Allan Lichtman is the American University history professor and well known political prognosticator who has correctly called every presidential election since 1984 — except one. In 1984, he developed a system composed of thirteen “keys” in collaboration with Valdimir Keilis-Borok, a Russian mathematical geophysicist. The keys are true-or-false questions, and eight or more “true” answers is predictive of the outcome of a presidential election.
Lichtman has called the 2024 presidential race for Kamala Harris.
For most people who follow politics, Lichtman’s current prediction seems counterintuitive. However, he called the 2016 election for Trump, and the 2020 election for Biden. Both predictions seem to soundly disprove what sentiment seems to indicate. But, applying an intuition informed by a career of professional investigatory practice, and the street sense acquired by long years of answering calls for service, for me something just doesn’t smell right.
In 2016, Trump was clearly the superior candidate, and handily trounced Hillary during debate performances and on policy. Moreover, Americans had grown weary of Obama’s policies of “radical transformation,” and his anemic economy. The 2020 election cycle was characterized by massive mail in ballot hucksterism as well as Democrat pollster shenanigans. Trump had delivered a roaring economy, featuring historic energy independence, not to mention peace in the Middle East, and a host of other significant successes. All of this runs counter to Lichtman’s thesis.
Lichtman’s Thirteen Keys were presented in an Atlantic piece and are as follows: “1. Incumbent-party mandate: After the midterm elections, the incumbent party holds more seats in the U.S. House of Representatives than it did after the previous midterm elections. 2. Nomination contest: There is no serious contest for the incumbent-party nomination. 3. Incumbency: The incumbent-party candidate is the sitting president. 4. Third party: There is no significant third-party or independent campaign. 5. Short-term economy: The economy is not in recession during the election campaign. 6. Long-term economy: Real annual per capital economic growth during the term equals or exceeds mean growth during the two previous terms. 7. Policy change: The incumbent administration effects major changes in national policy. 8. Social unrest: There is no sustained social unrest during the term. 9. Scandal: The incumbent administration is untainted by major scandal. 10. Foreign or military success: The incumbent administrations achieves a major success in foreign or military affairs. 12. Incumbent charisma: The incumbent-party candidate is charismatic or a national hero. 13. Challenger charisma: The challenging-party candidate is not charismatic or a national hero.”
Lichtman holds that keys 2,4,5,6,7,8,9, and 13 are true this election cycle, signaling a Harris win — meaning it’s Harris by a nose. A single change in the yes/no calculous would indicate a Trump victory, as far as the Lichtman keys would indicate.
The Atlantic piece is critical of Lichtman’s keys and for good reason. For instance, “The Democratic [sic] nominee in 2008, Barack Obama, qualified as charismatic, but the 2012 nominee, who was also Barack Obama, did not, because of his diminished approval ratings.”
Lichtman provided a deep dive into the mechanics of his keys in a YouTube post lasting just over an hour. In it, Lichtman said his favorite key is 9, Scandal. “This key is very specifically defined. Corruption that directly implicates the president…with at least some bipartisan recognition of wrongdoing. Now, for four years, the Republicans have tried to pin a scandal on Biden. They’ve come up empty. I haven’t heard anything about it because they don’t have anything. Their smoking gun witness, Mr. Smirnov, turns out to have been arrested by the FBI for lying about the Bidens and spreading Russian propaganda…Nothing has hit Joe Biden himself, or you’d be hearing all about it in the congress.” Alexander Smirnov was indicted for making a false statement and creating a false and fictitious record as an FBI Confidential Human Source (CHS). As such, Smirnov’s relevance is highly suspect. What Lichtman doesn’t reference are the incredibly damming allegations of Tony Bobulinski who provided sworn testimony before the House Oversight Committee.
He says these keys are not “eye of the beholder” sorts of analysis. He claims they’re very specifically defined. As we’ve seen, Lichtman’s liberal bias is apparent and does seem to inform some elements of his interpretation. He’s taught at American University since 1973, is a registered Democrat, and contributed the following to an American University Government and Politics piece, “The Big Lie of a stolen presidential election that inspired the Capitol riot endures. A year later, surveys show that a third of Americans think Biden’s election was illegitimate…The Justice Department must hold accountable and prosecute those who inspired and instigated the Capitol insurrection, not just their followers.” Sounds like a liberal academic’s way of saying he supports the arrest and prosecution of Trump.
With reference to key 13, Lichtman dismisses Trump’s charisma as not fitting his narrowly defined parameters, “You have to be the once in a generation, broadly inspirational candidate, cutting across partisan lines. Clearly, while Trump is a great showman, he appeals only to a narrow base. And, therefore,…he doesn’t fit the criteria of the keys. He’s no FDR.” He leaves out “national hero,” which, I’d argue, Trump qualifies for, subsequent to his heroic response to the assassination attempt in Butler, PA.
The thesis of Lichtman’s model is, “It’s governance, not campaigning that counts.” If it’s really all about governance, Harris hasn’t got a prayer. The Biden-Harris administration has been a disaster characterized by military debacles, foreign policy disasters, economic blundering, and border incompetence. The real outrage is that it’s all been by design.
Ultimately, it’s not polls that matter or Lichtman’s 13 keys. It’s up to an informed and motivated electorate to weigh a corrupt administration in the balance and find it wanting. I hope the American people will prove Lichtman wrong.