Allan Lichtman, a historian famous for his predictions of presidential election outcomes, is discussing what led to his incorrect forecast regarding Vice President Kamala Harris’s chances in this election cycle.

Prior to this week, Lichtman, a professor at American University, had correctly predicted nine out of the last ten elections. His previous accuracy of 90% has now dropped to 81.8% after president-elect Donald Trump won a second term following his earlier defeat by President Joe Biden.

“It feels like it has been a year since Tuesday,” Lichtman remarked during a Thursday evening YouTube livestream hosted by his son, Samuel Lichtman. “I admit I was wrong. I predicted a win for Harris, but she didn’t secure it. However, I wasn’t the only forecaster who got it wrong; most models were off mark too.”

Lichtman explained the two primary factors that led to the failure of his “13 Keys to the White House” prediction system this year. These included a widespread dissatisfaction with the Biden-Harris administration and Harris starting her campaign later after Biden dropped out on July 21. Moreover, he noted that Harris was the first nominee in recent history who did not take part in primary or caucus voting, although Democrats did make significant efforts.

“I don’t believe I made any faulty calls on my keys,” Lichtman stated. “The contest key became problematic due to circumstances within the Democratic Party, but I can’t say I was wrong at the time—based on the information available, it was the most logical prediction.”

He also mentioned an “immense wave of disinformation” spread across platforms like X, where false claims about the stock market plummeting and historical unemployment rates circulated widely.

What led Lichtman to predict Harris would win?

Lichtman utilized his established “13 Keys to the White House” framework to predict that Harris would outperform Trump in the election.

The keys in Lichtman’s system encompass:

• Key 1 (Party Mandate): The incumbent party has more representatives in the U.S. House post-midterms compared to the last midterm elections.
• Key 2 (Contest): There is no significant opposition for the incumbent party’s nomination.
• Key 3 (Incumbency): The candidate for the incumbent party is the current president.
• Key 4 (Third Party): There are no notable third-party or independent candidates running.
• Key 5 (Short-term Economy): The economy is not experiencing a recession during the campaign.
• Key 6 (Long-term Economy): Real per-capita economic growth equals or exceeds the average from the last two terms.
• Key 7 (Policy Change): The current administration implements significant changes in national policy.
• Key 8 (Social Unrest): There is no ongoing social unrest during the term.
• Key 9 (Scandal): The current administration has no major scandals.
• Key 10 (Foreign/Military Failure): The current administration does not face major failures in foreign or military policy.
• Key 11 (Foreign/Military Success): The administration achieves significant success in foreign or military affairs.
• Key 12 (Incumbent Charisma): The presidential candidate from the incumbent party is charismatic or viewed as a national hero.
• Key 13 (Challenger Charisma): The opposing party’s candidate lacks charisma or hero status.

Employing his method, Lichtman has accurately predicted nine of the eleven presidential elections since 1984. His first error occurred when Republican George W. Bush won over Democrat Al Gore in the 2000 election.

Is he planning to revise his ’13 keys’ system?

Lichtman affirmed that he does not intend to modify his 13 keys system, which he believes still maintains a strong success rate.

“I don’t think the underlying issue lies within the keys themselves. You can’t adjust a model based on the failure during a single election cycle. The model has been developed through 41 election cycles,” Lichtman stated.

He mentioned that his forecasts, which frequently diverge from mainstream political analysts, still serve as a more reliable indicator compared to other prediction models.

“The figures we’re seeing are unprecedented in modern American history. Especially considering how effectively the Democrats were mobilizing their voters up until that point. What caused such a sudden collapse for the Democrats?” Lichtman remarked. “We’ll continue to analyze this and might uncover insights in future discussions.”

What did Lichtman say about Nate Silver’s prediction?

Lichtman criticized Nate Silver’s final forecast for the 2024 election, which also anticipated a Harris victory, in a post on X the Monday before Election Day.

Lichtman took to X on Monday to express his views, stating: “Nate Silver’s collection of polls is so inconsistent that he now claims the outcome of the presidency is a matter of chance.”

The seasoned historian, who is 77 years old, was reacting to a post that Silver shared on X the same day, where he discussed how his final election prediction might hinge on “luck.”

“It could actually fall within a range where who appears ‘ahead’ in our last forecast is based merely on luck,” Silver wrote. “There’s still some variability due to running ‘only’ 40,000 simulations (we’ll expand that to 80,000 tonight, but still   ).”