tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3412583847145043520.post3085384992373185969..comments2024-03-10T01:22:54.380-07:00Comments on Enik Rising: East End boys and Westen's pearlsSeth Maskethttp://www.blogger.com/profile/17178036016555722068noreply@blogger.comBlogger2125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3412583847145043520.post-60343567866663552652011-11-01T21:52:50.291-06:002011-11-01T21:52:50.291-06:00Metrichead, check out this article by Bartels and ...Metrichead, check out <a href="http://www.sscnet.ucla.edu/polisci/faculty/zaller/Pres.%20Election%20Models.pdf" rel="nofollow">this article</a> by Bartels and Zaller. As it turns out, the economy had slowed down by late 2000 (at least as measured by RDI growth). It hadn't slipped into a recession, but the fundamentals predicted just a narrow Gore victory, and he only underperformed by about half a percentage point.<br /><br />Why did he underperform at all? That could be due to campaigning skills, or perhaps a residual penalty from being vice president to an impeached president.Seth Maskethttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17178036016555722068noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3412583847145043520.post-13748153172303664852011-11-01T21:17:08.290-06:002011-11-01T21:17:08.290-06:00Seth, help me out here. I assume (maybe incorrect...Seth, help me out here. I assume (maybe incorrectly) you adhere to the Douglas-Hibbs "Bread and Peace" model.<br /><br />In 2000, we had no wars, and the economy was booming, yet Gore couldn't manage to break 50% in the popular vote, despite winning a plurality. <br /><br />I realize there are always outliers, but how was Bush able to win the election? Better yet, since one can dispute that he "won/stole" the election, how was he able to get so close to Gore in terms of the popular vote with all these factors moving against him?metricheadhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08160603323000839703noreply@blogger.com