The situation was volatile at the time. Biden had dropped out of the race 100 days prior and the Democratic leadership had nominated Harris. While Enns had expected a head-to-head between Biden and Trump, he guessed that since Trump already stood a 75% chance of winning according to his model, the only way the Democrats could win would be if Trump squandered the lead. He didn't.
In the end, Enns appears to have correctly predicted the presidential election.
How, exactly?
In national survey polls, respondents asked who they plan to vote for are often reluctant to answer honestly. Enns' model is not based on these polls. Rather, it determines voter preferences using a number of state-level economic indices.
Roughly speaking, the sitting party wins when people's payroll enrollment and average production hours are higher and their unemployment rate and deflated wages (income relative to the consumer price index) are lower than they were in the previous election cycle. Invert the trends, and the sitting party gives way to the opposition.
Enns' findings are consistent with Gallup polls indicating that the most salient issue for voters in 2024 was the economy, specifically inflation. But careful we don't get caught up in a broken-clock exuberance. Formerly, Enns had failed to predict the 2016 presidential upset.
And not long ago, political scientist Allan Lichtman, having successfully predicted the 2016 and 2020 presidential elections, even Trump's impeachment, nevertheless blew it with his 2024 Harris prediction. In his live election coverage on YouTube, his confidence melted down in real-time.
Many a forecast have wrecked themselves upon the shores of reality.
No comments:
Post a Comment