Voting Expert William Jacoby Knows How You're Going To Vote

As the polls grow tighter, more people wonder what the electorate will be thinking on Nov 4. OffTheBus posed that question to political scientist William G. Jacoby, a Michigan State University professor, and a research scientist with ICPSR at the University of Michigan. Jacoby, who recently served as editor of The Journal of Politics, is a specialist in mass political behavior.

OTB: As a political scientist, are you able to understand and predict the kinds of decisions people will make once they're inside the voting booth?

WILLIAM G. JACOBY: Yes, everyone has a fairly set routine when it comes to voting, so we can describe pretty clearly the choices you're going to make inside a voting booth. Most people decide who they're going to vote for long before Election Day. In fact, we can trace the decision you'll make on Tuesday all the way back to your childhood, to elementary school. That's the age when most people develop a psychological sense of party attachment that begins with your parents and how they voted.

Your parents' party affiliation remains with you for most of your life. People flirt with change, but rarely act on it. When someone finally does change, it's usually due to a political shock.

What do you mean by "political shock"?

JACOBY: The Great Depression is one example. More recently, the Vietnam War turned large numbers of young Republicans into Democrats. These political shocks -- or "realignments" as political scientists call them -- are rare. Some people think the Reagan Revolution is another example, but I disagree. Ronald Reagan rejuvenated the GOP, but he didn't turn large numbers of Democrats into Republicans.

When unique campaign issues or unique personalities come along, they too can overturn a person's party affiliation. For example, Republican Dwight D. Eisenhower, a military hero, was elected by Democrats who feared Korea and the spread of Communism. In 2004, Republican George W. Bush was elected thanks to Democrats who had concerns about national security. But by and large, the New Deal alignment created during the 1930s -- with some slight modifications along the way -- is still the party alignment we see today. It's an alignment based on class and social status.

A psychological sense of party attachment is always in the back of your mind. It's the default orientation: "All else being equal, I'm inclined to react favorably to that political party."

Are independents really as independent as they say they are?

JACOBY: No, not really. Many independents are new voters, people just getting into politics who like to think "nobody will sway me." But it rarely turns out that way. Most independents lean toward one party or the other. In fact, research indicates that these independent leaners usually vote in a more partisan way than some of the people who openly declare their party affiliation.

Most of the truly non-leaning independents out there have separated themselves from the political world, and usually do not vote at all. One of the benefits of party affiliation is that it pulls people into the political process. Partisanship leads to greater public participation.

What do you know about voters who are still undecided right before Election Day?

JACOBY: There are two kinds of undecided voters. The first kind probably won't vote at all. Or, if they do vote, they'll essentially flip a coin and cancel each other out.

The second set may say they're undecided to a pollster, but psychological factors from childhood are already in place to accurately determine their vote. Asking this group, "Have you decided how you are going to vote?" is not a very effective way to find out. Pollsters should reframe the question.

John McCain recently criticized the "gotcha" role of bloggers. Does the media affect voter behavior?

JACOBY: Senator McCain is wrong. The media has surprisingly little direct effect on voting behavior. People are surrounded by psychological screens -- such as their early affiliation with the political party of their parents -- and the media has a tough time getting through all these invisible screens. How many voters can the media influence? Research indicates the number is only one in three. Now, that's a large number overall, but probably a much smaller percentage of the electorate than the candidates imagine.

People who watch endless election coverage on cable television and read the political blogs are folks who are into politics, and these people already know how they're going to vote.

Will race be a factor on Election Day?

JACOBY: Race already is a factor. Senator Obama is running behind where other Democrats would be expected to be at this point, given the public's low opinion of the Bush Administration. On the other hand, we probably won't see much more in the way of a Bradley Effect on Election Day, because we're already seeing that effect now.

Racism still permeates a large component of white America, but today it's a different kind of racism. It's not deliberate -- it's symbolic. A majority of whites do not believe they're inherently superior. Research indicates they believe "we are all the same," but that certain demographic groups "aren't living up to their potential."

Is Barack Obama targeting young voters because they're more comfortable with racial diversity?

JACOBY: Avoiding long-standing prejudices is probably part of the success of that strategy. But, more generally, young people are simply more prone to persuasion. They have less baggage of any kind, racial or otherwise. At the same time, Obama's own youth -- especially relative to his opponent -- makes it very natural for him to target the younger segments of the electorate.

Obama seems to be running well across most demographic groups. All in all, I think he's playing up the traditional partisan loyalties pretty successfully, even taking into account any "drag" that might be due to racial feelings.

The Obama campaign took political branding and merchandising to a new level. Did this strategy make it "cool" to be a Democrat again?

JACOBY: I don't think Obama has deliberately tried to make being a Democrat cool, because for the most part, presidential candidates focus more on their own appeals rather than partisanship. Obama is riding a tide that rises from frustration with the wars, and the current economic troubles. Being the "out party" is good for the Democrats. They stand to gain without really having to sell themselves all that much.

Are the polls truly tightening as we get closer to Election Day?

JACOBY: No, I don't believe the polls are tightening. I think it's just statistical noise.

---

Comments

[pons1595]

One of the reasons the voting of school age children has accurately predicted the last several elections is that kids vote like their parents and a high percentage of them continue to do so as adults: "Since 1940, kids voting in the Scholastic Presidential Election Poll have predicted the winning candidate in every election but two: students chose Thomas E. Dewey over Harry S. Truman in 1948 and Richard M. Nixon over John F. Kennedy in 1960." http://blog.nj.com/parentalguidance/2008/09/pg23_election.html

[maxhnb]

As a Black American, i can't help but see race as something that influences a lot of people especially where there arent a good size black population and in the deep south especially. In the midwest, there may be a greater sense of tolerance however in states like Missouri, Ohio and Indiana, races has n known to be an issue. The polling results inthese states are hard to believe.

One thing I know , that if McCain is elected, poverty will get worse, the inner cities will decline and we will have more war. I do know that he wont get alot of cooperation from the Congress, So that will be a check, but still his executive decisions like Bush's will doom the country. I have my suspicions that McCain would be more moderate as a President no longer having to suck up to hisparty. If his political identity of 2000 ever reemerges he s less threatening.

Obama is afresh new face who has spent a long time working up close with the poor and seen the social and personal needs of the less than well off in society. That makes for the majority of the working force and small business people. One's vote needs to consider that if you are well of f it is because of your workers or employees. If your employees do better and workhard to keep their jobsir will help business. A high tide here lifts all boats.

[eeVas]

"But by and large, the New Deal alignment created during the 1930s -- with some slight modifications along the way -- is still the party alignment we see today."

I completely disagree with the above statement. It completly ignores the Southern Strategy that flipped the Solid Democratic South Republican. This was a major shift. I am curious why Dr. Jacoby did not include that in his analysis.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Southern_strategy

[owlsocks]

I grew up in a poor, inner-city home. My parents never said one word to me about politics.

It was in my idealistic hippie high school years that my party affiliation was born, when Bush the First had that stupid Gulf War.

My oh-so-liberal college education and my world travels made my democratic leanings even stronger.

The attempt by the Republicans to seemingly make anyone who is not Christian (I am a long-time Pagan) into a second-class citizen in this country, where we supposedly have freedom of religion, is the nail in the coffin for my likelihood of EVER voting Republican.

I am forever a democrat now, and that approach has been proved right by Bush's offspring and their cronies.

Obama '08!!!

[Sloane7]

I really didn't know what each political party represented until college years ago. I thought I wanted to be a Republican because I associated it with being wealthy as often seen in movies. How disappointed I was when I compared the two parties and realized I was an absolute Democrat!

[TNew]

i come from a long line of Republicans and can say it was Reagan that turned me into a Democrat. The only Democrat left in my family is my father all 5 of my sisters and my mother have changed to Democratic party.

[GOPsuxx]

I was raised in a hardcore Republican household during the '80's, in a largely Republican area in LA County. My mother is still religiously Republican, though during the '70's, when I was a little kid, she was very earth mother-y. I think life experiences are the biggest contributing factors to one's voting choices. My brother and I are both very liberal, crunchy Democrats, and like other Gen-Xer's (whom we can proudly claim Barack as our own), we are reacting to the self-absorption of our boomer forebears who started their political life as radicals and then voted Reagan into office.

[jadeba]

Jane Wyman was a Democrat and so was Ronald Reagan when he was married to her. Both their kids - Maureen and Michael became hard core Repubs. Nancy and Ronald Reagan were Repubs - their kids Patti and Ron Jr. became Democrats. I think the older two became repubs to gain their father's favor, while the younger two were secure enough to act independently and depart from their parent's ideology.

Now, this is really simplistic but I think Repubs are selfish - as long as I have mine, who cares about you. Dems have a larger world view and are generally more accepting of differing points of view. Repubs don't seem to have the ability to sympathize or empathize with anyone else, whereas Dems can and do. Look at Mc's base - their primary concern is their own tax situation and not the common good. They can't tolerate the notion that in "spreading the wealth" they might have to pony up a few bucks. They can't wait to "drill, baby, drill", regardless of how the environment might be affected. They want to save every fetus but will do nothing to help children in need who are here. Are they aliens? Are they the Borg? Is it a brain virus? Is it simply the darkness versus the light?

I got off topic here....tired, I canvassed all day in a very red part of Colorado....

[Oregon Ivy]

Your experiences and observations mirror mine very closely. Republicans seem to have a f-- you attitude toward everyone, especially those they consider "lower class" than themselves.

And good on ya for the phone banking. I did it last week myself, to Ohio. Only got cussed out good once by an 86 year old man who ha t. ed both candidates. *G*

But I know how draining it is. Three more days....

[eeVas]

You might have gotten off topic, but Thank you for your post.

I think you hit it on the head. It is a world view of "what's best for me" vs. "what's best for everyone."

A perfect example is "trickle down economics" vs. build from the bottom. If a person is at the top they get helped either way. With trickle down the rich get helped directly and the only trickle down is to their employees through low paying jobs.

But if the bottom is helped. It helps everyone. If the low and working class have better jobs/incomes. They spend money, money that goes to the big companies and the wealthy class. Everyone is better off.

If the wealthy are helped both ways it is more a question of "fairness" vs. "me-first."

[loveu2]

You put it very well! Maybe we've met the same Republicans. That's how a lot of them seem to me, too.

[NoSandwiches]

The family influence, I'm not so convinced on.
Both of my parents were Democrats.
My older sister and I are Democrats, and my younger sister and brother are Republicans. My husband's family is similar in this respect.

The difference is generational---my older sister and I share common music as well. We were also more influenced by watergate, whereas little brother and sister grew up when Reagan was "in.

[tlc13]

There is truth in those statements; I disagree with definition of "Independents" as well as, parental influences. My parents are both Democrats; I'm an Independent. I was a Republican out of High School. I voted for Reagan. Afterwards, I realized the party was "NOT" what it portrayed to be in theory nor historically.

I was disappointed; I had been idealistic in my original choice. I thought I was behind a decentralized government, less spending, more freedom of choice, etc...I think I was stuck in the Lincoln era (he was reality based)--it's about people, not the government. Plus, the R party was set up by Jefferson to remain true to the constitution; after "reading"(I cannot listen to her speak) Palin's comments in regard to her possible job and the other uninformed comment regarding the first amendment, shows me this party is completely out of touch, lacks integrity & has no leadership (among many descriptive adjectives I could employ).

The point is I don't believe my choices have anything to do with how I was raised, but more in who I am. I cannot say either party at this time has my "complete" ideology (although, I am far more liberal in my leanings, if I had to choose) and until one comes along in which I resonate with their principles and message...then an Independent I shall remain. I have three kids...two of voting age. Both are Independent, & all 3 of us are voting for Obama and NO on 8!!!!

[Boadicea]

Very interesting, and I agree with most of it.

I disagree that another Democrat would be further ahead at this point. That's just ludicrous - John Edwards? His scandal would have totally destroyed any chance for Democrats? Hillary Clinton? Tremendous baggage, especially on the economic front - not to mention the campaign finance/fraud legal troubles set to start soon. Joe Biden? He has no idea how to garner media attention. And McCain had a very positive relationship with the media and the country at the outset.

Obama's brilliant organizational and motivational skills are exceptional and have had an impact on the contest. He's pulling that extra vote - even if each one seems small - from every corner, and that is what will win him the election.

[ProgressiveInAZ]

True, none of the other democrats would have been further ahead.
But, if Barack were white with an "American-sounding" name, he would be WAY further ahead.
Yes, there is an element of racism and xenophobia at play.
That is why we must continue to work very hard right down to the end of the wire.

[KC333]

I agree

[JodyMcg]

The only thing potentially keeping Obama from blowing out this election is his skin color. I hope Americans vote Obama by a landslide and show that we can in fact be unified, that we have grown as a nation, that we are able to look past race and vote on credentials, and that we are able to continue to show emerging nations that we are still that great beacon light of hope.

[eeVas]

The problem with the idea that a white Dem would have a landslide assumes 1) the country is highly predjudice still 2) and that people vote for economic reasons alone.

A number that was thrown around alot (but I think is meaningless) is that 80% of Americans are unhappy with the direction of the country. It assumes that everyone is unhappy for the same reason. A social conservative might be unhappy because the country is getting too liberal, the number of states that allow gay marriages is growing (for example. A liberal might be unhappy because of the trampling the constitution has taken over the last 8 years.

The answer to both of those questions is completely opposite. One is fixed with a Democratice government the other with a Republican government.