If the 2020 election took place today, President Donald Trump, there would be the best one fifth chance of beating former Vice President Joe Biden, according to three main models that predict the outcome. Dump Trump President Election Toilet Shirt
Dump Trump President Election Toilet Shirt, hoodie, tank top, sweater
Trump’s chance of winning is 21% that comes from the Dump Trump President Election Toilet Shirt 538 election model, which simulates the 40,000-fold election and produces the most probable aggregate based on many factors including historical results, election probe and a bunch of other variables.
Two other electoral models that most politicians follow show that incumbents have an even smaller chance of winning. The HQ Decision Table model gives Trump a 17.8% chance of securing a second term in a 34-day period. The economic model gives Trump a 13% chance of winning.
Those are pretty amazing things! And honestly, it would get more attention if 2016 didn’t happen. After all, the modelers – especially the 538’s Nate Silver – became the hot commodity following the 2008 election in which they accurately predicted Barack Obama’s convincing victory over John McCain. And Silver has proven itself again by nailed the results in all 50 states by 2012.
But 2016 happened. And the models were wrong.
On November 8, 2016 (Election Day), the 538 pattern gave Trump a 28.4% chance of winning. The New York Times “Upshot” model pinned his chances of 15%. The Huffington Post model gives the billionaire businessman a 1.7% chance to win.
What that failure has proven is that a model is only as good as the Dump Trump President Election Toilet Shirt assumptions (and the data behind those assumptions) you put into it. Trump was able to find voters in three key states – Pennsylvania, Michigan, and Wisconsin – those models missed out on. So he won.
But simply because electoral models ignored the Trump phenomenon for the first time doesn’t mean we should ignore them altogether. The models are updated to reflect the realignment Trump established in 2016. Hence, the likelihood of a lack of some sort of pro-Trump factor hidden among voters is much less.