Presidential election keys for 2000

USA Today (Society for the Advancement of Education), July, 1998 by Michael L. YOung

Deprived of impeachment fantasies and chastened by the President's relentlessly strong approval ratings, Republicans now seem ready to accept their fate: Bill Clinton will leave office, but not before Jan. 20, 2001. Accordingly, they are setting their sights on a more realistic objective--recapturing the White House in the 2000 presidential election. According to one widely used forecasting tool, they just might pull it off, although opposition Democrats will have to do most of the work. This early prediction and some others are derived from a model developed by political scientist Alan Lichtman.

It challenges much of the conventional wisdom concerning how presidential elections work, as well as many traditional assumptions about what factors determine electoral outcomes. Fundamentally, it views presidential elections simply as referendums on the incumbent administration's past four years in office. To voters, the electoral choice is not whether to vote Republican or Democrat, or even whether to vote for one candidate over another. The choice is far more basic: Shall the in-party stay in or shall the ins become the outs?

The electorate makes that judgment with reference to 13 factors Lichtman calls "keys." Each is measured simply as positive or negative for the incumbent party. If a key is negative, it is said to have "turned" against the incumbents. For a given election, any time six or more keys turn against the incumbent party, the incumbent loses. Otherwise, the incumbent wins. According to Lichtman, this model perfectly has predicted each of the 34 elections since 1856. Let's take a brief look at the keys and their history:

Party mandate. From midterm to midterm, does the incumbent party gain House seats? Historically, the incumbent party tends to lose House seats at midterm, often interpreted as a cost of governing. This key turned against the Democrats in 1980 and 1996, but against Republicans in 1972 and 1976.

Nomination fight. Is there a serious primary nomination struggle in the incumbent party? Primary battles fracture party unity and may weaken the eventual nominee. Jimmy Carter's 1980 fight with Ted Kennedy turned this key against his party. George Bush's 1992 struggle with Pat Buchanan turned it against the Republicans, as did Ronald Reagan's 1976 contest with Gerald Ford.

Incumbent president. Other things being equal, sitting presidents are hard to beat. Bush (1992), Carter (1980), and Ford (1976) are notable exceptions to that role. More typical years are 1972 (Richard Nixon), 1984 (Reagan), and 1996 (Clinton).

Third party. Is there a significant third party campaign? Significant is the key, since every presidential campaign includes some minor third party activity. Certainly, Ross Perot (1992) qualifies, as do John Anderson (1980) and George Wallace (1968).

Short-term economy. Is the economy in recession during the campaign? This is a measure of the short-term economy only and it may differ from the direction of the longer-term economy. Bush (1992) had this key turned against him, as did Carter (1980) and Nixon (1960).

Long-term economy. Does the long-term economy equal or exceed the eight-year growth rate? This measure is weighed separately from the short-term economy and may run opposite to it. Reagan (1984) and Nixon (1972) had this key turned against them, but survived. Ford (1976) and Nixon (1960) lost in years it turned against them.

Policy. Has major national policy change occurred under the incumbent party? This key reflects voters' inclination to reward presidents with activist domestic policy agendas and to punish those without them. Bush (1988 and 1992) lost this key, as did Carter (1980) and Ford (1976).

Social unrest. Sustained social unrest is one of the rarer keys to be turned against modern incumbents, though Hubert Humphrey (1968) had it turned against him, as did Herbert Hoover (1932).

Scandal. Has the incumbent administration been tainted by a major scandal? Certainly, Clinton (1996) qualifies, as does Ford (1976) and Adlai Stevenson (1952).

Foreign policy failure. Has the incumbent party suffered major failure in foreign or military affairs? This key turns against incumbents in the aftermath of colossal disasters such as the Iran hostage crisis that affected Carter (1980) or Lyndon Johnson's Vietnam policy, which impacted on Humphrey (1968).

Foreign policy success. Has the incumbent administration achieved major success in foreign or military affairs? Most modem presidents achieve major foreign policy successes, but not all. This key turned against Clinton (1996), Reagan (1984), and Ford (1976).

Incumbent charisma. Is the incumbent party candidate either charismatic or a national hero? Incumbent party charisma is not common. Since 1960, this key turned against the ruling party seven different times: Bush twice (1988 and 1992), Carter (1980), Ford (1976), Nixon (1972), Humphrey (1968), and Johnson (1964).

Challenger charisma. Is the challenging party candidate either charismatic or a national hero? Challenging party charisma, like incumbent charisma, is not common, so this key turns less frequently against incumbents. It did against Carter opposed by challenger Reagan (1980), Bush opposed by challenger Clinton (1992), Nixon (1960) opposed by challenger John F. Kennedy, and Stevenson (1952) opposed by challenger Dwight D. Eisenhower.