Honest libertarian Jane Galt looks at the new jobs number and says, “I think we in the media should start practicing saying ‘President Kerry’.”
Honest self-proclaimed liberal Republican William Saletan has read the polls in some detail. My favorite part:
Look at the data going back to February. Over that period, Bush’s top score in the ABC trial heat is 48. In the CBS and ARG polls, it’s 46. During that time, Newsweek has repeatedly asked respondents, “Would you like to see George W. Bush re-elected to another term as president, or not?” The percentage saying Bush deserves re-election hasn’t risen above 46. The percentage saying he doesn’t deserve re-election hasn’t fallen below 50. During the same period, Zogby surveys have repeatedly asked voters, “Do you think George W. Bush deserves to be re-elected as president of the United States, or is it time for someone new?” The percentage saying Bush deserves to be re-elected hasn’t risen above 45. The percentage saying it’s time for someone new hasn’t fallen below 51.
Honest liberal Billmon also looks at the new jobs report and says:
High unemployment, high energy prices, inflation-driven wage gains that still fail to keep up with prices. Gee, where have we seen that picture before? Jimmy Carter shakes his head sadly and says, “Don’t ask.”
I just can’t help but point out that the latest Fox News poll shows a five-point swing towards Kerry among registered voters, and a three-point swing among Fox’s definition of “likely voters,” following the Democratic convention - the same one the Fox talking pinheads spent four days trying to redefine as a liberal hate rally.Meanwhile, Bush’s approval rating has dropped to 44% - a record low for the Fox poll. That’s down three points from before the convention. His disapproval rating has risen to 48% - a record high - from 45% before the convention…
I fully expect to see the smoke pouring out of Bill O’Reilly’s ears as he rails against those biased liberals at Fox News.
The comparison of the present economic circumstances to the circumstances of 1980 is more than a bit of a stretch, isn’t it? I mean, inflation ran better than 13% in 1980, and this year will run less than 4%. Similarly, the employment rate in 1980 was 7.1%, whereas it is now at 5.5%.
I’m a libertarian who almost certainly will not be voting for Bush, but isn’t it a little early to start declaring victory? The Republican convention hasn’t even happened yet. It’s three months before the election.
How many rank-and-file voters are paying attention right now? (And I don’t trust polls on this. Don’t pay attention to what people say; pay attention to what they do.)
It’s kinda cute that Jane Galt is a libertarian. Where is she anyway?
Any response to this?
Basically: (1) likely voter models are best (2) Saletan ignores them in favor of registered voters (3) likely voters are split fairly evenly, with potential to swing to Bush
Thomas,
You’ve got a point, especially when it comes to interest rates.
Bob,
I don’t want to declare victory, just spike the “Dem Panic Watch!” promulgated by (especially) Mickey Kaus.
a three-point swing among Fox’s definition of “likely voters”
oops! hurrah.
Ms McArdle is a member of “the media”??? Since when? Never mind.
In any case, the wingers are back to the old “the President doesn’t have much to do with the economy” defense. I didn’t hear them saying much when Bush/Cheney announced their intention to run on it!
I think a lot of the “stimulus” we’ve gotten has been pure sugar, and now the rush has worn off.
Regardless of how you feel about free trade, by “giving us our own money back” they basically took a fucking huge chunk of money, that could really do something, and broke it down into a bunch of tiny pieces that allowed us to buy stuff from China at the mall but make no gains in energy independence, school improvements (even vouchers need seed money, right my rightist friends?) and the like.
>You’ve got a point, especially when it comes to interest rates.
Not so quick. Not disagreeing since I don’t have the numbers, but do this first:
1- Don’t cherrypick 1980, Carter took office in 1977. Look at all the years.
2- Calculate the difference between the prime and the inflation rate, and consider that also.
3- Finally, see if you can take a whack at the way the changes in the way unemployment rate calculation affect the numbers. For instance, I’m sure that in 1980 we treated miltary service different in some way.
My impression has been that electoral vote predictions are more significant than national
polls:
http://www.electoral-vote.com/
To make things more complicated, there’s no guarantee that electors are going to vote for whom they pledge. My favorite example is Henry D. Irwin, a Republican-pledged elector from Oklahoma who voted for Harry Byrd instead of Nixon:
CBS Reports found Irwin and interviewed him. He said that he “could not stomach” Nixon. Irwin held the view that the founding fathers never intended for the “indigent, the nonproperty owners” to have a vote for the president.
(from http://www.avagara.com/e_c/ec_unfaithful.htm#Irwin)
Don’t forget, we do not live in a democracy.
Carter. I believe Tacitus has declared Bush the republican’s Carter. I was just watching the financial news earlier today. Oil is at a all-time high. Employment was very disappointing.
Holy crap, it’s the late 70s again.
Sorry about the treble post… IE decided to die on me.
a different chris—the number I cited was the inflation rate, not a prevailing interest rate. Inflation ran 13% in 1980. The economic conditions today have very little in common with the economic conditions in 1980.
How old are the people making these comparisons? Do they not remember those years?
Regardless of the numbers we a BETWEEN conventions right now. Bush is sure to get a boost after the Republicans invade NYC (my home town. I’m so happy I’ll be on vacation in Colorado then). I think it is really to early to call regardless of the recent Job numbers.
BTW — McArdle writes for The Economist and used to contribute to Tech Central Station. I think that qualifies her as being “in the media”.
Basically: (1) likely voter models are best (2) Saletan ignores them in favor of registered voters (3) likely voters are split fairly evenly, with potential to swing to Bush
Basically:
(1) and (2) — while ‘likely voter’ models have been useful for past elections, the emphasis this year on appealing to unregistered voters and to registered non-voters makes them less credible. (Call it the Michael Moore effect, or the Florida 2000 effect.)
(3) No matter what your scenario, the precedent is that undecideds in an election where there’s an incumbent break overwhelmingly for the challenger.
I mean, inflation ran better than 13% in 1980, and this year will run less than 4%. Similarly, the employment rate in 1980 was 7.1%, whereas it is now at 5.5%.
Please. That’s the headline number, and the BLS definition of ‘over 16, unemployed and actively seeking work’ has changed substantially from that used in 1980.
The big problem when measuring the real unemployment rate (and more crucially, the underemployment rate) is that while the payroll survey is a more accurate indicator of employment, it doesn’t (and basically can’t) measure the number of discouraged workers, people working subsistence jobs in lieu of proper employment etc.
As the US provides much less of a safety net for the unemployed than other developed nations, the numbers are skewed by those people who, having lost a decent job, end up doing low-paid work to get by. Jobs are really easy to come by if you’re prepared to work two $8/hr shifts a day.
An honest Jane Galt? Her Assymetrical War has been successful.
Thomas, I believe the inflation reference was about how wage growth is currently slower than inflation, as it was in 1980. The inflation is not as bad as it was then, but the wage growth is not nearly as high either.
In terms of “likely voters,” i looked at the link provided in vain for an explanation why “likely voters” models are “better,” and didnt see one; just an assertion. Ruy Texeira, who is the most knowledgable poll analyst i’ve seen, disagrees at this stage of the race: he believes that registered voter results are more important than likely voters until much later, and given a choice between texeira, who backs his opinion up, and someone who doesn’t, i pick texeira.
Meanwhile, as someone who does remember the ’70s, the point is this: the name for the economic conditions of the late ’70s was “stagflation.” Stagflation was a condition of slow growth, inflationary pressures, no gains in real incomes, and an overall sense of economic stagnation.
This is what Billmon is pointing to: yes, the absolute numbers aren’t the same as the late ’70s, but the conditions of mild stagflation are looking increasingly present (especially as oil prices spike).
And, as an excellent article in the new republic (http://www.tnr.com/doc.mhtml?i=20040816&s=hacker081604) points out, there is good reason to attend to the increasing feelings of economic insecurity that a broad swath of the electorate feels.
Bottom line: there’s a long way to go, but the election has been kerry’s to win (rather than bush’s to lose) since about April, and the polling internals support that.
PS. While we’re talking about 1980, Ronald Reagan had everything going for him that year: adoration of the Republican base, the ascendancy of the modern conservative movement, general disdain for the failures of the carter years, stagflation, and more, and yet he didn’t actually move clearly in front until the final week of the campaign (after the debate, which he won with the assistance of the stolen briefing book, but i digress)….
Michael Moore says the likely voters model is missing gobs of people whose disillusionment with Bush (Hatred may be more accurate but it has such a nasty ring.) will move them to vote for the first time. They are hiding from the pollsters at the moment, but they will turn election day into a route for Kerry. Nice to dream about, anyhow.
I think the best analogy is the late Hoover presidency. At the end of the Carter administration things had been going badly economy-wise for a decade - remember wage&price controls from the Nixon era? - people were despondant about the economy. Things were horrible and only going to get worse. Now, as in the late Hoover administration, there is an anger that nothing is being done.
>the number I cited was the inflation rate
Thomas, I understand that, I was trying to point out that you have to look at comparative numbers.
Neil covered this well, so I’ll just add those good old “personal anectdotes” for whatever they are worth:
Believe it or not, when I was at Westinghouse in 1980 they offered a Savings program, where you could buy W stock or put it in a “Fixed Investment” account. The interest rate for the fixed investment account? SEVENTEEN POINT FIVE PERCENT.
And of course, passbook savings paid 5.25 down at the corner bank.
On the loan side, when I got a mortgage in the 80’s the rate was 12%. It sounds outrageous to “kids” today, until I point out to them that core inflation (including the value of my house) was about 7%, 5 percentage points different. Meanwhile they were paying 6.6% in an era of nearly negligible inflation. Who was doing better?
Of course, then the housing bubble inflated which knocked the props out under my argument, but I’m simply trying to say is that stand-alone numbers don’t mean as much as you’d think at first pass.
À Gauche
Jeremy Alder
Amaravati
Anggarrgoon
Audhumlan Conspiracy
H.E. Baber
Philip Blosser
Paul Broderick
Matt Brown
Diana Buccafurni
Brandon Butler
Keith Burgess-Jackson
Certain Doubts
David Chalmers
Noam Chomsky
The Conservative Philosopher
Desert Landscapes
Denis Dutton
David Efird
Karl Elliott
David Estlund
Experimental Philosophy
Fake Barn County
Kai von Fintel
Russell Arben Fox
Garden of Forking Paths
Roger Gathman
Michael Green
Scott Hagaman
Helen Habermann
David Hildebrand
John Holbo
Christopher Grau
Jonathan Ichikawa
Tom Irish
Michelle Jenkins
Adam Kotsko
Barry Lam
Language Hat
Language Log
Christian Lee
Brian Leiter
Stephen Lenhart
Clayton Littlejohn
Roderick T. Long
Joshua Macy
Mad Grad
Jonathan Martin
Matthew McGrattan
Marc Moffett
Geoffrey Nunberg
Orange Philosophy
Philosophy Carnival
Philosophy, et cetera
Philosophy of Art
Douglas Portmore
Philosophy from the 617 (moribund)
Jeremy Pierce
Punishment Theory
Geoff Pynn
Timothy Quigley (moribund?)
Conor Roddy
Sappho's Breathing
Anders Schoubye
Wolfgang Schwartz
Scribo
Michael Sevel
Tom Stoneham (moribund)
Adam Swenson
Peter Suber
Eddie Thomas
Joe Ulatowski
Bruce Umbaugh
What is the name ...
Matt Weiner
Will Wilkinson
Jessica Wilson
Young Hegelian
Richard Zach
Psychology
Donyell Coleman
Deborah Frisch
Milt Rosenberg
Tom Stafford
Law
Ann Althouse
Stephen Bainbridge
Jack Balkin
Douglass A. Berman
Francesca Bignami
BlunkettWatch
Jack Bogdanski
Paul L. Caron
Conglomerate
Jeff Cooper
Disability Law
Displacement of Concepts
Wayne Eastman
Eric Fink
Victor Fleischer (on hiatus)
Peter Friedman
Michael Froomkin
Bernard Hibbitts
Walter Hutchens
InstaPundit
Andis Kaulins
Lawmeme
Edward Lee
Karl-Friedrich Lenz
Larry Lessig
Mirror of Justice
Eric Muller
Nathan Oman
Opinio Juris
John Palfrey
Ken Parish
Punishment Theory
Larry Ribstein
The Right Coast
D. Gordon Smith
Lawrence Solum
Peter Tillers
Transatlantic Assembly
Lawrence Velvel
David Wagner
Kim Weatherall
Yale Constitution Society
Tun Yin
History
Blogenspiel
Timothy Burke
Rebunk
Naomi Chana
Chapati Mystery
Cliopatria
Juan Cole
Cranky Professor
Greg Daly
James Davila
Sherman Dorn
Michael Drout
Frog in a Well
Frogs and Ravens
Early Modern Notes
Evan Garcia
George Mason History bloggers
Ghost in the Machine
Rebecca Goetz
Invisible Adjunct (inactive)
Jason Kuznicki
Konrad Mitchell Lawson
Danny Loss
Liberty and Power
Danny Loss
Ether MacAllum Stewart
Pam Mack
Heather Mathews
James Meadway
Medieval Studies
H.D. Miller
Caleb McDaniel
Marc Mulholland
Received Ideas
Renaissance Weblog
Nathaniel Robinson
Jacob Remes (moribund?)
Christopher Sheil
Red Ted
Time Travelling Is Easy
Brian Ulrich
Shana Worthen
Computers/media/communication
Lauren Andreacchi (moribund)
Eric Behrens
Joseph Bosco
Danah Boyd
David Brake
Collin Brooke
Maximilian Dornseif (moribund)
Jeff Erickson
Ed Felten
Lance Fortnow
Louise Ferguson
Anne Galloway
Jason Gallo
Josh Greenberg
Alex Halavais
Sariel Har-Peled
Tracy Kennedy
Tim Lambert
Liz Lawley
Michael O'Foghlu
Jose Luis Orihuela (moribund)
Alex Pang
Sebastian Paquet
Fernando Pereira
Pink Bunny of Battle
Ranting Professors
Jay Rosen
Ken Rufo
Douglas Rushkoff
Vika Safrin
Rob Schaap (Blogorrhoea)
Frank Schaap
Robert A. Stewart
Suresh Venkatasubramanian
Ray Trygstad
Jill Walker
Phil Windley
Siva Vaidahyanathan
Anthropology
Kerim Friedman
Alex Golub
Martijn de Koning
Nicholas Packwood
Geography
Stentor Danielson
Benjamin Heumann
Scott Whitlock
Education
Edward Bilodeau
Jenny D.
Richard Kahn
Progressive Teachers
Kelvin Thompson (defunct?)
Mark Byron
Business administration
Michael Watkins (moribund)
Literature, language, culture
Mike Arnzen
Brandon Barr
Michael Berube
The Blogora
Colin Brayton
John Bruce
Miriam Burstein
Chris Cagle
Jean Chu
Hans Coppens
Tyler Curtain
Cultural Revolution
Terry Dean
Joseph Duemer
Flaschenpost
Kathleen Fitzpatrick
Jonathan Goodwin
Rachael Groner
Alison Hale
Household Opera
Dennis Jerz
Jason Jones
Miriam Jones
Matthew Kirschenbaum
Steven Krause
Lilliputian Lilith
Catherine Liu
John Lovas
Gerald Lucas
Making Contact
Barry Mauer
Erin O'Connor
Print Culture
Clancy Ratcliff
Matthias Rip
A.G. Rud
Amardeep Singh
Steve Shaviro
Thanks ... Zombie
Vera Tobin
Chuck Tryon
University Diaries
Classics
Michael Hendry
David Meadows
Religion
AKM Adam
Ryan Overbey
Telford Work (moribund)
Library Science
Norma Bruce
Music
Kyle Gann
ionarts
Tim Rutherford-Johnson
Greg Sandow
Scott Spiegelberg
Biology/Medicine
Pradeep Atluri
Bloviator
Anthony Cox
Susan Ferrari (moribund)
Amy Greenwood
La Di Da
John M. Lynch
Charles Murtaugh (moribund)
Paul Z. Myers
Respectful of Otters
Josh Rosenau
Universal Acid
Amity Wilczek (moribund)
Theodore Wong (moribund)
Physics/Applied Physics
Trish Amuntrud
Sean Carroll
Jacques Distler
Stephen Hsu
Irascible Professor
Andrew Jaffe
Michael Nielsen
Chad Orzel
String Coffee Table
Math/Statistics
Dead Parrots
Andrew Gelman
Christopher Genovese
Moment, Linger on
Jason Rosenhouse
Vlorbik
Peter Woit
Complex Systems
Petter Holme
Luis Rocha
Cosma Shalizi
Bill Tozier
Chemistry
"Keneth Miles"
Engineering
Zack Amjal
Chris Hall
University Administration
Frank Admissions (moribund?)
Architecture/Urban development
City Comforts (urban planning)
Unfolio
Panchromatica
Earth Sciences
Our Take
Who Knows?
Bitch Ph.D.
Just Tenured
Playing School
Professor Goose
This Academic Life
Other sources of information
Arts and Letters Daily
Boston Review
Imprints
Political Theory Daily Review
Science and Technology Daily Review