Bookmark this post. How "fundamentals" usually trump smear campaigns.

[beachmom]

I have been saying since 2004, that I do not think the Swift Boat smears on John Kerry were pivotal in his electoral loss. After reading this post, I think his 3 outstanding debates led him to outperform what was expected given the fundamentals of that election year.

Via Andrew Sullivan, read this:

http://www.brendan-nyhan.com/blog/2008/08/the-narratives.html

While I obviously have normative concerns about misleading campaign attacks, it's much less clear that the LBJ ad had "crushing smear power," that the Swift Boat ads "severely undercut" John Kerry, or that Michael Dukakis lost his 17-point lead in the polls as a result of the Willie Horton ad. The leading models of presidential elections predicted that Goldwater, Kerry, and Dukakis would lose. Journalists tend to construct post hoc narratives after the fact about election outcomes that tend to rely on dramatic visuals from debates and campaign ads rather than the fundamentals (the state of the economy, presidential approval, war casualties, etc.).

People tend to forget that nearly every factor was in George W. Bush's favor in 2004:

1. He had close to 50% approval ratings the entire year.
2. People were still scared following 9/11. Although they were becoming concerned about Iraq (outside the Dem base), they still felt Bush "was keeping them safe". The Beslan School Massacre continued to stoke those fears, much more so than the terror alerts or Dick Cheney's remarks. Remember that that happened in Sept. '04.
3. The economy, although increasingly unfair, was still chugging along.
4. The Religious Right was in a pre-scandal era. Before Ted Haggard. Before all the weird GOP sex scandals. They did not like Kerry because he wasn't one of them, and never could be. The evangelical vote will never be at that height for the GOP again, IMO.

I realize the polls went down in August, but I still think 2004 was an uphill battle from the get go. And I just don't think the SBVT played much of a factor -- the people who believed the lies were already influenced by the above fundamentals, so it was just a quick way to justify voting for the draft dodger President. If it wasn't the SBVT, they would have used another excuse.

[ginnyinWI]

1. And Katrina had not happened yet.

I think that was a big eye-opener for a lot of people in this country. But Kerry wasn't able to dub it "the Katrina administration" until the following year.

I,personally, kept blaming the DNC for being weak and disorganized and not giving JK the help he needed because of it. And he almost won it single-handedly. No thanks to McCauliffe, Carville, and friends.

I agree that a lot of that narrative was constructed after the election, one that explained the loss. Easier than tackling election fraud or other factors. "The Swifties did it, end of story." On the left it was, "He ran a bad campaign. He should have____"

I think it's the same this time around: people who don't want to vote for Obama are finding excuses and aren't likely to change even if their excuses are debunked. They just don't "like" him, and maybe don't want to say what the real reason is. Those who are inclined to vote for him will be open to his message, and those are the ones he's working to get.

[sandnsea]

2. Look at all the people still voting Republican

It's much more than just current "fundamentals". It's a right wing belief system and until somebody challenges it, we'll continue to have these close elections. How can 80% of the people oppose Bush because of his disastrous policies, and so many turn around and support McCain. They haven't faced reality about the failure of conservative policies, that's why. I thought Obama would challenge the very premise of conservatism, but I'm not seeing it so far. If he chooses Bayh as VP, I give up.

[ladym55]

4. Around here it's the knee-jerk reaction to "taxes"

The Democrats will raise their taxes. There is a total disconnect between what taxes are and what they should be used for and the voting public. They don't "get" that the Republicans have totally mismanaged the nation's finances and put us in massive debt. They also firmly believe that Democrats "don't support the troops." This again conflicts directly with the reality. It is the Democrats (led by people like JK) who have fought for the rights of the men and women in the military.

I live where the foreclosures are going nuts. FOUR of the eight cities in Ohio are on the "Fastest Dying Cities" list, and yet we are NOT going for Obama in a landslide!!!! :banghead:

[MBS]

3. I agree 1000%

It's easy for people in blue-state bubbles to forget the broader reality of our confused country -- in my neck of the woods, I don't think they've EVER understood this reality. I keep trying to explain. .. .