October 2004

Election Watch

Using one word to describe how the race has changed since the last Election Watch: closer. The first debate certainly helped John Kerry close the gap. The perception of who won that debate changed significantly over the weekend--when polled immediately after the debate, people said Kerry won but by small margins. After several days of post- debate spin that largely favored Kerry, public opinion shifted and said that Kerry won the debate decisively.

Polling of the overall presidential race also showed Kerry gaining following the debate. Taking into account all of the polls, Bush was leading by an average of six points--49 to 43 percent before the debate. After the debate, Bush was still ahead but only by two points--48 to 46 percent.

The controversy over likely voters versus registered voters in public opinion polls has emerged this year as a major issue. Bush's lead has generally been larger among likely voters as opposed to all registered voters. Democrats claim that the polls are not accurate because newly registered voters are usually not counted as "likely voters." Determining likely voters in a poll is always a guess. Pollsters usually ask several questions to measure whether or not somebody meets the likely voter bar--including questions about their enthusiasm, interest in the race, and past voting habits. Therefore, while new registrants have a higher bar to pass to be considered likely voters, they can still make it into the likely voter pool if they meet other criteria.

Voter registration has soared across the country for this election, but more so in Democratic areas. If voter turnout is high, this will probably benefit John Kerry.  Registering voters is also only one part of the game--the other is actually getting your new voters to the polls. It remains to be seen which party has the better ground game in this respect.

Heading into the final stretch, the race has been very strange thus far. Elections are supposed to be a referendum on the incumbent--this election has been as much about the challenger as it has been about the incumbent. For example, in Tuesday night's vice-presidential debate, George Bush was mentioned only thirty-five times; by comparison John Kerry was brought up sixty-five times.  Bush's campaign has been very successful in making this election a referendum on Kerry--whether that strategy can work until Election Day remains to be seen. 

Norman J. Ornstien
AEI

When comparing the current election to past contests, 1980 still comes to mind. That year, in October, Jimmy Carter led Ronald Reagan, 44 to 40 percent. The candidates had a debate ten days before the election, and it was not until after that debate that the country felt comfortable with Ronald Reagan and decided to elect him President.

The first presidential debate got Kerry back into the game, but he is not there yet. If Kerry does get a little further over the bar and makes people feel that he would be a credible commander in chief, he could still win this race. The president is trying to blunt Kerry's gains from the first debate--witness the very harsh speech in Pennsylvania yesterday.

In a race that could be decided by turnout, both sides are trying to scare their bases to death. For example, Republicans sent out fliers in West Virginia and Arkansas saying that if Kerry was elected, he would take away their Bibles. Democrats are busy spreading draft rumors around college campuses. The level of acrimony and negativity that lies ahead is beyond what we have ever seen before in an election.

Democrats--aided by some questionable rulings by state election officials--are already complaining about voter fraud.  If after November 2 there is any feeling that the election was "stolen," the ensuing controversy will be greater than it was last time and make the thirty-four day ordeal in Florida look like a picnic.
 
It is also important to keep in mind that an unforeseen October surprise could dramatically change the election dynamics--including the Afghan elections either being a wonderful success or a horrible disaster, the Australian elections, a month and a half left of hurricane season, the capture of Osama bin Laden, the ability of Bill Clinton to campaign, the price of gasoline, the possibility of US Airways' bankruptcy, and job numbers.

Turning to the House and Senate, without some larger force, Republicans are in good shape to retain their majorities in both legislative bodies. In the House, only thirteen to fifteen seats are truly competitive, and Republicans feel that they can hold their own. One wildcard might be three ethics rebukes issued recently against House Majority Leader Tom Delay (R-TX). Delay was the architect of the Texas redistricting plan, and there might be a small backlash in the Lone Star state.

In the Senate, there are more Democrat seats at risk than Republican ones. As for specific races, Georgia and Illinois will flip parties. South Dakota and Florida are still dead heats. In South Carolina, Rep. Jim DeMint has a lead, but DeMint also has a case of "foot in mouth disease," and the race might be closer than expected. Democrat Erskine Bowles has a small but steady lead in North Carolina.

The Democrats are currently ahead in several seats that the Republicans currently control--Colorado, Oklahoma, and Alaska. But the races are so close and the states so overwhelmingly Republican that the Democrats leads are anything but a sure thing.
Unfortunately, whatever the results of this election, chances of bipartisanship in the next Congress are slim to none--and none just left the building.
 
Karlyn H. Bowman
AEI

Looking at the major issues in this campaign, President Bush continues to maintain a strong lead in every poll dealing with terrorism. Although there are still few signs that the public believes the economy is improving, John Kerry has yet to convince voters that he has a clearer plan for making it better. Still, Kerry has regained the lead as the candidate who can better handle the economy, something he had to do to be competitive in this race. The public still remains divided on the wisdom of the Iraq war. The verdict on the president's handling of the war is decidedly negative, but the American people still do not think Kerry could do a better job.

One issue that could come into play with the second and third debates is health care. Americans are worried about having their health care benefits cut back. Kerry, like other Democrats before him, has a big advantage on handling health care.

The polls have been seesawing back and forth because the country is closely divided. Kerry had a good convention and changed the equation a bit. Bush had a better convention and changed the race a lot. The election is still a referendum on the incumbent. After the GOP convention, people moved closer to a decision on that referendum. After the first debate, they were less sure.

The reality of the presidential vote being a "personal vote" also could impact this election. The boost the president got after the GOP convention was in part as a result of a good convention, in part a result of a good speech by the president, but much more about the fact that Bush reminded people of what they liked about him and his wife.

Americans are not well informed about many issues--for example, Annenberg found that less than 50 percent of the public knew George Bush favored proposals that would allow workers to invest Social Security contributions in the stock market and only a bare majority, 51 percent, knew that John Kerry supports drug reimportation from Canada. Pundits and others usually score debates based on which candidates got their facts right or wrong. This is unlikely to sway public opinion. The public weighs what they hear from others against their own convictions. They assess these views in terms of what makes sense to them and above all consult their feelings and values.

In evaluating both men personally, polling evidence is somewhat more ambiguous. Both men have similar favorable/unfavorable ratings. When asked by Newsweek whether Bush or Kerry are personally likeable, equal numbers say they are. But when asked by CBS News which candidate is someone you would like, Bush has a big edge. When asked by Fox which candidate is best described as genuine, Bush leads by twelve points. Kerry is particularly weak on the so-called compassion issues. In only one of the four October polls to ask the question does Kerry have a large lead. Democratic candidates usually lead on this issue by a mile. It does not mean they always win, but they almost always have the advantage.

If Kerry loses this election, some of it will be explained by Bush's strength as the commander in chief and on handling the war on terror. But at least some of it will be explained by Kerry's failure to gain ground on a traditional Democratic strength on a cluster of issues that touch people personally.

Finally, what might be different about this election from the one in 2000 was that in poll after poll in 2000, Americans said they could live comfortably with either candidate. It is less clear that will be the case this year. Let us hope that whoever wins, wins big.

AEI Research Assistant Bryan O'Keefe prepared this summary.