MercoPress, en Español

Montevideo, April 21st 2024 - 07:51 UTC



Trump's presidency short lived? Two experts who anticipated his victory make the prediction

Friday, November 18th 2016 - 09:22 UTC
Full article 41 comments
Allan Lichtman said Trump's history of playing “fast and loose with the law,” his unpredictability and lack of public service experience could end in impeachment. Allan Lichtman said Trump's history of playing “fast and loose with the law,” his unpredictability and lack of public service experience could end in impeachment.

Donald Trump caught the world by surprise when he emerged victorious at the United States elections, but his stay at the White House could be short-lived, according to university professor who has correctly predicted presidential poll outcomes for the last 30 years. A similar prediction has been made by journalist and filmmaker Michael Moore who also forecasted Trump's victory with weeks' anticipation.

 Allan Lichtman, a political historian at the American University, told CNBC's “Squawk Box” on Thursday that Trump's history of playing “fast and loose with the law,” his unpredictability as well as lack of public service experience could lead to an impeachment.

He added the prognostication was based on a 'gut feeling' rather than the scientific methods he employed in predicting Trump's election victory.

Since winning the election last week, Trump, along with his Vice President-elect Mike Pence, has been trying to fill out key posts in his Cabinet. Reports, however, hinted at the strain his transition tema was under in setting up a new administration.

Trump also faced backlash when he appointed Steve Bannon, the former president of Breitbart News, as his chief strategist and senior counselor.

“Trump is a wild card,” Lichtman said, adding Bannon's appointment would be a litmus test for the President-elect to either jettison him or stick with him no matter how controversial he became.

Though Republicans have won the majority in Congress, Lichtman pointed out they did not have a “filibuster-proof majority” in the Senate. Trump's appointment of controversial figures like Bannon and his unpredictability could make it more difficult for the Republicans to work with Democrats and other members of the Congress, he said.

“Republicans love control and they would love to see Mike Pence as president because he is predictable and controllable - a down-the-pipe standard conservative Republican.”

Lichtman's predictions on presidential election outcomes were based on history. Appearing on CNBC in October, Lichtman explained he looked at 13 “keys” he developed by studying every election from 1860 to 1980 and then applied it to the next eight elections.

The way his method worked was if six or more “keys” went against the incumbent party at the White House, its candidate would likely lose the election. In the October interview, Lichtman said there were six “keys” that were against the Democratic party.

To-date, only two presidents have been involved in formal impeachment trials by the Senate - Andrew Johnson in 1868 and Bill Clinton in 1999.

Michael Moore told the “Morning Joe” program a similar outcome: “Here's what's going to happen, this is why we're not going to have to suffer through four years of Donald Trump, because he has no ideology except the ideology of Donald Trump”

“And when you have a narcissist like that, who's so narcissistic where it's all about him, he will, maybe unintentionally, break laws. He will break laws because he's only thinking about what's best for him.”

Moore also called Trump a “racist”, a “misogynist” and an “authoritarian”.

Top Comments

Disclaimer & comment rules
  • bushpilot

    Trump won a substantial portion of the “electoral” votes. I haven't read that Trump was “overwhelmingly” backed by the American public. It might be “professional” journalism, U.S. style, that is causing your confusion. They spew fantasy and lies and think that is normal professional adult behavior.

    The U.S. “electoral college” system is based on its bicameral legislative system. In the beginning, states with smaller populations were concerned their wishes would be overlooked by the older more populated states if voting was just based on population alone.

    If the huge populations of California and New York were always able to decide how things were going to be in WY, MT, AZ, AK, SD, ND, NE, KS, OK, UT, ID, MS, AL, AR, KY, TN, IA, etc., then an “overwhelming” number of these less populated states would be inclined to not associate themselves anymore with these few more populated states.

    Each state in the Union has equal weight in some parts of the system. These lesser populated states are not going to want to have a secondary status to the more largely populated states. And they should not.

    Their has to be a check on an area of huge population. This check is the bicameral legislature and electoral college system.

    The people of these smaller states are perfectly capable through their own life experiences of coming to their own political conclusions and they tend to view the leftist politics of California and New York as, not “progressive”, but “twisted”. They are appalled by that kind of thinking and feel they shouldn't have it forced on them. Leftists believe their way should be forced on all peoples of the world. That is a pretty scary notion too.

    So, in this election, there were enough people in these lesser populated states that felt more leftism wasn't good for them or the United States, and that lesser amount of people were able to tell California and New York to “buzz off”, this time.

    The majority rules in a democracy, but it is regulated.

    Nov 18th, 2016 - 02:54 pm +6
  • DemonTree

    @ ChrisR
    You were opposed to the electoral college before the election. Changed your mind have you?

    @ bushpilot
    Why is it okay for the people living in smaller states to force their preferences on those in larger states, then? Right-wingers also believe their way should be forced on everyone, and it's just as scary.

    Not that Trump is truly right wing; the devil only knows what he will do to the country.

    @ shackleton
    Yes, I have said before that there are similarities, and I would also like to see the first past the post system reformed.

    Nov 19th, 2016 - 12:08 am +4
  • DemonTree

    @ ChrisR
    As it would have been only fair for it to apply to Clinton had results been reversed?

    But you are wrong anyway, Obama won the popular vote both times, unlike Trump.

    Whether the media was against Trump or not, it gave him all the free publicity he could have asked for, and the head of the FBI helped him out by breaking election laws to announce an investigation into Clinton that ultimately found nothing.

    Also, you seem very trusting. It would be wiser to wait and see what Trump actually does with his first term before cheering for him to have a second one.

    Nov 19th, 2016 - 11:45 am +4
Read all comments

Commenting for this story is now closed.
If you have a Facebook account, become a fan and comment on our Facebook Page!