The media and campaigns would have us believe that somewhere, in a swing state, there are a few hundred voters who need to make up their minds. And, the conventional wisdom seems to go, candidates should rush to the middle to court them. (And, of course, the media would have the candidates spend $200 million for this courtship.)
But, this pursuit of the middle is delusional. Because in the last election, apathy beat both Gore and Bush -- clobbered them!
Only 51.3% of the voting age population voted at all in 2000. The
"None of the Above" vote was 48.7%.If you look at the entire pool of the voting age population, here's how the vote went:
24.8% Gore
24.6% Bush
1.4% Nader
0.5% Other
51.3% Total who voted
+ 48.7% Total who didn't vote ("None of the above")
100.0% Total voting age US population
Roughly twice as many people "voted" for None of the Above as for either Gore or Bush. (48.7% to 24+%).
Let's say one-quarter of the 48.7% non-voters can't vote -- felon, not a citizen, whatever. That still leaves a potential voter pool of 37%, enough to defeat either candidate's 2000 total by a landslide! Why wouldn't a candidate try to appeal to them, rather than the illusory middle voter?
Sources for numbers: <> percent of entire population figures: http://www.infoplease.com/ipa/A0763629.html
<> percent of vote that went to each candidate: http://www.aph.gov.au/library/pubs/cib/2000-01/01cib09.htm
<> new percentages, based on total voting age population: my calculator