Main | Good odds for odd goods »
Just 48 hours to go
By Nixonomics | November 1, 2008
In a little under 48 hours, election day will dawn. And with it will be long lines, of Democrats, perhaps even a few Republicans. But not too many Republicans, if the polls are to be believed. There’s little reason not to believe the polls. They suggest a strong, significant victory for Obama.
The question for some is: Are the polls to be believable?
There are believers and non-believers. They tend to split with Democrats being in the former camp and Republicans being in the latter camp. Gratefully, the polls are close enough that we haven’t seen the tired, inevitable calls for a Dewey vs Truman type turnaround from the McCain camp. The citing of Dewey vs Truman is in our view THE sign that the election will be a blowout for Obama. Nixonomics has yet to see a real Dewey vs Truman from McCain yet. There was a kind of Dewey vs Truman reference but it was indirect and in our view does not count as one.
Given that Obama is the favorite and looks to be near invincible, at least by those polls and by a very friendly press, the only real fun to be had if the Obama-rout comes to pass is guessing by how much he will win by, which red states he turned blue, and then of course the silly, even stupid analysis of why voters voted they way they did.
It is clear that even voters don’t know why they vote they way they do. Behavioral studies suggest that voters often vote for the first name on the ballot, the most familiar name on the ballot, or the person/party on a particular side of the ballot, or the party/person that they and their families have voted for generations.
These studies suggest that simpler variables than the press’ obsession with “issues” is at work in elections. The number of people that truly take into account “issues” is small. If you can predict turnout and know the percentages of folks in the categories listed above, you’re probably a lot closer to knowing why someone voted one way or the other.
But then, this election is purportedly a “historic” one. We say purportedly because we disagree. There is very little that’s historic about the current election other than that Governor Palin will only be the second woman to be nominated as vice president. Obama’s nomination is hardly unique unless you believe that race is the central factor in the current race. Even so, Obama is the son of a Kenyan immigrant and a caucasian woman. Obama is not descended from slaves and has no connection to the issue of slavery and and civil rights. If Obama were a direct descendant of slaves, his nomination as president and likely victory in 48 hours would be historic.
Nonetheless, the election is among the most hyped in at least a decade. Obama has garnered the support of an unusual collection of the electorate for his likely win, if the press is correct. Catholics, the northeastern conservatives and even some ex-Bushies (McLellan, Powell) are purportedly lining up behind him. The story line for the sudden shift in party among these reliably Republican partyline voters is the dissatisfaction with Bush.
Unquestionably, Bush is unpopular, even though the reason for this unpopularity has changed. Last year the unpopularity stemmed from the Iraq project but it’s now the economy. Once again, this is what the press says.
If what we read and have cited above regarding election oriented behavioral studies is correct, the press has a compelling story, but its unlikely to be true, even if Obama wins.
By behavioral norms, we’d handicap things like names (is it unusual, common, familiar, etc.), which side of the ballot voters tend to see first (i.e. left or right or alternately which name comes first) and long-term historical voting patterns.
In terms of names, Obama has the more memorable one. It’s different and unusual and few intending to vote for Obama are going to vote for McCain. McCain however has the more familiar name and it’s not “funny sounding” which is the way Obama has dealt with the foreignness of his name. From our purview, the name based sweepstakes works out to a tie, with a slight handicap to Obama, primarily because of his “funny sounding” campaign comment. By our reckoning, comments like that tend to make people uncomfortable.
With respect to the ballot and where each candidate will end up on, at the top, bottom, left or right, each state is different. Making a study of ballot patterns would be an excellent project for the big political foundations, and they can determine who is favored when the ballot is not arranged top to down in alphabetical order.
Finally, and perhaps most importantly voting patterns. Big shifts occur, periodically, perhaps even rarely. Nixon’s election in 1968 was one of those occasions. That election saw southern Democrats switch to the Republican ticket. With that switch, Republicans and center-right Democrats have won every presidential election since. Some may argue that Carter and Clinton aren’t center-right politicians. We disagree. Carter certainly presented himself as right of the the then Democratic party. Clinton was in practice a right of center Democrat particularly on spending and welfare.
The big question that will be answered on November 4 is if this electorate is still one that is a majority one. If, or perhaps I should say should when Obama wins, it’ll be because some group that comprised this electorate splintered off.
Topics: Politics |
Comments are closed.