Friday, 3 February 2017

Trumpexit by the Numbers

Let's work out the likelihood that President Trump doesn't see out his full term.  It might be fun, and possibly also cheering, ignoring that he'd be replaced by Pence. (Spoiler: Trumpexit probability as at 20 January 2017 = 43%)



The table below sets out each loss of Presidency scenario. There are six 'impeach/resign' scenarios, and seven 'die/be killed/incapacity' scenarios. They are all mutually independent if we adhere to the definitions, which we will. That means we can multiply individual probabilities to get a total "Trumpexit" figure.



Provided of course, we can estimate each individual probability. On January 20 I made the estimates in the yellow column; grand total at the bottom. Columns to the right will be filled out in coming months.



I get an overall likelihood of 43% that Trump will be gone by the next election. Pleasingly high, but not high enough to my taste. Putting it another way, there's a 57% chance the US will lurch from crisis to disaster for the next four years.

I'll update the numbers every month on the anniversary of Day Zero. Some will definitely go up on Feb 20. While I was imagining he'd be vainglorious and incompetent, the first two weeks have been much weirder and more extreme than I could ever have imagined.

I tried to make a "You Edit" version of this - so you could try out your own numbers - but without success. Will keep trying.

UPDATE 5 Feb 17. Expanded scenario 1 and split it into three distinct impeachment scenarios. This is because I didn't realize Congress is the sole arbiter of what constitutes an impeachable offense (doesn't have to be a criminal offense) until a couple of days ago.

UPDATE 7 Feb 17: Added 25th Amendment Scenario. Didn't know about this possibility before now. Trump almost certainly has Malignant Personality Disorder: he has nine out of nine of the diagnostic characteristics where five are required for a diagnosis. Since this means nothing unless the VP and cabinet decide to act on it, I've made the probability low - 2%.

-->
Notes:
=====

1 The totals are calculated using Bayes' rule. A way to think of it is: for Trump to make it through four years unscathed, he has to avoid ALL of the bad things (1 thru 10) happening to him. So the probability of his surviving is (100% - probability of 1st scenario happening) * (100% - probability of 2nd scenario happening) * (100% - probability of 3rd scenario happening) etc etc; and the The probability of his NOT surviving is (100% - The probability of his surviving). Make sense?

2  Comments on initial probabilities:


1Trump is dragging huge baggage from his business dealings, and he seems to have very low ethics
2This would be immediately politically fatal.
3Would be higher but there is a fair chance he would divest if this happened to hold onto the prize.
4A scandal that may or may not involve criminality, but which is politically not survivable.
5President has access to the best medical support that money can buy
6The number of people who feel alienated by Trump is so large that the minuscule proportion of people with murderous intent towards him will include a small number with the means and motivation to follow through.
7These people have lots of weapons. A proportion have major anger issues. They will be very unhappy if they perceive he has "betrays" them. And armed.  And he in all likelihood will betray them in multiple enormous ways.
8For example, if he attempts a first strike nuclear launch, he will likely be prevented from doing so by the military; up to and including by killing him. They may already have a contingency plan.  They'd be derelict in their duty to the constitution if they didn't.
9If you think this sort of thing can't happen, it already has in the past. Sirhan Sirhan assassinated Robert Kennedy "believed that he was deliberately betrayed by Kennedy's support for Israel in the June 1967 Six-Day War, which had begun exactly one year to the day before the assassination."
10Not Russia or China, but for example North Korea (they'd do it in the blink of an eye of they could pull it off); or Iran, if they were to perceive an existential threat (whether justified or not).


No comments:

Post a Comment