Was this election highly reminiscent of the Dukakis-Bush I Election? I was hoping the wisdom of the SDope may chime in. How big was Bush I’s victory, etc., etc?
Naturally, some personal bias may weigh into your response which cannot be helped (we’re only human, afterall). But, I’ll be as objective as possible if you promise to do the same. - Jinx
Let’s see. Dukakis and Kerry were both democrats. Both campaigned highly on negativity toward the incumbent’s administration, and were somewhat both successful. But at the same time, both failed to convince a majority of Americans that they had plans that were any better. Both were honest about who they were. Dukakis said he would raise taxes. Kerry said he would raise taxes just on people making over $200,000 a year, and was also named the most liberal senator.
Here’s where things get different. In 1988, George H.W. Bush was campaigning as part of Reagan’s administration (his Vice President). Ronald Reagan’s approval rating was well over 50%.
It’s always been my understanding that a President with a 50% or high approval rating will probably be re-elected. One with an approval rating below 45% will probably lose his job. And it will be a photo finish for one with an approval rating of 47 or 48%. Bush had a 47% approval rating (as opposed to Reagan’s higher rating) going into the election. What pushed him over the top, IMO, was the fact that moral issues were the top concern among voters this election, something on which Bush is stronger than Kerry.
If Bush’s approval rating had been where Reagan’s was in 1988, Kerry probably would’ve suffered a Dukakian loss (426-111) rather than the one he did (286-252).
Naw. As much as some Republicans would like to change the meaning of “mandate” and “crushing victory,” Bush I crushed Dukakis, whereas Bush II beat Kerry.
In 1988, Bush I received 48.9 million votes, 53.4% of the electorate, and 426 electoral votes. Dukakis got 41.8 million, 45.6%, and 111 EV.
Compare that to 2004: Bush got 59.4 million votes, 51% of the electorate, and probably will end up with 286 EVs. Kerry got 55.9 million, 48%, and 252 EVs.
In short, Bush I beat Dukakis by 7.1 million votes, nearly 8 percentage points, and 315 EVs. Bush II beat Kerry by 3.5 million votes, 3 percentage points, and 34 EVs. That is a clear win, but it’s not by any measure a drubbing.
Additionally, Kerry, whatever one may think of his Senate record, didn’t have to worry about what was happening with his regular job while he was campaigning. Dukakis made several key mistakes in the year leading up to the 1988 election. First, the budgets approved for 1987 and 1988 in Massachusetts were so generous that many people were concerned where the money was coming from. The debt loading taken on in just those two years is a large part of what turned around the so-called Massachusetts Miracle just in time for Massachusetts to be falling apart economically around September 1988. Secondly, while Dukakis had a capable Lt. Governor, he refused to pass any authority to her while he was campaigning. He apparantly thought he could campaign for president and run the state himself, at the same time. So, when the state’s economy began to suffer from the inevitable result of his efforts to keep his Democratic base in the state happy with him during the presidential run - he was usually too busy trying to become President to actually talk to legislative leaders about what could be done to fix the local economy.
When a large part of Dukakis’ campaign was supposedly based on his success with the Massachusetts Miracle, having his state go into a recession just before the election was not a good sign.
And furthermore, the election was decided by close races in several individual states, obviously including Ohio (but several others as well). Had Ohio gone Kerry’s way, he wins the election.