Handicapping the 2004 Presidential Election: A Normal Vote Approach

Conventional wisdom about the 2004 presidential election holds that it will be an exceptionally tight race. This wisdom is grounded in the results of the 2000 presidential election, current polls, and a general sense that electoral competition at the presidential level has tightened over the past de...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Veröffentlicht in:PS, political science & politics political science & politics, 2004-10, Vol.37 (4), p.813-820
1. Verfasser: Nardulli, Peter F.
Format: Artikel
Sprache:eng
Schlagworte:
Online-Zugang:Volltext
Tags: Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
container_end_page 820
container_issue 4
container_start_page 813
container_title PS, political science & politics
container_volume 37
creator Nardulli, Peter F.
description Conventional wisdom about the 2004 presidential election holds that it will be an exceptionally tight race. This wisdom is grounded in the results of the 2000 presidential election, current polls, and a general sense that electoral competition at the presidential level has tightened over the past decade. While there is ample justification for these beliefs, an examination of long-term voting trends (i.e., normal voting patterns) paints a different picture. In terms of the relative size of their electoral base, and its distribution across states, the Democrats begin the 2004 campaign with a distinct electoral advantage. Historically speaking, they have not begun a presidential campaign in such a strong position since 1944. Practically speaking, all the Democrats need to do is win the states in which they have a normal vote advantage to capture the presidency. If the Democrats can do this they need not win any Southern states in which the Republicans hold an electoral edge, including Florida. Moreover, even if Ralph Nader matches his statelevel returns in 2000, this will not be sufficient (by itself) to overcome the Democrats' electoral advantage in states that are essential to attaining an Electoral College majority.
doi_str_mv 10.1017/S1049096504045202
format Article
fullrecord <record><control><sourceid>jstor_proqu</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_60620444</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><cupid>10_1017_S1049096504045202</cupid><jstor_id>4488914</jstor_id><sourcerecordid>4488914</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c329t-8827d61c50fbf56418bd61274721822aa4b2e72bd6c46340cadea1b8801a65fd3</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNp9UMtOwzAQjBBIlMIHIHHIiVtg7diOw60KpQVVQHmJm-U4TuuSJsFOJfh7XKXigsRe9jEzu6sJglMEFwhQcvmMgKSQMgoECMWA94IBonES0TSm-772cLTFD4Mj51bgg1MYBNlU1oVRsm1NvQi7pQ4xAAkfrXam0HVnZBWOK60609RX4Si8b-zaj96aToejtrWNVMvj4KCUldMnuzwMXm_GL9k0mj1MbrPRLFIxTruIc5wUDCkKZV5SRhDPfYsTkmDEMZaS5Fgn2A8VYTEBJQstUc45IMloWcTD4Lzf689-brTrxNo4patK1rrZOMGAYSCEeCLqico2zllditaatbTfAoHY2iX-2OU1Z71m5brG_goI4TxF25VRDxvX6a9fWNoPwZI4oYJN5uI6zvDT-3wq7jw_3r0g17k1xUKLVbOxtffnnyd-ANgNgm8</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>60620444</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Handicapping the 2004 Presidential Election: A Normal Vote Approach</title><source>Worldwide Political Science Abstracts</source><source>JSTOR Archive Collection A-Z Listing</source><source>Cambridge University Press Journals Complete</source><creator>Nardulli, Peter F.</creator><creatorcontrib>Nardulli, Peter F.</creatorcontrib><description>Conventional wisdom about the 2004 presidential election holds that it will be an exceptionally tight race. This wisdom is grounded in the results of the 2000 presidential election, current polls, and a general sense that electoral competition at the presidential level has tightened over the past decade. While there is ample justification for these beliefs, an examination of long-term voting trends (i.e., normal voting patterns) paints a different picture. In terms of the relative size of their electoral base, and its distribution across states, the Democrats begin the 2004 campaign with a distinct electoral advantage. Historically speaking, they have not begun a presidential campaign in such a strong position since 1944. Practically speaking, all the Democrats need to do is win the states in which they have a normal vote advantage to capture the presidency. If the Democrats can do this they need not win any Southern states in which the Republicans hold an electoral edge, including Florida. Moreover, even if Ralph Nader matches his statelevel returns in 2000, this will not be sufficient (by itself) to overcome the Democrats' electoral advantage in states that are essential to attaining an Electoral College majority.</description><identifier>ISSN: 1049-0965</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1537-5935</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1017/S1049096504045202</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>New York, USA: Cambridge University Press</publisher><subject>Battlefields ; Elections ; Electoral college ; Features ; Forecasting ; Incumbents ; Political campaigns ; Polls ; Presidential elections ; Presidents ; State elections ; United States of America ; Voting ; Voting Behavior ; Voting patterns ; War</subject><ispartof>PS, political science &amp; politics, 2004-10, Vol.37 (4), p.813-820</ispartof><rights>2004 by the American Political Science Association</rights><rights>Copyright 2004 American Political Science Association</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><linktopdf>$$Uhttps://www.jstor.org/stable/pdf/4488914$$EPDF$$P50$$Gjstor$$H</linktopdf><linktohtml>$$Uhttps://www.cambridge.org/core/product/identifier/S1049096504045202/type/journal_article$$EHTML$$P50$$Gcambridge$$H</linktohtml><link.rule.ids>164,314,780,784,803,27923,27924,55627,58016,58249</link.rule.ids></links><search><creatorcontrib>Nardulli, Peter F.</creatorcontrib><title>Handicapping the 2004 Presidential Election: A Normal Vote Approach</title><title>PS, political science &amp; politics</title><addtitle>APSC</addtitle><description>Conventional wisdom about the 2004 presidential election holds that it will be an exceptionally tight race. This wisdom is grounded in the results of the 2000 presidential election, current polls, and a general sense that electoral competition at the presidential level has tightened over the past decade. While there is ample justification for these beliefs, an examination of long-term voting trends (i.e., normal voting patterns) paints a different picture. In terms of the relative size of their electoral base, and its distribution across states, the Democrats begin the 2004 campaign with a distinct electoral advantage. Historically speaking, they have not begun a presidential campaign in such a strong position since 1944. Practically speaking, all the Democrats need to do is win the states in which they have a normal vote advantage to capture the presidency. If the Democrats can do this they need not win any Southern states in which the Republicans hold an electoral edge, including Florida. Moreover, even if Ralph Nader matches his statelevel returns in 2000, this will not be sufficient (by itself) to overcome the Democrats' electoral advantage in states that are essential to attaining an Electoral College majority.</description><subject>Battlefields</subject><subject>Elections</subject><subject>Electoral college</subject><subject>Features</subject><subject>Forecasting</subject><subject>Incumbents</subject><subject>Political campaigns</subject><subject>Polls</subject><subject>Presidential elections</subject><subject>Presidents</subject><subject>State elections</subject><subject>United States of America</subject><subject>Voting</subject><subject>Voting Behavior</subject><subject>Voting patterns</subject><subject>War</subject><issn>1049-0965</issn><issn>1537-5935</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2004</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>7UB</sourceid><recordid>eNp9UMtOwzAQjBBIlMIHIHHIiVtg7diOw60KpQVVQHmJm-U4TuuSJsFOJfh7XKXigsRe9jEzu6sJglMEFwhQcvmMgKSQMgoECMWA94IBonES0TSm-772cLTFD4Mj51bgg1MYBNlU1oVRsm1NvQi7pQ4xAAkfrXam0HVnZBWOK60609RX4Si8b-zaj96aToejtrWNVMvj4KCUldMnuzwMXm_GL9k0mj1MbrPRLFIxTruIc5wUDCkKZV5SRhDPfYsTkmDEMZaS5Fgn2A8VYTEBJQstUc45IMloWcTD4Lzf689-brTrxNo4patK1rrZOMGAYSCEeCLqico2zllditaatbTfAoHY2iX-2OU1Z71m5brG_goI4TxF25VRDxvX6a9fWNoPwZI4oYJN5uI6zvDT-3wq7jw_3r0g17k1xUKLVbOxtffnnyd-ANgNgm8</recordid><startdate>200410</startdate><enddate>200410</enddate><creator>Nardulli, Peter F.</creator><general>Cambridge University Press</general><general>American Political Science Association</general><scope>BSCLL</scope><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>7UB</scope></search><sort><creationdate>200410</creationdate><title>Handicapping the 2004 Presidential Election: A Normal Vote Approach</title><author>Nardulli, Peter F.</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c329t-8827d61c50fbf56418bd61274721822aa4b2e72bd6c46340cadea1b8801a65fd3</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2004</creationdate><topic>Battlefields</topic><topic>Elections</topic><topic>Electoral college</topic><topic>Features</topic><topic>Forecasting</topic><topic>Incumbents</topic><topic>Political campaigns</topic><topic>Polls</topic><topic>Presidential elections</topic><topic>Presidents</topic><topic>State elections</topic><topic>United States of America</topic><topic>Voting</topic><topic>Voting Behavior</topic><topic>Voting patterns</topic><topic>War</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Nardulli, Peter F.</creatorcontrib><collection>Istex</collection><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>Worldwide Political Science Abstracts</collection><jtitle>PS, political science &amp; politics</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Nardulli, Peter F.</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Handicapping the 2004 Presidential Election: A Normal Vote Approach</atitle><jtitle>PS, political science &amp; politics</jtitle><addtitle>APSC</addtitle><date>2004-10</date><risdate>2004</risdate><volume>37</volume><issue>4</issue><spage>813</spage><epage>820</epage><pages>813-820</pages><issn>1049-0965</issn><eissn>1537-5935</eissn><abstract>Conventional wisdom about the 2004 presidential election holds that it will be an exceptionally tight race. This wisdom is grounded in the results of the 2000 presidential election, current polls, and a general sense that electoral competition at the presidential level has tightened over the past decade. While there is ample justification for these beliefs, an examination of long-term voting trends (i.e., normal voting patterns) paints a different picture. In terms of the relative size of their electoral base, and its distribution across states, the Democrats begin the 2004 campaign with a distinct electoral advantage. Historically speaking, they have not begun a presidential campaign in such a strong position since 1944. Practically speaking, all the Democrats need to do is win the states in which they have a normal vote advantage to capture the presidency. If the Democrats can do this they need not win any Southern states in which the Republicans hold an electoral edge, including Florida. Moreover, even if Ralph Nader matches his statelevel returns in 2000, this will not be sufficient (by itself) to overcome the Democrats' electoral advantage in states that are essential to attaining an Electoral College majority.</abstract><cop>New York, USA</cop><pub>Cambridge University Press</pub><doi>10.1017/S1049096504045202</doi><tpages>8</tpages></addata></record>
fulltext fulltext
identifier ISSN: 1049-0965
ispartof PS, political science & politics, 2004-10, Vol.37 (4), p.813-820
issn 1049-0965
1537-5935
language eng
recordid cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_60620444
source Worldwide Political Science Abstracts; JSTOR Archive Collection A-Z Listing; Cambridge University Press Journals Complete
subjects Battlefields
Elections
Electoral college
Features
Forecasting
Incumbents
Political campaigns
Polls
Presidential elections
Presidents
State elections
United States of America
Voting
Voting Behavior
Voting patterns
War
title Handicapping the 2004 Presidential Election: A Normal Vote Approach
url https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-01-13T07%3A28%3A52IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-jstor_proqu&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Handicapping%20the%202004%20Presidential%20Election:%20A%20Normal%20Vote%20Approach&rft.jtitle=PS,%20political%20science%20&%20politics&rft.au=Nardulli,%20Peter%20F.&rft.date=2004-10&rft.volume=37&rft.issue=4&rft.spage=813&rft.epage=820&rft.pages=813-820&rft.issn=1049-0965&rft.eissn=1537-5935&rft_id=info:doi/10.1017/S1049096504045202&rft_dat=%3Cjstor_proqu%3E4488914%3C/jstor_proqu%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=60620444&rft_id=info:pmid/&rft_cupid=10_1017_S1049096504045202&rft_jstor_id=4488914&rfr_iscdi=true