An alternative predictor to biased, small-sample polls for the 2016 POTUS election

In 2016, Republican Primary turnout was 15% of US Pop, they have averaged 10% since 1980. Dems 14% of US Pop, avg 13% since 1980. Rep primary ended 1 month before Dems, so the 9 states after had about half the turnout of usual, and in Colorado, the GOP did not permit citizens to vote. Those discrepancies allow an easy estimation of 18–19% turnout for Reps had it gone the distance it went with the Dems.

This means that during the primaries, Bernie enthusiasm moved the Dem needle to slightly above average turnout. However, Trump enthusiasm moved the needle to a (corrected for all states voting) virtual turnout tie with Obama in 2008. What does this mean? Well, this #BasedAsian went way deeper than I just did and established several predictive scenarios using party-swapping as the variable for how this election will go, and because the basis is a set of invariable results rather than volunteered information from about 100 people selected at party percentages with sketchy justifications (I.E. voter polls), It is far more reliable for predicting this election.

Also, because there is no incumbent candidate, primary turnout actually does have predictive value so long as the actual campaigning from both candidates in the General Election remains moderately competitive. The numbers being way off on Reagan vs Mondale was due to maybe the worst campaign in US History run by Mondale, and in Bush V Dukakis, Bush had semi-incumbency as the VP while Dukakis ran a campaign trying to establish national security credentials on the idea that the USA didn’t need nukes (during the cold war) or space-based weaponry, but did need Tanks (which we hadn’t really used since the Korean war, at the time). He then did an ad with him riding in an M1A1 Abrams Tank, the most self-destructive campaign ad in US History. During THIS election, however, both Clinton and Trump had (until that last debate), been being kept competitive by the near-universal media bias for Hillary Clinton.

A super-pac called the Trumpocrats , whose stated goal is to sign Democrats up to vote for Donald Trump come Nov 8th, has signed up over 200,000 voters to date. Conversely, the #NeverTrump “GOP” camp, as far as anyone can tell, consists of around 2,000 assorted political pundits, writers, and politicians. I’m willing to bet most readers have heard of one of those groups, and it’s not the one with over 200,000 people. Those Never Trump people are perfectly situated to be very loud, going so far as to run their own independent candidate who won’t be on the ballot in 43 states, while constantly and persistently delivering attacks on Trump like they are the very “liberal media” they have publicly decried for decades. They are like a small dog who barks loudly at a coyote through a fence, and will not shut up, demanding it’s owner’s attention, demanding it’s own attention, all the while no one notices that the rest of the coyote pack broke into NeverTrump’s house, emptied their fridge, ate their wife and kids, and mauled their owner from behind, but they don’t devour the loud dog, they let it keep barking. That poor dog is going to turn around on Nov 8th to see that it’s whole world is gone, and it is now doomed to slowly starve and die within the bounds of the fence it thought protected it, and it will likely never know that if it had just shut it’s yap and taken stock for a second, it’s only chance for survival could have been preserved.

Overly elaborate metaphors aside, the evidence points to a scenario Daniel Kwon did not mention, let’s call it Scenario T, the scenario where the media pretends that the Trumpocrats and primary turnout don’t exist, basing their polling on guesswork/wishful thinking, and simultaneously the NeverTrumpers loudly, constantly, spew their salt over many “right-wing” new media sites. In this scenario, we witness a repeat of what happened the entire primary, a virtual consensus across all our news input that Trump won’t win, that he’s being abandoned en-masse by the GOP, that Hillary will of course win. In Scenario T, 5% of Reg GOP who would have voted stay home or vote either Johnson or Bill Kristol’s puppet, 5% vote Hillary, the rest vote for Trump, but for the Dems, 10% don’t vote or vote either Johnson or Stein, 10% vote Trump, and the rest vote for Hillary, causing Trump to win the biggest landslide since Reagan.

Sadly, this prediction is highly speculative because some of the evidence for the variable is qualitative, but said evidence is being applied quantitatively. However, even if over-estimated by 50% for dems as well as GOP, (unlikely), that would still put the election on scenario A or B. Should Trump make it 28 more days without a campaign cataclysm orders of magnitude worse than “Grab her by the pussy”, he will be the 45th President of the United States.