ELECTIONS AND ACCOUNTABILITY

(Weeks 12-13)

(Note: these are actual class notes, valuable to those having an excused class absence, or those wishing to review their class notes for the test. Double spaced notes reflect subjects that are so important that they are likely to be asked about on a test.)

 

Presidential general elections are fascinating, and professors at the University of Michigan in the 1950s proposed a model seeking to explain what affects voters’ choices in presidential general elections. First, party identification is extremely important; most people just vote for the candidate nominated by the party that they psychologically identify with. Therefore, if you are in a party era with a majority party, like the Democrats were in 1932-1968, that party will usually win the presidential election. Short term forces like candidates and issues can also be important, as the minority party must nominate a very popular candidate or seize on a popular issue to overcome being the underdog. Here’s how this model applies to the presidential elections from 1948 through 1968, when Democrats had the advantage in numbers of voters.

In 1948, poor Harry Truman faced high unemployment as our troops had come home, and everyone expected him to lose to Republican Dewey. Truman kept emphasizing the popular New Deal economic issues like Social Security and protection of the worker, and blasted the Republicans as the party of the rich and big business. He ended up winning, uniting the majority Democratic Party on the popular economic issues that had made them the majority. This use of the New Deal economic issues to unite the Democrats was especially impressive, as two other Democrats ran in the general election- liberal Henry Wallace who claimed that Truman was too tough on the Soviets, and segregationist South Carolina Governor Strom Thurmond, who opposed the first-time inclusion of a civil rights plank in national Democratic party’s platform (Thurmond carried a few southern states like Mississippi.).

In 1952, again there was public dissatisfaction, this time with the Korean War, the spread of communism (mainland China had fallen to the communists), and allegations of corruption in Truman’s administration. Republicans nominated the war hero Eisenhower, who accepted the New Deal programs. The issue of dissatisfaction and a popular candidate won it for Republicans.

In 1956, Eisenhower won re-election because of his great personal popularity (I like Ike was the campaign slogan, using Disney cartoon characters carrying signs), and the issues of peace and prosperity. In both years, you can see how the short-term factors helped the minority party win election, the only time they won during this period of 1932-1968. An interesting fact about Eisenhower’s leadership was how he always told his advisors, “Don’t even mention politics or partisanship when we make our decisions; we only do what is in the best interests of the nation.” (This is obviously a far cry from the recent political situation, where Trump kept talking about how popular he was: “I have the highest ratings in history, 91% approval among Republicans.” Uh, what about the majority of Americans who are Democrats or Independents? President Biden has been criticized as being the captive of the left-wing extreme of his party.)

In 1960, in a very narrow popular vote win (but a more comfortable electoral vote victory), Democrat Kennedy beat Republican Vice President Nixon. Kennedy unified the majority Democratic party by picking a southerner as Vice President. He defused his Catholicism problem by winning the West Virginia primary (a very Protestant state) and speaking at a conference of Protestant ministers in Texas and pledging a separation of church and state. He also came across very well in the televised debates, being cool, calm, articulate, thoughtful; Nixon had shifty eyes, looked pale with too much makeup, had a 5 o’clock shadow, and didn’t even use all of his time.

In 1964, now President Johnson won a landslide over very conservative Arizona Senator Barry Goldwater. Goldwater was viewed by voters as too conservative, as he threatened to repeal the New Deal by making Social Security voluntary, selling the TVA (Tennessee Valley Authority electric generating system) to private industry, eliminating farm price supports; he wanted to win in Vietnam; he talked loosely about the possible use of nuclear weapons. So, the majority party won, and even the issues were with them as Goldwater was seen as too conservative.

In 1968, our nation faced a bloody Vietnam War, campus protests against it, urban riots, rising crime, and rising inflation. Republican Nixon played on this issue of dissatisfaction with how things were and beat Johnson’s Vice President, a liberal from Minnesota Hubert Humphrey (previously, he had been mayor of Minneapolis, the author of the 1948 Democratic civil rights platform, and then a U.S. Senator). A third-party candidate was segregationist Alabama governor George Wallace who carried a few Deep South states like Mississippi based on his being even tougher than Nixon on protesters. So the issues of dissatisfaction helped the minority Republican Party; but Democrats were still the dominant party, as they kept control of Congress until 1980.

We now move into the more modern age, as the left-wing takeover of the Democratic Party in 1972 with McGovern’s nomination showed how both parties were increasingly dominated by their more ideological wings. Voters (who are more middle-of-the-road) found themselves increasingly motivated by issues and candidates, and as Democrats lost their national majority in the population in terms of party identification, control of Congress itself was up for grabs. The next section is a likely exam question.

 

In 1972, Democrats moved left (liberal), and nominated liberal anti-war Senator George McGovern. He pledged to end the war immediately, and said he would “crawl to Hanoi” (capital of communist North Vietnam) to bring our POWs home. He wanted to slash defense spending and condemned our more authoritarian allies. The Republicans called him the Triple A candidate- in favor of acid, amnesty (for Vietnam draft evaders who had fled to Canada), and abortion. Even the AFL-CIO labor union for the first time in their history refused to endorse the Democrat. McGovern’s Vice-Presidential nominee, Senator Thomas Eagleton, even resigned from the ticket after news that he had had an electric shock treatment for clinical depression. Nixon had pursued Détente (improved relations) with the now split Communist giants, visiting both China and the USSR (Soviet Union, Russia and its Soviet Republics) in the election year, and announcing a peace agreement in Vietnam. Nixon won re-election in a landslide. The minority party won because the majority had picked a weak candidate who was too liberal.

In 1976, more centrist Jimmy Carter reunited his Democratic party and beat Jerry Ford (who had become President after Nixon resigned). His running mate was Minnesota Senator, liberal Walter Mondale, so this was a nice balanced ticket with Carter being a southerner and centrist. Indeed, not only did Carter win the more liberal northern states, but he also won all except one of the southern states. There was also some dissatisfaction with Ford’s pardon of Nixon, and with a weak economy (Carter called it the misery index, which added the inflation and unemployment rates). While Ford gained ground in the final days as he attacked Carter as a big-spending liberal, Ford then reinforced the public image of him being clumsy and dumb when he misspoke at a debate: “Eastern Europe is not under Soviet domination, and it never will be in a Ford administration.” (The USSR had conquered all of Eastern Europe after World War 2 with its tanks and puppet communist regimes.)

The 1980 election was a clear case of dissatisfaction, as the issues of the Iranian hostage situation (they held our diplomats for a year), the Soviet invasion of Afghanistan, high unemployment during the recession, and 13% annual inflation obviously hurt President Carter. In the one televised debate near the end of the campaign, Carter kept trying to paint the conservative Reagan as an extremist. Reagan just grinned, did an aw-shucks routine, sighed and responded, “There you go again,” and rebutted the claims. Reagan said that in the 1960s he had supported an alternative free market Eldercare plan instead of Medicare, and he later sought to eliminate nuclear weapons from the face of the earth. At the debate end, he summed it up as: “Are you better off today than you were four years ago? Can you buy as much for your dollar as you could then? If so, vote for my opponent. If not, give my program a chance.” Reagan won a landslide, and even swept in a Republican-controlled Senate for the first time since 1954.

In 1984 Reagan won re-election with a booming economy. His campaign ad was an optimistic “Morning in America” film that highlighted this booming economy, and a stronger America militarily, with the Lee Greenwood song God Bless the U.S.A. in the background. Reagan had also become personally popular. He worked with Democratic House Speaker Tip O’Neill, a fellow Irishman, and granted interviews with hostile media outlets (“Well, I don’t think I changed any minds, but at least I tried.”). When 73-year-old Reagan stumbled over his words in the first debate, and was then asked in the second debate whether he was too old to be President any longer, he joked: “I am not going to make age an issue in this campaign. I am not going to make an issue of my opponent’s relative youth and inexperience.” Even Mondale laughed. Democrat Mondale picked the first woman Vice Presidential running mate of a major party, Congresswoman Geraldine Ferraro. It didn’t help. It should also be noted that by 1984 the numbers of Democratic and Republican party identifiers among voters was essentially tied, so issues and candidates were clearly the decisive elements in election outcomes.

In 1988 Reagan’s Vice President George Herbert Walker Bush beat the son of Greek immigrants and Massachusetts governor Michael Dukakis. Bush staged a come from behind victory by tearing down his opponent, labeling him as being too liberal. Dukakis was a member of the liberal ACLU (American Civil Liberties Union), he had vetoed a pledge of allegiance bill for public schools (fearing a 1^st amendment establishment lawsuit), he had a furlough program for inmates (one of them, Willie Horton, had terrorized a young couple on his furlough), and Dukakis made defense spending a low priority. Even reporters felt he had an image problem, and one of them asked him at a debate: “Governor Dukakis, if your wife Kitty were raped and murdered, would you still oppose the death penalty.” Dukakis while smirking responded, “Yes, I would. I don’t think it is a deterrent to crime. We’ve done other things to reduce crime in Massachusetts, such as….” Bush’s response with emotion was: “I disagree with my opponent. I think there are some crimes that are so heinous, such as the killing of a police officer, that they merit the death penalty.”

In 1992, as we continue this modern era of issues and candidates being the dominant forces deciding elections (since the two parties are tied in adherents), the key issue was public dissatisfaction over the economic recession and high unemployment. The media kept talking about the bad economic news, even though things were starting to recover. Democrat Clinton stressed this issue with the campaign slogan, “It’s the economy, Stupid!” The aloof President Bush didn’t help his case; in a town hall debate when asked about how he could understand the plight of average people, he said he didn’t understand the question, and then glanced at his watch. Clinton walked into the audience, and said, “I feel your pain. I come from a small town in Arkansas, Hope. I know people personally affected by the recession.” Clinton won. It was also kind of interesting that he didn’t seek to politically balance his ticket, as he picked a Vice President whom he thought could actually be President, Senator Al Gore of Tennessee (who years later won the Nobel Prize for his fight against climate change).

In 1996 Clinton won re-election with a booming economy that was so great that even some Republicans were asking themselves, “Why should I vote for a change; I have money in my pocket?” Clinton talked about his domestic programs as being a Bridge to the 21^st Century, kind of a knock on his opponent Senator Bob Dole who was so old that people thought of him as a Bridge to the 19^th Century. Dole didn’t help himself when he was bending over a wooden railing at a campaign rally to shake hands and the railing broke and he fell into the street; lying on his back, his eyes looked stunned, but he got up pretty fast. Saturday Night live had some great skits about Dole! Another problem is that Dole had a history of being sarcastic, bitter, and mean. In the 1976 Vice Presidential debates (Ford had dumped Rockefeller and put the conservative Dole on the ticket) he accused the Democrats of being “the party of War. Every war in this century, started by a Democrat. World War 1, Wilson. World War 2, FDR. Korea, Truman. Vietnam, Johnson. All Democrat wars started by Democrat Presidents.” So issues and candidates made the difference. (Personally, I liked Dole and even voted for him; he was a war hero, lost the use of his right arm, always carried a pencil in it so people wouldn’t try to shake it; he was in the Senate so long that he became Senate Republican Leader, and his fellow senators rated him as the most effective senator in that body.)

The 2000 election seemed to be all about the candidates. Bush was a Republican, but he was a “compassionate conservative.” Gore was a liberal Democrat, but he didn’t talk much about President Clinton because of the sex scandal, even though the economy was booming and Clinton was popular! Gore bombed in the debates. In the first one, he acted like Hermione Granger in Harry Potter. Bush would start answering a question, and I would hear a sigh. Then I would hear another sigh. It was an impatient Al Gore who acted like he knew all the answers, and wanted to answer every question, and do all the talking. Saturday Night live did a great skit making fun of Gore, and the Gore campaign manager even showed that skit to Gore to try to make him more self-aware. In the next debate on foreign policy, Bush was calmly sitting on a stool and talking, and Gore walked right up to him, and Bush stared him down. Again, creepy! So Gore had a problem of perceived arrogance. But why did Bush lose the popular vote (while winning the electoral vote)? Well, the weekend before the election, it came out that before being Texas governor he had had a DUI arrest; he never publicly admitted it because he didn’t want to be a bad role model for his two teenage daughters. And so the election was so close that it was up to cliffhanger Florida, as plane loads of lawyers from both parties flew down to Florida, and the Supreme Court finally decided the election dispute over Florida.

Well, the 2004 election was another reality TV program type of election. Bush never did find those weapons of mass destruction in Iraq. Saddam Hussein had lost them during the first Gulf War, but he wanted to appear to be the big bully in the Mideast so he never admitted that he didn’t have them. Anyway, some Americans were upset that European nations like France did not support our invasion of Iraq, so they boycotted French fries! (I’m not making this up!) Democrats nominated the liberal Senator from the most liberal state in the nation, John Kerry. Even though he had served in Vietnam, Kerry returned as a bitter anti-war activist. He even joined with a group that accused American soldiers of committing war atrocities against civilians. The impression I got was that the public viewed Bush as a leader in the fight against terrorism. He would keep America safe. And he didn’t wait on other nations’ support, and wait for their permission to take military action. Bush won a narrow victory, benefitting from the anti-terrorism issue.

What a difference 4 years makes! By 2006 Americans had become fed up with our endless seeming involvement in Iraq, and Democrats gained control of both chambers of Congress. Then, the financial community nearly collapsed, as they had made too many questionable loans, and in 2008 we had to begin bailing them out with federal money. Democrats nominated Barack Obama, an articulate, thoughtful (he paused and thought before he spoke), organized, and passionate (“Yes, we can.”) candidate. He was very concerned over income inequality. Senator John McCain was an honored war hero who had been a POW in Vietnam (He showed so much character that he refused to be released early, because others had been held in prison longer; that’s when his jailors crippled his shoulder.), but he looked old as he stumbled around the debate stage. Obama won due to his positive personal characteristics plus the issue of dissatisfaction over the financial meltdown. Obama was also a kind of post-racial candidate, as he didn’t stress the race issue, and his race appeared to have no effect on voters.

Well, in 2012 Obama was re-elected President. Polls showed that his issues supporting the middle class helped him, as did voters’ perception that he cared about the average person. He had empathy. Republicans nominated a rich businessman Mitt Romney, former governor of Massachusetts (his RomneyCare for that state was actually similar to ObamaCare!). Romney was a Mormon who gave a lot of money to his church; he stuck by his wife’s side when she had cancer; he organized fellow business leaders to save the Salt Lake City Olympics. But he was weak in the foreign policy debate, and didn’t counter Obama’s implication that terrorism wasn’t much of a problem anymore (a terrorist attack had just killed our Libyan ambassador at Benghazi city), or Obama’s mocking of Romney’s concern over Russia (“Mitt, the Soviet Union doesn’t even exist anymore” said Obama). The rich guy Romney then was caught by a waiter’s cellphone, as he asked for donations from rich people: “You know, 47% of the American people doesn’t even pay taxes, and they’re not going to vote for me.” That 47% comment that gave the impression that Romney thought that nearly half of the American people were freeloaders was the kiss of death (actually, they still pay other taxes, such as state sales taxes, property taxes). Do any of you remember anything about these Obama elections? How did you feel about those elections?

And now we come to 2016. Nobody expected a Reality TV star with no political experience like Donald Trump to win the presidency, or even get the Republican nomination. Well, as an outsider he played on public discontent with politicians, so he hung derogatory labels on his opponents- lyin’ Ted (Senator Cruz of Texas), little Marco (Senator Rubio of Florida had desperately reached for a glass of water when giving a televised rebuttal to an Obama speech), low-energy Jeb (another Bush, this time the governor of Florida; again, some truth, I saw a split screen with a Trump rally versus Bush talking like a professor to a small crowd of people sitting in a living room somewhere), and of course Crooked Hillary (Clinton). Clinton was also overconfident, not expecting to lose normally Democratic states like Michigan and Pennsylvania, so she didn’t campaign there much. Trump was not a normal free enterprise, free trade Republican, as his willingness to engage in trade wars and his promotion of American businesses helped him with blue collar workers in these Rust Belt states. Clinton was hurt by her e-mail scandal, which federal prosecutors looked into (without any indictment). Clinton’s final problem was arrogance, as she brushed off many Trump supporters (when addressing an LGBTQ crowd) as “racists, sexist, homophobic, Islamophobic, basket of deplorables, totally unredeemable.” An interesting contrast- Clinton had had some Hollywood types lined up for her election night party; the next day, Trump was on the phone putting pressure on American business executives to keep their factories in the U.S. and open up new ones. So, what did you think about that campaign? What did you think about the Trump groping open mike comment? When that came out, that weekend one third of Senate Republicans called on Trump to be kicked off of the ticket. He fought back by inviting all of the women who had accused Bill Clinton of sexual harassment to sit in the front row of the next debate. So, Trump wins in a dirty campaign where voters get to choose between two unpopular candidates.

Biden’s victory over Trump in 2020 wasn’t a big surprise. Two indicators of likely presidential outcome are presidential job rating and the economy, and Trump always had more disapprovals than approvals in his job rating, plus the economy crashed after the nationwide coronavirus shutdown (though it later improved). Biden was pretty universally seen as a nice guy, who showed his concern for American worries over the coronavirus pandemic by preaching mask wearing. So weak Trump job rating, scary pandemic, nice guy Democrat helped elect Biden. Biden won the electoral vote and the national popular vote. His vice president Kamala Harris made history as the first woman and person of color as VP.

 

A summary of these elections and their outcomes follows:

1948- Truman (D) - 50% - New Deal domestic issues (I), whistle stop campaign key, Democratic majority (P).
Dewey (R) - 45%- popular governor (C), dissatisfaction (I).
2 Independents: Strom Thurmond and Henry Wallace- 2% each- divided Dems.

1952 - Eisenhower (R) - 55% - war hero (C). Nixon Checker's Speech defuses issue. Dems blasted with Korea, Communism, corruption slogan (I), Dissatisfaction very important.
Stevenson (D) - 45% -

1956 - Eisenhower (R) - 57% - personal popularity (C); peace and prosperity (I). Satisfaction
Stevenson (D) - 43% - Democrat (P).

1960 - Kennedy - (D) - 50% - young, charismatic (C); W.V. primary and Texas ministers' conference defuses religion, debate defuses youth; time to move ahead (I); Democrat (P).
Nixon - (R) - 50% - popular VP, knowledgeable (C). (Debates hurt him)

1964 - Johnson (D) - 61% - Democrat (P); centrist (I); incumbent (C).
Goldwater (R) - 39% - too conservative (I); extreme, impulsive (C); numerous right-wing comments are disastrous. Own convention deeply divided.

1968 - Nixon (R) - 44% - Vietnam, unrest, crime, inflation (I). Nixon plays on Dissatisfaction with TV ads.
Humphrey (D) - 43% - Democrat (P). Divided Chicago convention hurts Dems.
Wallace (I) - 13% - seeks blue collar support.

1972 - Nixon (R) - 61% - world leader, prosperity (I); popular (C). Satisfaction.
McGovern (D) - 39% - extreme liberal (I). Numerous liberal statements hurts him, Humphrey attacks in bitter Democratic nomination battle, own V.P. resigns after admitting shock treatments.

1976 - Carter (D) - 51% - Democrat (P); stagnant economy, pardon (I). Dissatisfaction . Ford debate blunder about East Europe.
Ford (R) - 49% - Conservatism helps (I).

1980 - Reagan (R) - 51% - Iran, Afghanistan, inflation, recession (I). Dissatisfaction. Carter poor leadership (C). Reagan rebuts extremist charge with "there you go again."
Carter (D) - 41% -
Anderson, John (Indep)- 7%

1984 - Reagan (R) - 59% - peace and prosperity (I), Morning in America message; likeable person (C). Satisfaction
Mondale (D) - 41% - Democrat (P). 1^st woman VP-Ferraro.

1988 - Bush (R) - 54% - peace and prosperity (I). Negative campaigning, Willie Horton.
Dukakis (D) - 46% - too liberal (I); uninspiring (C). (Debate-anti-death penalty, iceman)

1992 - Clinton (D) - 43% - moderate "New Democrat" (I). Dissatisfaction hurt Bush. Bush aloof at debate, Clinton slogan, "It's the economy, stupid".
Bush (R) - 38% - recession hurts (I).
Perot (Indep) - 19% -

1996 - Clinton (D) - 50% - Good economy, domestic (I); "Bridge to 21^st century" target's Dole age, stresses "children" word. Satisfaction
Dole (R) - 41% - Old, uncaring (C). Dole falls off podium. (Reps. Keep Congress)
Perot (I) - 9% -

2000 - Bush (R) - 50% - personable (C), compassionate conservative (I)
Gore (D) - 50% - arrogant (C), Clinton scandal (I), too liberal (I).

2004- Bush (R) - 51% - Decisive terrorist fighter helps Bush (I)
Kerry (D) - 48% - Flip-flopping liberal charge hurts Kerry (I)

2008- Obama (D) - 53% - Charismatic, articulate speaker (C)
McCain (R) - 46% - Financial Crisis, recession hurts (I)

2012- Obama (D)- 51%- middle class theme, people like me empathy (I); 38-32 Democratic exit poll advantage (P).
Romney (R)- 48%- rich man, takers 47% comment lacks empathy (C).

2016- Trump (R)- 46%- outsider, dissatisfaction (I); trade protectionism (I).
Clinton, Hillary (D)- 48%- basket of deplorables (racists, sexists, Islamophobic) comment lacks empathy (C).

 

2020- Biden (D)- 51%- safe cand, wins moderates, independents (C); coronavirus (I).

Trump (R)- 47%- divisive figure (C).

Note: R denotes Republican candidate, and D denotes Democrat.
I denotes issues, C is candidate, and P is party factor.
Numbers denote percentage of popular vote received.

(Source: Flanigan and Zingale Political Behavior of the American Electorate Tenth Edition CQ Press, p. 194.)

 

So, using the most prominent and important American elections as a case study, what do these Presidential election outcomes tell us about the role of public opinion in deciding who is our national leader? Is our electoral process accountable to the American people? I’d say yes. When the nation has a majority party that is backed by most Americans (measured by party identification), the majority party usually wins the election, unless the minority party comes up with a great candidate or plays on important issues. Thus, Democrats won every Presidential election from 1932 until 1968, except for Eisenhower’s victories in the 1950s. The issues of dissatisfaction produced victories for the minority party in 1952 and in 1968, but those candidates were only moderately conservative and did not seek to repeal popular New Deal programs. As the two parties became closely divided in terms of the public’s partisan identifications, you can see how issues and candidate traits dominate in determining the election outcomes. Public dissatisfaction contributed to incumbents Ford (1976), Carter (1980), and Bush1 (1992) being kicked out of office, economic satisfaction re-elected Reagan (1984) and Clinton (1996). Specific candidate factors and issues were important in the other elections, as well.