The report, released August 18th, notes that “With foreign policy and defense issues at the forefront of the presidential campaign this year, swing voters’ views on a range of (foreign policy) issues take on added importance. On eight of the 11 foreign policy issues in the poll on which there are significant partisan gaps, opinions of swing voters are closer to those of Kerry supporters than to those of Bush voters.
On several issues, the differences between swing voters and committed Bush voters is substantial. More than half of swing voters (53%) regard strengthening the United Nations as a top priority compared with 35% of Bush voters who have this view. And about twice as many swing voters as Bush supporters view global warming as a major concern (35% vs. 18%). ”
UPCATEGORY: Ruy Teixeira’s Donkey Rising
TDS Strategy Memos
Latest Research from:
Editor’s Corner
By Ed Kilgore
-
November 30: Biden Has a Relatively Low Popularity Requirement For Beating Trump
Staring at the polls and recent precedents, I offered some blunt thoughts at New York on exactly how popular Biden needs to be in 2024:
There’s abundant evidence that if it were held today, a general election rematch of Joe Biden and Donald Trump would show the 46th president in serious trouble. He’s trailing Trump in national and most battleground-state polls, his job-approval rating is at or below 40 percent, his 2020 electoral base is very shaky, and the public mood, particularly on the economy, is decidedly sour.
The standard response of Biden loyalists to the bad recent polling news is to say “The election is a year away!,” as though public-opinion data this far out is useless. But it’s only useless if Biden turns things around, and while there’s plenty of time for that to happen, there has to be a clear sense of what he needs to secure victory and how to go about meeting those needs. Vox’s Andrew Prokop provides a good summary of possible explanations for Biden’s current position:
“One theory: Biden is blowing it — the polls are a clear warning sign that the president has unique flaws as a candidate, and another Democrat would likely be doing better.
“A second theory: Biden’s facing a tough environment — voters have decided they don’t like the economy or the state of the world, and, fairly or not, he’s taking the brunt of it.
“And a third theory: Biden’s bad numbers will get better — voters aren’t even paying much attention yet, and as the campaign gears up, the president will bounce back.”
The first theory, in my opinion, is irrelevant; Biden isn’t going to change his mind about running for reelection, and it’s simply too late for any other Democrat to push him aside. And the second and third theories really point to the same conclusion: The president is currently too unpopular to win in 2024 and needs to find a way to change the dynamics of a general-election contest with Trump.
There’s not much question that Biden needs to improve his popularity at least modestly. There is only one president in living memory with job-approval ratings anything like Biden’s going into his reelection year who actually won; that would be Harry Truman in 1948, and there’s a reason his successful reelection is regarded as one of the great upsets in American political history. There are others, including Barack Obama, who looked pretty toasty at this point in a first term and still won reelection but who managed to boost their popularity before Election Day (Obama boosted his job-approval rating, per Gallup, from 42 percent at the end of November 2011 to 52 percent when voters went to the polls 11 months later).
Given the current state of partisan polarization, it’s unlikely Biden can get majority job approval next year even with the most fortunate set of circumstances. But the good news for him is that he probably doesn’t have to. Job-approval ratings are crucial indicators in a normal presidential reelection cycle that is basically a referendum on the incumbent’s record. Assuming Trump is the Republican nominee, 2024 will not be a normal reelection cycle for three reasons.
First, this would be the exceedingly rare election matching two candidates with presidential records to defend, making it inherently a comparative election (it has happened only once, in 1888, when President Benjamin Harrison faced former president Grover Cleveland). In some respects (most crucially, perceptions of the economy), the comparison might favor Trump. In many others (e.g., Trump’s two impeachments and insurrectionary actions feeding his current legal peril), the comparison will likely favor Biden.
Second, Trump is universally known and remains one of the most controversial figures in American political history. It’s not as though he will have an opportunity to remold his persona or repudiate words and actions that make him simply unacceptable to very nearly half the electorate. Trump’s favorability ratio (40 percent to 55 percent, per RealClearPolitics polling averages) is identical to Biden’s.
And third, Trump seems determined to double down on the very traits that make him so controversial. His second-term plans are straightforwardly authoritarian, and his rhetoric of dehumanizing and threatening revenge against vast swaths of Americans is getting notably and regularly harsher.
So Biden won’t have to try very hard to make 2024 a comparative — rather than a self-referendum — election. And his strategic goal is simply to make himself more popular than his unpopular opponent while winning at least a draw among the significant number of voters who don’t particularly like either candidate.
This last part won’t be easy. Trump won solidly in both 2016 and 2020 among voters who said they didn’t like either major-party candidate (the saving grace for Biden was that there weren’t that many of them in 2020; there will probably be an awful lot of them next November). So inevitably, the campaign will need to ensure that every persuadable voter has a clear and vivid understanding of Trump’s astounding character flaws and extremist tendencies. What will make this process even trickier is the availability of robust independent and minor-party candidates who could win a lot of voters disgusted by a Biden-Trump rock fight.
So the formula for a Biden reelection is to do everything possible to boost his job-approval ratings up into the mid-40s or so and then go after Trump with all the abundant ammunition the 45th president has provided him. The more popular Biden becomes, the more he can go back to the “normalcy” messaging that worked (albeit narrowly) in 2020.
If the economy goes south or overseas wars spread or another pandemic appears, not even the specter of an unleashed and vengeful authoritarian in the White House will likely save Biden; the same could be true if Uncle Joe suffers a health crisis or public lapses in his powers of communication. But there’s no reason he cannot win reelection with some luck and skill — and with the extraordinary decision of the opposition party to insist on nominating Trump for a third time. Yes, the 45th president has some political strengths of his own, but he would uniquely help Biden overcome the difficulty of leading a profoundly unhappy nation.
I see VoteHillary.org which pushed a 2004 Hillary Rodham Clinton Draft presidency is now pushing her for president in 2008. The site is http://www.votehillary.org I have heard it will be launched as early as next week.
Ruy:
Since you don’t have trackback enabled…I wanted you to know that I used your piece on a blog post:
http://preemptivekarma.com/2004/08/we-are-sultans-of-swing.html
send them a few emails… tell them just how you think… in English.
I watched Inside Politics and was pissed off because they spent more than 10 min talking to that lier spewing out his poison about Kerry’s record on the swift boat and they knew all to well that the Washington Post article, with proof from the military records, that his story was a lie. They didn’t even give equal time to Kerry’s side nor did they even mention the story as reported in the Washington Post. Maybe they are taking over for FOX as being “Fair And Balanced”.
I suppose its easy and somewhat expected for persons to start sweating beads of anxiety and why not?
About 8 months ago, everyone was thinking that Kerry had very few of the qualities needed to be president and most were hoping that he would pick a prospective VP that would swing the line his way. Right now however, everyone is somewhat surprised that this same Kerry is now in the lead on every issue and seems to be holding his own quite well, even with his cool, relaxed, calculated, timely demeanor and his long face too.
Its this lead from a person who wasnt quite expected to lead that has everyone wondering and calculating and figuring out stuff, and polling and working out the neck and necks and every other thing.
However, when I stop to think about it, I dont think that Kerry is surprised by his current position. I think that he is truly a reflection of his demeanor. I get the feeling that this game is playing out according to plan, even tho its causing some people to be drenched in sweat with worry and anxiety.
I remember hearing some people say that they are glad that he picked Edwards because Edwards could back him up with better speeches and better facial presentations etc… but, from the looks of it, I dont get the impression that Kerry is even thinking of Edward much.
So much so, that he has sent Edwards off to spread the word, while he handles his end of the campaign. I dont and cant think of anyone who can come right out and say that Kerry is making a mess of things. Kerry is rising like cream to the heart of the game. I read his response to the swift boat ads today and he was right on the mark. hard hitting and yet using the best of English and with words well chosen and well placed. Personally, I dont think todays speech is his best speech yet, but from what I read, I get the distinct impression that he has more to say and will say it.
From what I read today, I dare Bush to personally launch an attack on Kerry to the tune of Kerry’s response to the Swfit boat ad. I dare Bush to change his tune and not continue in his previous mode of saying that Kerry is an honorable Veteran.
Kerry is on the move and hence I agree with the other posts which note that someone needs to check on the GOP and Pat Roberts and Jerry Falwell and that crowd. Someone needs to monitor things and challenge the republicans to be clean this time around.
I dont think that there is any real need for anxiety about Kerry. He seems to know what he is about and he is playing his cards the way he wants to. I have not seen or heard any recent mis-steps from him and currently he is under relentless attack from the GOP fronts.
Even tho I have noticed alot more support from the rank and file dems and various supporting organisations, I still think that its important that every kerry supporter beat the streets, wear out some soles and tell somebody to vote for Kerry.
The world needs a change in the White House. One thing that is certain, is that the world will breathe a sigh of relief when Bush departs this White House. The world stands a better chance of quelling the attacks of terrorist under a Kerry regime. The World stands a better chance of getting help to fix Iraq and the world under a kerry umbrella. The World is much more prone to getting help with just about every world issue if people vote for Kerry.
Unfortunately Americans are not voting for a president this year, the burden is now to vote for a leader of the free world and thats not a role the George Bush can fulfill.. I am very sorry GWB but you just dont cut it. Kerry deserves his opportunity to prove his metal.
Cheers
to SC. Thanks for clearing that up I read it like the writer meant it and didn’t notice the spelling.
I read somewhere that the Kerry campaign had recruited about 2000 lawyers who were going to spearhead efforts in targeted states to monitor the election and respond to fraud. In my state the Kerry campaign is recuriting volunteers with the goal of having a pollwatcher at every polling site. So I think there is concern at the top and actions are being taken. I do think that it is important to publicize every attempt at fraud as widely as possible now so that when the fraud occurs on election day, people will not be surprised. Of course some fraud is hard to detect. I was a poll watcher at an election about twenty years ago and we had a high number of people who came in to vote only to discover that their names were not listed at that site. We gave them absentee ballots so they could vote anyway. It turned out that the business responisble for printing the voting lists had “accidently” printed the names of Democrats at the wrong polling sites. The business was a small local concern owned by the chair of the county Republican party.
Also our state Kerry campaign is calling all Democratic and independent voters and urging them to switch to absentee ballots.
The Republicans will cheat in this election. I expect that soon they will start rumors of Democratic cheating since accusing us of their crimes is part of their way of operating.
If you think your state Kerry campaign is not planning for for ways to deal with election fraud, then call them up, get active, voice your concerns. But the fact that the kerry campaign in my safe Kerry state is planning for fraud should be reassuring. If steps are being taken here, they must be taking steps in Ohio and Florida.
Link is to WashPost article this AM discrediting central claims of one of Kerry’s most vocal Swift boat critics:
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A13267-2004Aug18.html
Wonderful letter, BT. Honestly, I find myself in a lather of anxiety over the coming election. It has long been my contention that Republicans do not really want educated voters or honest elections because that would be a losing situation for them. When we have a media which is also corporately owned and pretty much do the bidding of the people in power, what hope is there. I feel like we are spitting in the wind!
I don’t usually get so discouraged, but we’ve just been treated to 2 weeks of swift boat ads by the Republican slime machine, and I have a bad, bad feeling that there’s going to be more mud thrown by them shortly, and they are so carefully crafted that they are difficult to dispute. Josh Marshall has a good article this morning about this. We’re going to have to get as good at throwing dirt as the Republicans. God knows, Bush has given us enough to work with!
I’d like to see an ad that talks about the 500 or so men that Bush skipped over to get into the TANG. How many of those men were subsequently drafted to Viet Nam and how many of them died so that the shrub could sit on his ass swigging beers and not showing up for duty?
I’m angry about the dirt these Republicans throw, and I think it’s time we threw some back.
I think Fact Checker is referring to the use of “then” instead of “than”. It’s a common mistake, unfortunately.
“than” means you are making a comparison. “then” means that something else happened next. Very different words, even thought there’s only one letter different.
The headline should be
“Pew Research Center Report Shows Swing Voters Closer to Kerry Than Bush”.
By using “then”, it makes it sound like swing voters were closer to Kerry, but are now closer to Bush.
BT, that’s a terrific letter! (I have read Toobin’s book.) Of course, this problem is bigger than Florida, enormous as Florida is. Maybe we need lawyers to get started filing suits (or something) now. The NY Times has a good editorial this (Thursday) morning on this subject in its broadest context.
BTW, if you or sympathetic others you know are having trouble getting worked up about free and fair elections I’d recommend as page-turner bedtime reading Jeff Toobin’s book on the Florida recount, Too Close to Call.
Michael, I couldn’t agree more, with one exception.
I agree wholeheartedly with Bel’s pleas to ordinary citizens to get involved and help our cause, recognizing that many are doing so now.
While it would be comforting to believe that the DNC, state Dem parties, and advocacy organizations can and will take care of these problems for others of us who share these concerns, I think we are better off assuming they need all the help they can get.
Re Florida, I sent this letter to an influential, sympathetic national columnist this morning:
Dear ,
Pardon my language, but what in the hell has the federal government been doing on election reform during the Bush Administration? The changes they enacted awhile back were mildly helpful as I understand it, but nowhere near what obviously needed to be addressed following the Florida debacle. The buck stops at the White House for this for yet another example of abysmal, utterly failed leadership–this time, at inexcusable peril to the health of our democracy.
What does it say about the level of confidence people have in our voting systems when the Florida Republican party is urging voters to vote absentee, and when many other citizens in jurisdictions with electronic voting machines but no paper trail backup are deciding for themselves that if they want their votes counted, absentee is the way to go?
Regarding the circumstances reported in Bob Herbert’s column earlier this week in the NY Times, why is it that no one–absolutely no one–evidently even believes it is appropriate to demand that Governor Bush see to it that an immediate, impartial, and thorough investigation be launched to determine whether federal voting rights laws have been violated in this instance?! The investigation needs to be completed swiftly and the results shared openly with the public.
Evidently, by the lights of Republican doctrine, it’s just fine for the US Supreme Court to find a sufficiently compelling federal interest in how Florida does its voting to shut down the recount ordered by the Florida Supreme Court in 2000. But it’s not enough of a federal interest for the other two branches of the federal government–controlled by the same party– to take vigorous action to see to it that the problems which led to this extreme and unusual (and of course unjustified) intervention be rectified.
How can we possibly find ourselves in the situation we are in 11 weeks before this election? Amazing.
(end of letter)
Fact Checker, I don’t understand your comment? It looks fine to me.
The is not directly relevant to the Pew poll but is nonetheless extremely important, I feel: There have been a spate of stories in the press lately–notably Paul Krugman’s latest column–concerning the honesty of the coming election. Will all the votes be accurately counted? Will all eligible voters who wish to vote be permitted to do so? I hope the Democratic Party at the highest levels as well as the various “good government” organizations and the media are monitoring these issues very closely. They obviously go to the very core of our democracy.
“Swing Voters Closer to Kerry Then Bush.” So, which is it? Typo perhaps?