[Q&A] Political Predictions Repository

Want to make your mark and be GWJ famous?

This is a place to deposit political predictions you'd like to make in public, so that they can be easily found and referenced in the future. Thus, it is not a discussion thread; discussions of predictions should take place in other threads as conversations proceed. Explicit clarification questions and answers are fine, but "Why do you think that?" expositions should occur elsewhere so as not to clutter the repository. Predictions should be narrowly defined; testable with publicly available information at all times; have an explicit date range; and refer to events, people and places explicitly so as to leave no doubt of resolution; and they should be numbered sequentially so that they are easier to find at later dates. Edits must be clearly marked and original text preserved through the use of strike-throughs if the prediction is modified. Please avoid the use of generalities - "The President will change his mind on this topic" is less useful than "The President will change his policy from yes to no on this topic", because the latter prevents a tiny change from being claimed as success. Failed predictions should be marked in bold at the top of the post via an edit, leaving the rest intact.

Edit - Off Topic. Sorry!
2) I predict that this will happen again. But if I'm lucky it won't be me next time.

Not a discussion group, please take this to another thread or create a new one so as not to clutter up the predictions.

Tanglebones wrote:

Prediction: Within the first month of his presidency, Trump will have the National Guard attack the DAPL protesters

It doesn't work like that.

Edit: Not the right thread for a discussion, I guess.

Reaper81 wrote:
Tanglebones wrote:

Prediction: Within the first month of his presidency, Trump will have the National Guard attack the DAPL protesters

It doesn't work like that.

I guess we will see.

After Kent State it doesn't work like that.

It'll be local cops.

I'm not sure that 'it doesn't work like that' is a viable predictor of what will happen under Trump.

Don't Comment - Predict! And you'll be happy in your life, more fulfilled spiritually, and more regular in the bowels.

I predict more comments in this thread.

I predict more bowels in this thread.

Rallick wrote:

I predict more vowels in this thread.

Ahem.

SillyRabbit wrote:
Rallick wrote:

I predict more vowels in this thread.

Ahem.

Hmph.

Grenn wrote:
SillyRabbit wrote:
Rallick wrote:

I predict more vowels in this thread.

Ahem.

Hmph.

Thhhbbthhtb!

Just made a very pessimistic and cynical prediction in another thread, perhaps I should cross post it here to be easier to find.

I'm predicting:
1. a lot of chaos, inefficiency, and lack of efficacy at many levels due to Trump's dictatorial need to purge anyone not personally loyal to him that he can get away with (and the Department of Energy "so, which employees do you have that work on climate change?" questionnaire shows that he will try devoutly to purge people he (hopefully) can't get away with).
2. Lots of blaming of Obama, Clinton, the Democrats, "insiders" etc, etc of how much of a sh*tshow things are, stating that things are bad because the past administration sabotaged the transfer process, or that people are working against Trump from inside Washington DC.
3. Did the public eat this up?
a. Yes: Go to 1.
b. No: Add 1 point to Trump's impeachment total. When Trump's impeachment total reaches some as yet unknown number from this and other activities, Trump will be impeached by Congress. In the meantime, Go to 1.

Yonder wrote:

b. No: Add 1 point to Trump's impeachment total. When Trump's impeachment total reaches some as yet unknown number from this and other activities, Trump will be impeached by Congress. In the meantime, Go to 1.

As long as Trump allows the Republican-held Congress to enact their Ayn Rand vision for the dystopian future they won't lift a finger to impeach (or even say bad things about) him.

They'll put up with him talking occasionally sh*t about them on Twitter if that means they can quietly dismantle or otherwise neuter New Deal and Great Society programs and eliminate much needed government regulation and oversight.

Can you put that in the form of a bounded prediction, OG?

Inauguration day will be bad. I think to much bad vibe is collecting. Protests, violence, violent protests, trigger happy cops, bedlam and pain. I hope it goes well but I doubt it will.

1) Years of underinvestment in US infrastructure will lead to a large-casualty (>100) incident within the next 18 months. It will be blamed on Obama, in spite of Republican obstructionism to infrastructure investment being a long-standing position (most-recently, in 2011 blocking an attempt by the Obama administration to raise the budget for infrastructure).
2) The US will withdraw from the Comprehensive Test Ban Treaty by the end of the calendar year, citing the threat posed by China.
3) The US will detonate at least one nuclear weapon within the next 18 months. The best case is for this to be a saber-rattling weapon test, but regardless will lead to a global arms race.
4) The US will be caught deploying special forces within Mexico's borders within the next four years, as friction from building the Wall (and arguments about payment) increases.
5) The US will be involved in at least one new war in East Asia within the next two years. It will be declared as a humanitarian effort, but will essentially be a proxy fight between the US / Russia and China.
6) Trump will not be in compliance with the Emoluments Clause for the entirety of his term in office. The GOP will push for the court to accept a case to neuter that clause before the Presidential elections in 2020 (Trump's SCOTUS pick will be publicly supportive). The war (see 5) will be used as justification for why the executive branch shouldn't be subject to regulatory shackles. This justification will make no sense, but be lapped up by Trump voters.

A super easy one:

The budget deficit will triple by the time Trump enters his third year in office and maintain its trajectory until a democrat is elected.

3) The movies based on these next few years are going to be incredible. The documentaries super depressing. An independent film maker will be tried for treason by the Trump Administration. The ACLU will make a Free Speech case and the Supreme Court will rule against them. Libel laws with extreme punishments and liberal applicability for news and commentary will be found to apply to entertainment and satire.
Someone on this forum will be served a cease and desist by an advocate for the administration.
Oh and I guess... Libel laws with extreme punishments and liberal applicability will be enacted, targeting 'rude' and 'unfair' news and commentary. Too bad.

Paleocon wrote:

A super easy one:

The budget deficit will triple by the time Trump enters his third year in office and maintain its trajectory until a democrat is elected.

Trick prediction. He'll flip and run as a Dem next time around.

A Timeline of 2017-2019 (Predictions #6)

1. Congress repeals part of the ACA, while keeping other parts intact. This makes everyone more upset than either of the alternatives. Costs rise sharply, which is passed on to the public, while many people lose their insurance.

2. The Democratic response splits the party into Sanders-esque and Clinton-esque wings, which mostly fight each other.

3. A video of killing of an African American pastor in North Carolina by the police (who mistook him for a car thief) sparks mass protests; the legislature sues the Governor when he refuses to send out the national guard.

4. "Fake news" becomes a common phrase: it is now is a synonym for "mainsteam media."

5. Meanwhile, online rumors spark ethnic attacks (against Sikhs and Hindu misidentified as Muslims). These are referred to as "race riots" in the mainstream news, and prompt calls decrying violent black people by the President (via Twitter).

6. An ecological disaster hits part of the country, disrupting agriculture. This is due to climate change, but anyone who says so is yelled at on Twitter. Corn production might have had a chance to recover, but the nation's top researcher at University of Iowa, an tenured professor who immigrated from India to get his PhD at Purdue, was let go after Iowa abolished tenure.

7. The 2018 Olympics in South Korea are marred by saber rattling and financial scandal, but the American coverage of this is overshadowed by the Black Lives Matter protest by several athletes, who are shunned after their return because they knelt during their gold medal ceremony.

8. A comedy film comes out based on SNL sketches of the administration. It is denounced by the President on Twitter, but only makes a domestic box office of about ten million.

9. The Republicans go into the election of 2018 with poor polling numbers. Congress in general has low approval ratings. (So does the president, but he doesn't care and those polls are fake news and also failing businesses. Sad.) The lower turnout for the midterms, the anger on the left, and the lack of the president's general support lead to projections of landside Democratic victories. 538 is laughed at when they project a 25% chance of a narrow Republican victory. This leads to the Democrats being complacent and fighting each other again.

10. Shortly before November, the Capital suffers a fire, which turns out to be arson. Black Lives Matter is immediately blamed for the attack. Politicians endorsed by the movement are banned from Congress.

11. In the aftermath of the attack on Congress, the president is granted plenary powers to fight terrorism, including the ability to deviate from the Constitution so long as it does not affect the institutions of Congress or the Judiciary. The vote is nearly unanimous, as many Democrats were prevented from attending.

12. Nationally managed land in several western states is privatized. This is hailed as a victory by Posse Comitatus believers, who have taken over the government of several relatively unpopulated counties, but most of the actual exploitation is corporate.

13. The purge of 2019 was mainly focused on right-wing targets, in part to demonstrate a separation between the President and the FBI, now unpopular on the left and right after responses to the protests in 2017 and their opposition to the Posse Comitatus movement. In the aftermath, the Vice President is given the powers of Congress, for the duration of the emergency.

Spoiler:

You may or may not recognize the source for this timeline. In a sense it isn't serious: it's more an act of futurism than a literal prediction. I write it in the hopes that it won't happen. I don't want to end up like the people (on the right and the left) who went off the raving deep end after 9/11. (It also underestimates Russian involvement.)

In another sense it is completely serious, in that right now I'm finding the political future to be a singularity-esque opaque black hole, and I want a darkest-timelime on record to compare to actual events as they happen.

That said, I do think some of these are scarily plausible, at least in broad strokes:
1: 50%
2: 90%
3: 70%
4: 100%
5: 60%
6: 40%
7: 90%
8: 60%
9: 70%
10: 30%
11: 40%
12: 30%
13: 30%

As per the thread guidelines, I'll cross these out as they occur/don't occur, though expect me to be somewhat forgiving of the dates and details.

I think citing the source would be appropriate, unless you've entirely rewritten and restructured it...

Robear wrote:

I think citing the source would be appropriate, unless you've entirely rewritten and restructured it...

Spoiler:

1932-1934

Thanks. I thought that was where you were coming from, but given the specifics, I struggled to find the actual source for comparison. It's a very interesting take.

The usual response to the actual sequence of events is that the German government and electoral system was very different from ours, and so some of the steps taken would not be feasible or perhaps even needed here. But that does not negate the overall point.

Another (my #7, if we're doing sequential numbering across posts)

7) Trump and Pence will not both be on the Republican ticket next electoral cycle. At some point, Pence will either consolidate his power and push Trump out of office (using any number of entirely justifiable law violations that have happened to this point or in the interim), or Trump will fear Pence doing this and push him off the ballot. If this latter scenario happens, expect a Trump / Kushner (or Trump / Trump) ticket in 2020.

The US will be riddled with the same kind of late soviet era, uncritical conspiracy thinking that crippled Russia through the 90's until now.

How will we know, Paleo? What specifics and their effects do we look for? I agree in general that it's possible, but how do we measure changes from the previous situation? What signs signify change as opposed to far-right conspiracies as usual?

Robear wrote:

How will we know, Paleo? What specifics and their effects do we look for? I agree in general that it's possible, but how do we measure changes from the previous situation? What signs signify change as opposed to far-right conspiracies as usual?

I think that would be measured by those conspiracies directing policy even more than normal. If the ACA actually gets repealed without a replacement, if the Republicans get away with ruining women's healthcare access as much as they want on top of that, if green energy subsidies disappear and maybe even "clean" coal subsidies appear, those will all be examples of those conspiracy theories increasing in power to a crippling level more and more.

What I'm getting at is that there should be some *direct, causal* link that we can see, if this change occurs. We can't just infer it. So for example, if changes to women's care requirements are supported by one-off, non-reproducible studies or evidentiary claims that tie into conspiracy theories directly, that would be a hit. But conspiracy theories require a cabal behind them, and that gives a specific causal attribute that we need to account for before we can accurately describe their influence.

Republicans opposing CO2 reduction because they don't believe the science is not based on conspiracy theories. Republicans cutting funding to climate scientists with the justification that the scientists are producing false results to enrich themselves, that's action based on conspiracy theories. So we need to be able to distinguish these cases and not just attribute by inference.

Examples of what conspiracy theories plagued Russia would be good for analogizing.