Tag: polls

THE STATE OF THE RACE FOR PRESIDENT

by Ken Grossberger, PhD

The ridiculous level of dishonesty in election campaigns and the media is a major issue in politics today. The desperate attempt to win at any cost has left too many voters in this cycle with the familiar feeling of having to pick between the better of two difficult options. The polls show this and even something as data-driven as polls become the subject of manipulation by die-hards on either side. The data should be objectively observed and reported, but such is not the case.

What we are left with is the bogus poll patrol, and both sides are guilty. Political polls are public opinion surveys that gauge sentiment at the time they are taken. The better polling organizations use sophisticated methods to construct questionnaires, collect data, analyze the data and provide the results with a reasonable margin of error. If we look at many of these polls over a period of time, we can deduce trends to indicate whether a candidate has a lead outside the margin of error, or not. Polls, therefore, are not necessarily predictive but can give us a sense as to where a particular election is heading. Hopelessly biased media “journalists” only look at the data that shows their candidate in the lead or catching up, the other candidate badly failing, and then make impossible-to-support flat predictions in declarative language. Nowhere to be found is any nuanced discussion of margins of error or the methodological difficulties inherent in collecting meaningful data from verbal questionnaires by cell phones.

But back on the campaign trail the Democrats went for the quick fix, the easy route (leveraging Biden out, deciding Kamala is in). But they are not going to solve the Biden problem with a Biden clone. Newly anointed Kamala Harris (so much for “democracy is on the ballot”) is now trying to verbally distance herself from the Biden-Harris border disaster. And Trump is back to his old self, neither chagrined nor informed by the favorable reactions to his mellower convention speech, nor the assassination attempt. Just days ago he called VP Harris “a bum.”  How does this help?

Both sides will have an abundance of money, surrogates and talking points. But most of these assets will be bulls-eyed at the other candidate and it will get even uglier if that’s possible. We will be told, umpteen times, that a vote for the opposition is an existential threat, and that our candidate is the savior and the only choice to save the planet. Their candidate? Fuhgeddaboudit. Facts do not matter as each campaign will have legions of realty re-constructors that will design a never-ending air attack designed to destroy the opposition and woo the undecideds. Still, in the end, a more rational electorate will decide which presidential candidate will inherit the most complex job in the world, campaign silliness notwithstanding. This show will go on the for the next few months, with the focus sharpening in the fall, reaching a fever pitch in late October. Let’s hope that somewhere in the circus there may be some actual substantive policy discussion where we can get a glimpse as to what the winning candidate might actually do.

PRESIDENTIAL ELECTION ANALOGIES – THIRD PARTIES AND FORMER PRESIDENTS

By Ken Grossberger, PhD

There is much discussion about how the 2024 US Presidential elections will play out, and media types have pushed several comparisons to prior elections, seemingly in an attempt to predict the future from the elections of the past.  Analogies are usually not perfect, but there are a few that might be instructive. Three-way presidential races, where there are viable third party candidates or independents, and races between current and former presidents, upset the balance between the two major parties and lessen the predictability of the outcomes. The “third” candidate becomes a mediating variable that is hard to analyze.  A brief review of the history of such elections sheds light on such unpredictable contests.

  • The election of 1860 was a 4-way contest between Abraham Lincoln and 3 Democrats at a time that the country was seriously polarized due to sectional differences arising from the slavery issue and the states’ rights argument. Sen. Stephen A. Douglas of Illinois (against whom Lincoln ran in 1858 for the Illinois Senate seat) represented the northern Democrats, John C. Breckenridge (incumbent Vice President of the United States) drew support from the southern states, and John Bell of the newly formed Constitutional Union party gained electoral votes from the border state region. Lincoln won almost all the electoral votes in the north, the three Democrats split the rest, and Lincoln won the presidency.
  • In 1892 former President Grover Cleveland, Democrat, came back to challenge incumbent Republican President Benjamin Harrison (who beat Cleveland in 1888).  In this return contest Cleveland won back the presidency, the only person in US history to have 2 unconnected terms in the White House. The third party candidate in the race, James B. Weaver, representing the Populist Party, won almost 9% of the vote and carried a few western states, which may have hurt Harrison.
  • The 1912 election was the race of the 3 presidents, one past, one current and one future. Former President Theodore Roosevelt ran against his old protégé William Howard Taft and won 27% of the vote. President Taft, the incumbent Republican, ran third with only 23% of the vote and only 8 electoral votes. Socialist candidate Eugene V. Debs won about 6% of the vote. Roosevelt and Taft split the Republican vote, and New Jersey Governor Woodrow Wilson, the Democrat, won the election with only 41% of the popular vote but an electoral landslide.
  • The presidential election of 1948 was famous for the biggest media faux pas in American history when the Chicago Tribune prematurely published a headline that stated: “Dewey Defeats Truman”. Incumbent President Harry S. Truman beat New York Governor and former prosecutor Thomas E. Dewey by a fairly comfortable margin in the electoral college. Truman was not that popular and the third party candidate, Dixiecrat South Carolina Governor Strom Thurmond denied Truman a sizable portion of the southern Democrat vote. After attempts to get him to drop out of the race the Democratic Convention nominated Truman, who went on to win by waging a strong campaign.
  • There was a similar outcome in the 1968 presidential race but this time the Democrat split gave the election to the Republican former Vice President Richard M. Nixon. Democrat Gov. George Wallace of Alabama ran on the American Independent ticket and won 5 southern states, denying Democrat and incumbent Vice President Hubert Humphrey the electoral votes of those states and a significant portion of the popular vote.
  • In 1992 independent Ross Perot, a Texas billionaire, won 19% of the vote, most of it from incumbent Vice President Republican George H.W. Bush, giving the election to Democrat Arkansas Gov. Bill Clinton. Perot scored one of the highest third party totals in US history. Ironically Bush had a national approval rate of 81% following the 1991 Gulf War, only to see his popularity dwindle to only 37 percent of the vote in the election.

The election of 2024 may be a mix of these scenarios. There is a viable third party candidate I Robert F. Kennedy, Jr, who is drawing about 10% in many polls, but not enough to be in contention for any electoral votes in the swing states. He appears to be taking more votes from Biden than Trump as we see a shift of a few points in the 5-way polling (including 2 other third party candidates), as opposed to the head-to-head data showing Trump with about a 2 point lead over Biden.

The post June 27 debate polls show a slippage in Biden’s support, most notably in the swing states, where Trump now leads outside the margin of error in 8 of 14 critical states.  Worse for Biden is that New Hampshire, Minnesota and Virginia, which have voted Democrat in recent elections, are now within the margin of error. There will be more to come with the polls following the assassination attempt on Trump.

Predicting the future from the past is always a lesson in objectivity and thought, and this election is no different.

TIPPING POINT

by Ken Grossberger, PhD

“The critical point in a situation, process, or system beyond which a significant and often unstoppable effect or change takes place” (Miriam-Webster Dictionary).

Donald Trump has been the focal point of the American political discussion since he first walked down the escalator in Trump Tower in 2015 when he announced his candidacy for president. Since then much has happened. A good economy, a lousy economy, a pandemic, 2 wars, 3 new Supreme Court justices, elections, court cases, and more political fights than anyone can count. Trump has been at the center of it all.

Thus the political world has divided into 3 camps: those who love Trump, those who hate Trump, and a lot of people in the middle. The current presidential polls show Trump and Biden within the margin of error nationally but Trump with a lead in most swing states. Biden’s approval ratings have been negative for quite some time, and Trump’s aren’t much better. Most polls show that much of the voting public, in general, would prefer 2 other candidates.

Trump has been living on the political edge since he first ran for president. That’s because he put himself there, and the not-so-mainstream media, hardly his fan club, has attached him to almost every story. They just can’t stop talking about him, and they hurl the most bitter, vindictive accusations at him at every chance they get, proving once again there is a dark lining in the silver cloud of public service.

Trump gets forgiven his ranting and personal attacks by his supporters, as his administration had a good record in many ways. Certainly, his time in office compares well against the seriously challenged Biden record of high inflation, the border crisis, the disastrous withdrawal from Afghanistan, the mismanagement of 2 wars and the deal with Iran that almost guarantees this terrorist state a path to deliverable nuclear weapons.

But even with all that, there remains the issue of Trump fatigue – have too many people heard Trump stories too many times. This has been analyzed and discussed, but his lead in the polls show no evidence of that. There is also the New York hush money trial, with a biased judge who precluded defense witnesses and manipulated the jury instructions so that any 4 jurors could find Trump guilty of any of 3 underlying crimes and did not have to be unanimous in doing so. Any objective reading of the presiding judge’s obvious attempt to manufacture a guilty verdict would lead a reasonable person to conclude that the trial was skewed in favor of conviction.

But is this one issue too many, in a political career jammed with issues? Even if one concedes that Trump had a good record in office, and that this latest trial was a sham, have we just reached the point where some likely voters have reached the Trumpian saturation point and will begin to finally peel away from the Trump-is-better-than Biden logic? Trump is setting fundraising records off his guilty verdict, but will millions of dollars be enough to hold the soft Trump voters, and to persuade the undecideds? Does Robert Kennedy Jr. edge more into the weaker part of the Trump base?

Polls give us trends, not necessarily predictions, and we will see in the coming weeks which direction the political needles point, but let’s not be surprised if there begins a new attrition in Trump support, and perhaps correspondingly in Biden’s as well.

INFLATION IS RISING, OR IS IT FALLING?

by Ken Grossberger, PhD

Politicians love to spin reality into a self-serving interpretation. Inflation may be the number one topic in this year’s presidential election, and both Biden and Trump have contrived diametrically opposed stories. Both cannot be true at the same time, but this is the silly season. The key topic this year, as in most elections, is the economy.

Inflation is defined as too many dollars chasing too few goods, creating economic conditions whereby prices rise. There are a number of metrics for this but the most recent number being reported is 3.5% for March of 2024 (US Bureau of Labor Statistics, 04/10/24). The Consumer Price Index (CPI) is the most used term for inflation, a measure of the change in the prices of basic goods, and what we worry about most is food and energy (e.g., gas). When Trump left office, the CPI was 1.9% (Investopedia, 04/30/24). Under Biden the CPI rose as high as 8.0% in 2022 (Federal Reserve Bank of Minneapolis, 04/30/24).

So here’s the conundrum: the rate of inflation rose dramatically during Biden’s term but has since decreased. So far so good. But how do we word this? If inflation is currently increasing at a 3.5% rate, it is still going up. But it was rising at about 8.0%. So is it correct to state that inflation itself is coming down, or is it just going up less? It would be correct to say that the rate of inflation has come down since 2022 but it’s not factually correct to state that “today’s report shows inflation has fallen more than 60%…” (The White House, 04/10/24) inferring that the rate of inflation, and therefore prices, are coming down (thus things are getting better). Under Biden the price of consumer goods has constantly increased. To manipulate the wording to make it seem like the opposite is true, is to engage in the kind of political deception we see too often in today’s political environment. And Biden has said this many times, part of his Bidenomics mantra (a term he has recently dispensed with). Under Biden, consumer prices have increased by about 20% (Federal Reserve Bank of Minneapolis, 04/30/24). This has crushed the middle class and the working poor, who are struggling to pay for food and gasoline for their vehicles.

This is reflected in the political polls, which show Biden has lost about 6% overall since he won in 2020[1], and its worse in 7 swing states[2] (Wikipedia n.d.; RealClearPolitics 04/30/24). He is on the defense in every swing state he won in 2020, and if the election were held today, he would lose most of them, and with them the election. Clever arguments about the economy, and treating the electorate as morons, will not win him a second term.

References:

Federal Reserve Bank. (04/30/22). Consumer Price Index 1913-. https://www.minneapolisfed.org/about-us/monetary-policy/inflation-calculator/consumer-price-index-1913-

Investopedia. 04/30/22. Average Yearly Inflation Rate by President. https://www.investopedia.com/us-inflation-rate-by-president-8546447

RealClearPolitics. 04/30/24. RCP Poll Averages. https://www.realclearpolitics.com/

The White House. 04/10/24. Statement from President Joe Biden on the March Consumer. Price Index. https://www.whitehouse.gov/briefing-room/statements-releases/2024/04/10/statement-from-president-joe-biden-on-the-march-consumer-price-index-2/

US Bureau of Labor Statistics. 02/06/22. Consumer Price Index Summary. Consumer Price Index Summary – 2024 M03 Results (bls.gov)

US Bureau of Labor Statistics. 04/10/24. Consumer prices over 7.5 percent over year ended January 2022. Consumer prices up 7.5 percent over year ended January 2022: The Economics Daily: U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics (bls.gov) 

Wikipedia. (n.d.). 2020 United Staes presidential election. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2020_United_States_presidential_election#:~:text=Biden%20ultimately%20received%20the%20majority,Bush%20in%201992.

[1] Biden beat Trump 51.3% to 46.8% in 2020, a margin of 4.5%, but in the RCP average Trump currently leads Biden in a 5-way race (including the third party candidates) by 1.6%, showing a statistical shift of 6.1%.

[2] As of this report Trump leads Biden by more than the margin of error in Arizona, Georgia, North Carolina and Georgia; Trump leads Biden in Wisconsin, Michigan and Pennsylvania but within the margin of error.  This is based on an average of recent polls.