Is it “Time for a Change”?

Running the numbers through the most reliable model — and what it means for the 2016 presidential election

Today, Professor Alan Abramowitz of Emory University published the results of his renowned election predictor — the Time for a Change model.

This model, which has correctly predicted the outcome of every US presidential election since 1988 with an average error of two points, takes into account three factors: the incumbent’s net approval rating, the growth rate of GDP during the second quarter and the presence/absence of an incumbent in the race. Added to Abramowitz’s constant, the model yields a percentage share of the major party vote that the nominee of the incumbent party is expected to receive — which can be used to generally predict the outcome of the election.

After learning today what the constants would be in this model, I ran the numbers for myself:

The top line is the formula; below that is the constant, which I multiplied by the data plugged into the next line. On the bottom line is the result, which I summed to get the bolded number on the far right. The numbers predict that the Democratic nominee will receive 48.6% of the major party vote, while the Republican nominee will receive 51.4%.

Thus, the model concludes that Donald Trump is expected to win the presidency.

If you’ve been following Professor Abramowitz’s commentary on the 2016 election cycle, this result shouldn’t come of a surprise. He has, for months, suggested that he expected his model to declare Trump the winner. However, now that the model has spoken, there are two points I’d like to make.

FIRST- This model is based on generic Democrat and generic Republican nominees. In other words, it assumes that a voter will make his/her decision based on a set of liberal or conservative policies advanced by each respective candidate. Therefore, the model is saying that, for instance, a George Bush-type would defeat a John Kerry-type.

It is important to note, however, that this is no conventional election year. Never before has a presidential campaign like the one Republican nominee Donald Trump has run to date been seen before. From a leaner than lean staff to a reluctance to fundraise or spend to a platform not based in traditional conservative ideas to reckless statements on the stump, it is fair to say that Trump is not a mainstream GOP candidate and will likely stretch the practicality of this model. Thus, while the GOP likely entered the 2016 election cycle as clear favorites to win the White House, the introduction of Donald Trump into the model might diminish that advantage. More so than usual, voters will be motivated to cast ballots for or against Mr. Trump — and the same goes for the negatively-perceived Ms. Clinton.

SECOND- On the flip side, the consistent success of this model lends credence to the theory that people vote primarily on economic conditions, and the desire to either maintain or change the status quo. The “Time for a Change” model is aptly named, as is captures what is at the heart of voting: a choice. Presidential elections are often described as historical pendulums — they swing back and forth based on the mass’s desire for change. Every four years, voters are presented this choice, and often base their decision on the economy. This year is showing signs of not being too abnormal in that regard. Across the country, people are frustrated— they’re out of a job, the global economy is changing and macro-level growth is too lethargic to sense on the micro-level. Among this crowd, the sentiment is universal: the need for change.

And this is what Donald Trump offers — liberation from the “same old policies” that have not produced the results these voters desire. Thus, regardless of the statements he makes or the policy he presents, it is reasonable to state that simply because he represents change, he is a contender for the White House with legitimate odds at victory.

Unfortunately, it will be very difficult to discover the balance these two opposing forces will strike in the final outcome before the evening of Tuesday, November 8th.

Much credit is owed to the University of Virigina’s Center for Politics, for which Professor Abramowitz writes and in which he published his findings today. The following link provides more insight to his methodology and offers his analysis — with which I mostly agree. http://www.centerforpolitics.org/crystalball/articles/forecasting-the-2016-presidential-election-will-time-for-change-mean-time-for-trump/