Looking Back at 2004 and 1992: Solidifying Support Two Weeks Out

So we hear it everyday now. The wheels are coming off of the McCain campaign. With poll numbers at a seemingly insurmountable level, many pundits are preemptively calling the election for Senator Obama. Though it definitely makes me nervous to agree with them, history tends to agree. I looked back at the 2004 and 1992 elections for reference, and both instances made me feel more confident that polling one to two weeks out is a strong harbinger of the final point spread on election day.

On Thursday (10/23), the New York Times posted the results of their latest NY Times/CBS poll. Obama is up 52-39 in the poll among likely voters. This spread is quite incredible and when you look back at the Times's past polls at roughly the same time in the 2004 and 1992 campaigns, the results seem to provide an early window to the eventual spread. Take this from a similar October 25, 1992 article.

The upshot is a tighter race. Among the probable electorate, which reflects the likelihood of each respondent's voting on Nov. 3, Mr. Clinton now has the support of 40 percent, Mr. Bush of 35 percent and Mr. Perot of 15 percent, the poll shows. In early October, before the debates, Mr. Clinton stood at 46 percent, Mr. Bush at 38 percent and Mr. Perot at 7 percent. Elation in Bush Camp

Bush campaign officials, elated over signs in this and other polls that Mr. Clinton's substantial lead was eroding, predicted that voters were entering a new phase of decision-making that would put a premium on trust. "It's moving our way," said Charles Black, senior adviser to the Bush campaign.

But Clinton strategists disputed the Times/CBS poll, noting that other independent surveys, while showing a closer race, did not show the gap as small as five percentage points. "I never question somebody's polls," said James Carville, senior strategist for Clinton. "But this is the first private or public poll with a margin like this."

The quote from the Bush campaign sounds similar to some of the soundbites coming out of the McCain campaign this weekend. In the end Clinton beat George H.W. Bush 43.0% to 37.7%, a difference of 5.3%. Ross Perot received 18.9%. If according to the poll that 10% were undecided nine days before the election, it seems that each candidate got roughly equal shares of that group. In 2008 this group is standing at 9%. Say they break 5% and 4% for each candidate. The final result should stand at Obama 57% and McCain 43%. My feeling is that the undecideds could break the opposite way just as easily, but really any changes are marginal.

In 2004 the same poll showed President Bush with 47% support and John Kerry with 46%. Again, very much in line with the eventual result, Bush 50.7% and Kerry 48.3%. This is a 3.7%-2.3% break. Again, the undecideds split with each candidate getting a sizeable percentage.

So barring something unforeseen, Senator Obama seems to be solidifying support similar to the winners of the 1992 and 2004 elections in the closing days of this election.

Searching for the "Real America"

So much chatter over the last several days over where the "real America" is. For those of you who missed it last week two GOP heavy-hitters, Alaska Governor Sarah Palin and Minnesota Congresswoman Michelle Bachmann made two rather brash statements on out culture. First, from the land of 10,000 lakes. To be fair, Bachmann seems to be more after individual "anti-Americans".



Now let's hear from the GOP nominee for Vice President.



After hearing these comments I thought to myself, "Wow, that pretty brazen. I can't even remember hearing George W. Bush saying something like that." Then I thought to myself, all these two women are doing is spouting (finally) in public, what has been a political strategy of their party for the last forty years.

Richard Nixon seized on the strife surrounding the 1960s race riots and political assassinations to his political advantage. Those groups most easily connected by the rioting (African Americans, young people, academics, etc.) all became the "Other America", the unstable part. An overarching theme of safety and security would frame each of his presidential campaigns, including an overwhelming 23 point landslide in 1972. Though Nixon ultimately overstepped his power, the winning strategy remained - go for the patriotic, pro-security, pro-American angle and you'll win.

It's extremely interesting when you look at this strategy's effect on two counties, one that Gov. Palin would probably consider anti-American and the other perhaps decidedly pro-American. I live in one of them San Francisco, California and my dad lives in the other Huntington County, Indiana. They were in the 2004 election perhaps two of the most politically opposite counties in the country.

In that year, President Bush walloped John Kerry (74.3% to 24.8%) in Huntington County while John Kerry returned the favor in the City by the Bay, defeating the President (83.0% to 15.2%). What's so extraordinary about this situation is that if you look back at previous elections, the diverging Americas seem to have slipped farther and farther apart every four years.

Let's take Richard Nixon's first election in 1968 for example. That year Nixon defeated Vice President Hubert Humphrey by less than 1 percent, 43.4% to 42.7%, with Alabama Governor George Wallace earning 13.5%). In San Francisco, getting over its hangover from the "Summer of Love", Nixon received over 100,000 votes, garnering 33.7% of the vote to Humphrey's 59%. George Wallace received 5.8%. In Huntington County, the numbers were closer - Nixon received 54.5%, Humphrey 37.8%, and Wallace 7.6%. Check out the divergence

In fact this relative non-polarization seems to still have been around in the late 1970s, as Jimmy Carter only garnered 52% of the vote in San Francisco both in 1976 and 1980. In Huntington County, Carter received 41% in 1976 and 34% in 1980.

It really doesn't seem to be until the 1990s, and especially in the last decade that such an extreme polarization has developed. In 2000 Bush received only 51,496 votes in San Francisco, less than half of President Ford's total of 103,561. In Huntington County, John Kerry only received 3,877 votes in 2004, again nearly half of President Carter's total of 6,515 in 1976.

My point is that all this "pro-America" and "anti-American" talk is not really trying to divide us - it already has, politically speaking. Palin and Bachmann are merely letting the cat out of the bag. In a society that is extremely migratory, this approach was certain to get old after awhile. What I think has occurred under the current administration is that all Americans are becoming tired of the stagnation, tired of the division and so I think that this Election Day you will see a blurring of the lines between Sarah Palin's "Real America" and "Fake America".