

As shown by key #2, the incumbent party should also avoid squabbles over the nominee and instead unite early and clearly behind a consensus nominee; conversely, it is not necessary for the challenging party to do this.[41]

Notes

  1. ↑ Reagan enacted major cuts in taxes and social spending.
  2. ↑ The Iran-Contra affair was not linked directly to Reagan and the scandal fizzled by the time of the election.
  3. ↑ Detente with the Soviet Union, and a bilateral nuclear disarmament treaty.
  4. ↑ Ross Perot managed to poll more than 10% in many polls.
  5. ↑ Bill Clinton was impeached for lying about his affair with Monica Lewinsky.
  6. ↑ The 9/11 attacks and mounting US casualties in Iraq.
  7. ↑ The defeat of the Taliban in Afghanistan and Saddam Hussein in Iraq.
  8. ↑ The unresolved military conflicts in Iraq and Afghanistan. Not applied to 2012, 2016, 2020
  9. ↑ The Affordable Care Act.
  10. ↑ The killing of Osama bin Laden.
  11. ↑ Obama did not succeed in connecting with the voters the same way he had in 2008.
  12. ↑ Allan Lichtman marked key 2 as "undetermined" in his 2016 book which was published before the Democratic National Convention had nominated Hillary Clinton. As it transpired, Clinton won 59.67% of the vote at the 2016 Democratic National Convention, well below the two-thirds threshold required to turn the key true. Despite this, Lichtman did not include it among his false keys in interviews given after the DNC had voted.[30][31][32]
  13. ↑ Lichtman marked key 4 as true in the 2016 edition of his book, then stated in September 2016 that he believed it had turned false because Libertarian nominee Gary Johnson was polling at 12-14%, indicating that he was likely to win 6-7% of the vote because third parties typically underperform their polling.[12] In October 2016, he stated the key could flip if Johnson's polling dropped, but by that point, six of the other keys were false, meaning he could predict a Clinton loss in any case.[33] By Election Day, Johnson was polling at or below 5% in aggregate nationwide polling, well below the 10% needed to turn the key false, and ultimately won 3.3% of the vote. While third party candidates earned more than 5% cumulatively, Lichtman notes in his description of the keys that it does not turn false "when several of the perennial third parties together have garnered more than 5 percent of the vote."[8]
  14. ↑ Major tax reforms.
  15. ↑ Numerous incidents of unrest, including the 2017 protests in Charlottesville and the 2020 nationwide protests sparked by George Floyd's murder.
  16. ↑ Trump was impeached for pressuring the government of Ukraine to investigate Joe Biden.

References

  1. ↑ Moscato & De Vries (2019), p. 53
  2. ↑ Kashina (2014), Vladimir Keilis-Borok: A Biography, p. 105
  3. ↑ Kashina (2014), Vladimir Keilis-Borok: A Biography, p. 107
  4. ↑ A. J. Lichtman; V. I. Keilis-Borok (November 1981). "Pattern recognition applied to presidential elections in the United States, 1860-1980: Role of integral social, economic, and political traits". Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America. 78 (11): 7230–7234. Bibcode:1981PNAS...78.7230L. doi:10.1073/pnas.78.11.7230. PMC 349231. PMID 16593125.
  5. ↑ Lichtman (2020), Predicting the Next President, chpt. 2, p. 14
  6. ↑ Allan J. Lichtman (April 1982). "How to Bet in '84". Washingtonian.
  7. 1 2 Lichtman (2020), Predicting the Next President, chpt. 2
  8. 1 2 3 4 5 6 Lichtman (2020), Predicting the Next President, chpt. 2
  9. ↑ Lichtman (2020), Predicting the Next President, chpt. 2, p. 26
  10. 1 2 Lichtman (2020), Predicting the Next President, chpt. 2, p. 31
  11. ↑ Lichtman (2020), Predicting the Next President, chpt. 9
  12. 1 2 Stevenson, Peter W. (November 25, 2021). "Trump is headed for a win, says professor who has predicted 30 years of presidential outcomes correctly". Washington Post. ISSN 0190-8286. Retrieved September 23, 2023. In his highest polling, Gary Johnson is at about 12 to 14 percent. My rule is that you cut it in half. That would mean that he gets six to seven, and that would be the sixth and final key against the Democrats.
  13. 1 2 Lichtman (2020), Predicting the Next President, chpt. 2, p. 38
  14. ↑ Lichtman (2020), Predicting the Next President, chpt. 2, p. 41
  15. ↑ Lichtman (2020), Predicting the Next President, chpt. 12: "Trump is a consummate showman who commands media attention but appeals only to a narrow slice of the electorate rather than achieving broad appeal like Ronald Reagan."
  16. ↑ Lichtman (2020), Predicting the Next President, chpt. 2, p. 46
  17. ↑ Lichtman (2020), Predicting the Next President, chpt. 2, p. 48
  18. 1 2 Allan J. Lichtman (2000). "ELECTION 2000: The Keys Point to Gore". Social Education. 64 (6): 376–377.
    "Thus, on balance, barring a most improbable turn of events, the American people will ratify the record of the current Democratic administration this year and elect Al Gore president of the United States."
  19. ↑ Joseph Jaffe, Allan Lichtman (November 18, 2020). The Keys to the White House - Distinguished Professor, Allan Lichtman (YouTube streaming video). Event occurs at 32m03s.
  20. ↑ Lichtman (1990), The Thirteen Keys to the Presidency, p. 6: "When five or fewer keys are false, the incumbent party wins the popular vote"
  21. ↑ Allan J. Lichtman (1999). "The Keys to Election 2000". Social Education. 63 (7): 422.
  22. ↑ Allan J. Lichtman (2001). "Supplemental Report on the Racial Impact of the Rejection of Ballots Cast in Florida’s 2000 Presidential Election and in Response to the Statement of the Dissenting Commissioners and Report by Dr. John Lott Submitted to the United States Senate Committee on Rules in July 2001" in Voting Irregularities in Florida during the 2000 Presidential Election (US Commission of Civil Rights, 2001)
  23. ↑ Lichtman, Featuring Allan. "Video: Opinion | He Predicted Trump's Win in 2016. Now He's Ready to Call 2020". The New York Times. ISSN 0362-4331. Retrieved February 15, 2021.
  24. ↑ "The Keys to the White House - Distinguished Professor, Allan Lichtman - YouTube". www.youtube.com. Retrieved February 15, 2021.
  25. ↑ In The Thirteen Keys to the Presidency (1990), Lichtman wrote: "When five or fewer keys are false, the incumbent party wins the popular vote". By contrast, in The Keys to the White House (2005), he wrote: "When five or fewer of these propositions are false, or turned against the party holding the White House, that party wins another term in office."
  26. ↑ Lichtman (2020), Predicting the Next President
  27. ↑ He Predicted a Trump Win in 2016. What's His Forecast For 2020? (streaming video). New York Times. August 5, 2020. Archived from the original on December 21, 2021.
  28. ↑ Lichtman (2012)
  29. ↑ "Historian's Prediction: Donald J. Trump to Win 2016 Election". American University.
  30. ↑ Professor outlines why he thinks Trump is headed for a win, retrieved September 23, 2023
  31. ↑ Stevenson, Peter W. (November 25, 2021). "Trump is headed for a win, says professor who has predicted 30 years of presidential outcomes correctly". Washington Post. ISSN 0190-8286. Retrieved September 23, 2023.
  32. ↑ Presidential Scholar Predicts Donald Trump Victory | Power Lunch | CNBC, retrieved September 23, 2023
  33. ↑ Stevenson, Peter W. (November 25, 2021). "Professor who predicted 30 years of presidential elections correctly called a Trump win in September". Washington Post. ISSN 0190-8286. Retrieved September 23, 2023.
  34. ↑ Csellar |, Maralee (July 12, 2010). "Obama Wins Re-Election in 2012 | American University Washington DC". American University. Retrieved September 25, 2023.
  35. ↑ "Never-Wrong Pundit Picks Obama to Win in 2012". US News.
  36. ↑ Schuessler, Jennifer (November 9, 2016). "Yes, He Thought Trump Would Win. No, He Didn't Use Hard Data". The New York Times. ISSN 0362-4331. Retrieved September 25, 2023.
  37. ↑ Stevenson, Peter W. (November 25, 2021). "Professor who predicted 30 years of presidential elections correctly called a Trump win in September". Washington Post. ISSN 0190-8286. Retrieved September 25, 2023.
  38. ↑ Combs, Cody (August 16, 2023). "Will Joe Biden be re-elected in the 2024 presidential election?". The National. Retrieved September 25, 2023.
  39. ↑ Silver, Nate (August 31, 2011). "Despite Keys, Obama Is No Lock". FiveThirtyEight. Retrieved September 25, 2023.
  40. ↑ Silver, Nate (September 12, 2011). "'Keys to the White House' Historian Responds". FiveThirtyEight. Retrieved September 25, 2023.
  41. ↑ Lichtman (2020), Predicting the Next President, chpt. 13

Bibliography

This article is issued from Wikipedia. The text is licensed under Creative Commons - Attribution - Sharealike. Additional terms may apply for the media files.