When it comes to predicting elections, journalists tend to get it wrong. Who could have predicted that the 2000 presidential election would have ended with Vice President Al Gore winning the popular vote and Texas Gov. George W. Bush winning the electoral-vote count upon the intervention of the Supreme Court? Sure, everyone knew it would be a squeaker, but the balloting itself was full of surprises. (For a quick and bittersweet reminder of just how wrong some journalists were, check out the predictions of a variety of journalists posted on Talking Points Memo during the 2000 election.)
Ultimately, however, the outcome of this year's elections will be determined by the unpredictable behavior of voters, and not just the observable behavior of candidates and parties. So here's an unconventional little prediction based on ethnography rather than polling: Among lackadaisical Democrats who sometimes vote and left-leaning independents given to protest-voting, Democratic turnout will be better than anticipated. For one thing, Democratic get-out-the-vote efforts this year are the real deal. For another, the death of Sen. Paul Wellstone (D-Minn.) could have a mobilizing effect. And the prospect of Republicans controlling both houses of Congress and the presidency may put the fear of God into mushy Dems who kind of support the president and don't really find much that's appealing about the Democratic Party (but who nonetheless remain terrified of an all-Republican government). Never underestimate the power of fear to drive people to the polls.
And then there is the Nader Guilt Factor. Independents who wanted to encourage third-party formations in 2000 have had two years to consider the error of their voting ways, during which time the administration has systematically undermined everything they stand for. Plus -- and perhaps more importantly -- they have had to endure two years of gibes from Gore voters who blame them for all that's gone wrong in America since Bush took office, and who've turned a Nader vote into the social equivalent of joining up with the Moonies. The argument that there is no difference between the two parties -- even though the parties have done little to substantively differentiate themselves in the campaigns -- has been proven fallacious, and decisively so, by the actions of the Bush administration.
With state budget deficits ballooning, a war with Iraq looming, personal retirement and college funds decimated, and consumer confidence at its lowest point in nine years, this election matters in a way that makes voting for third parties or sitting out the balloting luxuries that liberal voters can no longer afford.
Lefties who prefer to vote against someone -- i.e., against Bush Senior in 1992 and against Gore and the Democratic Leadership Council in 2000 -- instead of for someone may prove similarly motivated to vote against Republican control of the House, Senate and White House while holding their noses in favor of voting for weak Democratic candidates, even ones they hold in contempt (which is most of them). This will work to the advantage of Democratic House and Senate candidates, though the number of such voters 1 percent to 3 percent of the electorate, tops -- could either provide the margin of victory in tight races or be so small as to be outweighed by other factors. The fear vote will stop short of boosting weak Democratic gubernatorial candidates, who will more likely rise or fall based on the perception of their abilities to safeguard the economic health of their states. Solid but uninspiring candidates in supposedly safe Democratic seats, meanwhile, may find their margins of victory lower than anticipated as passive-aggressive voters once again simply "forget" to vote.
The polls, though, will give us a final answer, and soon enough. By tomorrow, we'll all know whether there's been any improvement in forecasting since the last round. Here are the main predictions, conventional wisdom style:
The 50-50 Electorate. This is the big story of the 2002 elections. As in 2000, the electorate remains closely divided, and small margins of victory in individual races will lead to the creation of small majorities for the parties in Congress. Ten of 34 Senate seats in play remain toss-ups: Minnesota, Missouri, South Dakota, Georgia and Louisiana, which had been Democratic; and Arkansas, Colorado, New Hampshire, North Carolina and Texas, which had been with the GOP. The conventional-wisdom consensus seems to be that the Senate will remain narrowly Democratic while the GOP will keep the House, with the possibility of the GOP sweeping both the Senate and the House a close runner-up.
The Year of the Woman Governor. This rubric, popular going into primary season, already looks dated, with State Treasurer Shannon O'Brien struggling against Mitt Romney in Massachusetts and Lt. Gov. Kathleen Kennedy Townsend underwhelming Maryland voters versus Robert Ehrlich. Former U.S. Attorney General Janet Reno, once included on the roster of women who could win in November, didn't even carry her primary in Florida. States with strong Democratic women gubernatorial candidates include Michigan and Kansas; seven other contenders are running even or trailing in Alaska, Arizona, Arkansas, Hawaii, Maryland, Massachusetts and Rhode Island.
The Rising Democratic Governor. The most solid prediction of the season is that Democrats will regain the majority of governorships for the first time since 1994. In particular, Dems appear likely to win such electoral prizes as Michigan, Illinois and Pennsylvania. Texas, New York and Florida, meanwhile, are favored to stay with the GOP.
Ongoing Election Chaos. "[E]xperts warn we may be in for another chaotic mess on Election Day. They say little has changed since 2000, and predict the combination of close races and new equipment could prove troublesome," CNN recently reported. The New York Times further warned that the Voter News Service, a consortium that surveys voters leaving polls, has a new system for tabulating exit-poll results, and that its statisticians are "not yet confident" about the accuracy of the new computers.
The Incomplete Election. A likely story. Sen. Mary Landrieu (D-La.) may well be forced into a Dec. 7 runoff if she fails to win 50 percent or more of the vote, leaving the final composition of the Senate officially in play for a few more weeks.
Garance Franke-Ruta is an associate editor at the Prospect.
