Prof says Trump victory 87% certain
Some people live on limbs.
Click here for reuse options!Helmut Norpoth has been predicting a Trump victory since early this year. His model currently projects a win for the Republican with a certainty of 87 to 99 percent.
Norpoth is a professor at Stony Brook University on Long Island…
Norpoth wrote in The Hill that although the race looks decided, current polling methods are “bunk.”
The projections for Clinton are all based on opinion polls, which are flawed because they don’t reflect actions, Norpoth wrote. They’re about what voters think of Clinton or Trump, but they can’t tell us exactly how voters will act on those thoughts.
“It is ingrained in all of us that voting is civic duty,” he says. “So nearly all of us say, oh yes, I’ll vote, and then many will not follow through.”
Instead of opinion polling, Norpoth relies on statistics from candidates’ performances in party primaries and patterns in the electoral cycle to forecast results. The model correctly predicted the victor in every presidential election since 1996, according to the Daily Mail.
Running the model on earlier campaigns comes up with the correct outcome for every race since 1912, except the 1960 election.
Copyright 2016 Liberaland
44 responses to Prof says Trump victory 87% certain
Leave a Reply
You must be logged in to post a comment.
jwong318 October 20th, 2016 at 17:22
Don’t take his class. You don’t want the idiot teaches you.
Jack E Raynbeau October 20th, 2016 at 17:32
We’ll know on November 28th.
whatthe46 October 20th, 2016 at 17:35
i keep reminding them that the republicans vote on the 28th. it’s their designation date. LOL
boss October 20th, 2016 at 18:18
unless Trump pulls a Gore and goes to the supreme court if he loses.
Jack E Raynbeau October 20th, 2016 at 18:29
Gore only requested a recount. The Florida Supreme court sided with him. It was Bush that appealed to the SCOTUS.
alpacadaddy October 20th, 2016 at 18:41
Hey Jack, don’t mess up his attempt at false-equivalency with mere facts! /s
Jack E Raynbeau October 20th, 2016 at 20:04
Sounds like a Trump apologist.
boss October 20th, 2016 at 19:15
ok…Gore did not accept the results. There was a recount and he still lost and the is still complaining from Gore.
Jack E Raynbeau October 20th, 2016 at 20:04
Nonsense. There was much more involved. Do you recall hanging chads and the arguments about whether or not they should be counted? I wouldn’t fault any candidate, including Trump, for demanding recall(s) in that very situation.
Do you have citation for recent complaining from Gore? It doesn’t have to be from today.
boss October 20th, 2016 at 23:04
In the speech he just gave, he made referrence to it. Gore still feels he was robbed and rightfully so.
In retrospect, a Gore Presidency might have kept America out of the Middle East.
The main reason I will not vote for Clinton is that she is thumping the war drum and will get America involved in a major war…imo.
Jack E Raynbeau October 20th, 2016 at 23:21
No, that’s now how it works. You claimed that Gore is still complaining. Do you have a reference for that?
boss October 21st, 2016 at 10:42
Ok …you are right, Gore is happy with the results. You argument is silly.
Jack E Raynbeau October 21st, 2016 at 12:10
So, you have nothing to back up your claim.
boss October 21st, 2016 at 12:27
why argue about a silly topic?
Here is the speech where he considers himself in a group of cheated people. You will not read any of this on MSM.
Don’t tell me, you are going to say this does not count.
http://freebeacon.com/politics/al-gore-still-cries-losing-2000-election/
http://hotair.com/archives/2016/10/20/last-week-hillary-agreed-gore-won-2000-election/
Here is a blog
http://talk.baltimoresun.com/topic/275813-did-albert-gore-jr-accept-the-result-of-the-2000-presidential-election/page-3
Bottom line, Gore still feels he should have won…it is human nature.
Can we now get of this silly disagreement?
Jack E Raynbeau October 21st, 2016 at 23:16
It takes two to argue. In most cases.
I read your links. What I gathered is that he was not complaining about the loss but was trying to explain how important it is to vote. He was stressing how close an election can be.
boss October 22nd, 2016 at 09:48
It is normal for anyone remember and talk about it.
At the time I was trading the markets and saw the daily swings up until Gore conceded. Wild ride!
Jack E Raynbeau October 23rd, 2016 at 00:29
I can only imagine how crazy that must have been. Hope you did well.
boss October 23rd, 2016 at 11:24
It really was. A year later, the most alarming thing happened. One morning the market crashed 600 points in 30 seconds. It was 4 am where I was. Turned on The news and saw the first tower after it was hit. Then watched the second tower get hit. Things will never be the same. I traded with some of the people.
To this day I will never forget the pain in so many families.
OldLefty October 20th, 2016 at 18:38
The state of Florida automatically went to recount.
It was bush who went to the Supreme Court and ask them to stop counting , Which they did 5-4 and called it per curiam claiming it is not setting precedent but is a decision one time only.
boss October 20th, 2016 at 19:26
There was a recount and Gore still lost yet he complains to this day.
Trump might do the same thing if he loses a close race.
http://www.pbs.org/wnet/supremecourt/future/landmark_bush.html
If Gore had been President, the Iraq war might have never happened which would have been a good thing.
OldLefty October 20th, 2016 at 19:32
The Court STOPPED the count.
And probably he DID win.
http://www.slate.com/articles/news_and_politics/kausfiles_special/2001/11/everything_the_new_york_times_thinks_about_the_florida_recount_is_wrong.html
http://www.slate.com/articles/news_and_politics/kausfiles_special/2001/11/update_hotrecount_docs.single.html
I agree about Iraq,
Obewon October 20th, 2016 at 19:35
Trump is nowhere near close. GOP is losing all swing states in another 3:2 blowout!
Electoral votes: Hillary Clinton 342.3 (86.6% chance)
Trump 195.0 (13.4% chance of 270 minimum to win)
Evan McMullin 0.6, Gary Johnson 0.1
Popular vote: Hillary Clinton 49.7% Vs Trump 42.9% http://projects.fivethirtyeight.com/2016-election-forecast/?ex_cid=2016-senate-forecast
KABoink_after_wingnut_hacker October 20th, 2016 at 17:47
The poor kids that have to sit though this buffoon’s classes have my sympathy.
crc3 October 20th, 2016 at 17:49
Helmut Norpoth? LOL Is that really his name? Anyway…he’s dumber than Rump if he thinks Rump has a prayer….
arc99 October 20th, 2016 at 18:05
“”Running the model on earlier campaigns comes up with the correct outcome for every race since 1912, except the 1960 election.””
Folks, it would be a mistake to just dismiss out of hand, a model that has been proven to accurately predict elections for over 100 years. Just sayin…
halfwayin October 20th, 2016 at 18:18
Professor of what?
amersham1046 October 20th, 2016 at 20:06
The Care of magical animals
Red Mann October 21st, 2016 at 00:21
The Dark Arts.
boss October 20th, 2016 at 18:21
He is most likely correct. Most online blog sites have Trump at 80% according to sources in Seattle.
Larry Schmitt October 20th, 2016 at 19:16
To put this in perspective. This will take a bit of reading, but it’s worth it.
https://www.quora.com/How-statistically-sound-is-Helmut-Norpoths-primary-model-for-predicting-presidential-election-results
OldLefty October 20th, 2016 at 19:27
Actually, this guy’s whole model seems to be based on incumbency and New Hampshire.
http://www.motherjones.com/kevin-drum/2012/08/new-hampshire-primary.
Then, from Sam Wang;
Hey Sam,
Off-topic here but would you care to comment on the model created by Helmut Norpoth at SUNY-Stony Brook?
http://primarymodel.com/
It seems at first blush to be so against everything you and other cutting-edge forecasters are doing these days…but maybe I’m missing something?
Sam Wang // Jul 10, 2016 at 5:12 pm
https://xkcd.com/1122/
Obewon October 20th, 2016 at 19:42
This clown ‘forecast’ ignores his own methodology e.g. ‘Incumbency’, ‘econ’, full employment: U.S. Record $18.45 T GDP growing +3.7% APR Q2-2016 final via BEA is +$5T. Unemployment is 5% via 15 M+ private Jobs created by BHO44, etc. https://uploads.disquscdn.com/images/c1751f3390dd04fbf49ad3dc8bd67a9087b36e2c62dc293a3f459fdf3aab0a81.jpg
Mensa Member October 20th, 2016 at 19:55
Remember when the Bush daughters would show up on the White House lawn with an empty gin bottle and one flip-flop between them?
Them’s there family values!
OldLefty October 20th, 2016 at 21:16
Saw this is a comment section;
Maya Benowitz, Mathematical Physicist/Biophysicist
Written Mar 20
I would equate the accuracy of his ‘model’ to flipping a slightly biased coin for every election and getting heads every time. If I had $10 million to wager against his prediction, I would do so confidently. The ‘statistical model’ is political pixie dust, lacking any and all flavors of rigor. There is a fundamental problem in building predictive models from historical events. The further you go into the past, correlations exponentially decouple with respect to the present. This exponential decoupling is proportional to the exponential growth of technology. The political landscape has fundamentally changed in the post-internet era, any model not accounting for this change almost surely will fail.
boss October 21st, 2016 at 19:20
your numbers are off according to BEA. GDP 2nd Qrt 2016 was 1.4%
Obewon October 21st, 2016 at 20:34
“Current-dollar GDP increased 3.7 percent, or $168.5 billion, in the second quarter to a level of $18,450.1 billion (table 1 and table 3).”-BEA Q2-2016. “EMBARGOED UNTIL RELEASE AT 8:30 A.M. EDT, Thursday, September 29, 2016” http://www.bea.gov/newsreleases/national/gdp/gdpnewsrelease.htm Thanks for reproving that you’re a unanimously debunked liar!
boss October 21st, 2016 at 23:59
Oh boy…
Obewon October 22nd, 2016 at 00:49
We’ve nearly achieved our social and non polluting renewable energy, privized Internet, and space program goals. “Not because they are easy but because they are hard. …And new hopes and peace are there.’-JFK Rice University. TX. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hZyLwfrDyjc
boss October 22nd, 2016 at 09:44
I was very young when John Kennedy was elected.
In todays terms he would be considered a conservative Rebuplican…more in line with Trump than Clinton. If you like what JFK did then you should be rejecting the globalism /establishment attitude of most Politicians…especially Clinton.
Things have changed since the 60’s after JFK, MLK and Robert Kennedy were assasinated.
Old school Liberals are todays conservatives. Todays Liberals are way left to the point of Socialism/Communism. Very sad to see both men and women working to raise a family.
Taxes, regulation and big government have destroyed what America Used to Be.
Mensa Member October 20th, 2016 at 19:52
Nate Silver has a fantastic track record. He says a Hillary presidency is almost certain.
Are the Merlin Project people still confidentially predicting a Trump win?
https://uploads.disquscdn.com/images/adaaf8207f820513bbd3c41417ebdd2f3bacdf94f613f78d1d5570f0be2c5ddb.png
amersham1046 October 20th, 2016 at 20:10
Seems with a track record like his he would be to go-to guy for election forecasting by all the networks
rat618 October 20th, 2016 at 21:17
Does this guy have tenure? Is he featured in literature on Stony Brook to prospective students?
Red Mann October 21st, 2016 at 00:25
Stony Brook is also the home to the evolution denying, ID supporting Michael Egnor.
Gary Parillo October 21st, 2016 at 03:16
Well I don’t know if this is any consolation,but it may be just as accurate,or as inaccurate.A blind Bulgarian mystic predicted before her death that the 44th U.S. President,would be the “last” president.She is known to have correctly predicted the 911 event,the 2004 tsunami,the rise of Isis,and extremists disruptions in Europe in 2016.Her name is Baba Vanga if you want to google her,but it is said she was the real deal,and accurate.
That being grimly said,what that means if true is the next 18 days may become a wild ride that we would rather not have tickets to ride on.Hopefully her and the nutty professor are both wrong.