The polls show Trump is behind multiple Democratic candidates and no one believes them. The polls were all wrong in 2016, and are viewed with some suspicion this time around.
But a new financial model that has an almost perfect track record at predicting presidential winners is calling it for Trump.
And in a big way. The report from Moody’s was wrong once since 1980 – they predicted a close race but Hillary to win.
They have since expanded their data to include the new voters Trump has pulled into the GOP and are predicting a landslide for Trump in 2020.
With a few caveats – if the economy tanks these numbers are useless. Or, if a candidate emerges from the scrap heap of the Dem primary and excites the base into record turnout for the left, all bets are off.
But according to a historically accurate model maintained by research firm Moody’s Analytics, he remains a strong favorite to win a second term based on economic trends in key swing states.
As Democrats gather on stage in Ohio on Tuesday night for their fourth debate, the Moody’s model suggests they’ll need to take aim at Trump’s record on the economy to overcome his advantage.
The Moody’s model — which was perfect from 1980 until narrowly missing the 2016 outcome — finds that Trump would win fairly solidly based on three different sets of state-level economic and political data.
One that focuses on pocketbook issues such as gas prices, home prices and personal income finds that, as of now, Trump would romp to a second term with 351 electoral votes.
“Democrats need to be on high alert. If history is any guide and we get typical turnout, they are going to lose,” said Mark Zandi, chief economist at Moody’s Analytics and lead architect of the model. “They need to be at DEFCON 1 or it’s likely Trump will be reelected.”
The model, which Moody’s plans to present to clients this week, called every election since 1980 correctly until missing in 2016 and predicting Hillary Clinton would defeat Trump.
In response to the miss, Moody’s expanded the range of potential voter turnout and made several other changes to how it assesses voter reaction to economic conditions. If applied now, Moody’s says the altered models would have called 2016 for Trump.
Another Moody’s model, focused mainly on the stock market, finds Trump would win with 298 electoral votes.
A third, which focuses on state-specific unemployment rates, finds Trump would win with 332 electoral votes.
In an average of its three models, Trump would also win with 332 electoral votes to 206 for the Democratic nominee.