Building on the work of previous forecasters, I develop a model of presidential elections that deviates from earlier work by including a measure of aggregate personal finances. The results of the analysis indicate a highly accurate model and predict a Democratic victory in 1996. The discussion of findings emphasizes that, although the model predicts a Democratic victory, caution should be exercised before concluding that the outcome is cast in stone or that the campaign cannot make a difference.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
Abramowitz, Alan.1988. An improved model for predicting presidential election outcomes. PS: Political Science and Politics21:843-7.
2.
Bean, Louis.1948. How to predict elections. New York : Knopf.
3.
Beck, Nathaniel.1992. Forecasting the 1992 presidential election: The message is in the confidence interval. The Public Perspective3:32-4.
4.
Gelman, Andrew, and Gary King.1993. Why are American presidential election campaign polls so variable when votes are so predictable? British Journal of Political Science23.409-51.
5.
Goidel, Robert K., and Ronald E. Langley .1995. Media coverage of the economy and aggregate economic evaluations: Uncovering evidence of indirect media effects. Political Research Quarterly48:313-28.
6.
Greene, Jay P.1993. Forewarned before forecast: Presidential election forecasting models and the 1992 election. PS: Political Science and Politics26:17-21.
7.
Holbrook, Thomas M.1996. Do campaigns matter?Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
8.
Holbrook, Thomas, and James Garand.1996. Homo-economus? Economic information and economic voting. Political Research Quarterly49:351-76.
9.
Kmenta, Jan.1986. Elements of econometrics. 2d ed. New York: Macmillan.
10.
Kramer, Gerald H.1971. Short-term fluctuations in U.S. voting behavior. American Political Science Review65:131-43.
11.
Lewis-Beck, Michael S., and Tom W. Rice.1992. Forecasting elections. Washington, DC: Congressional Quarterly.
12.
Ostrom, Charles W., Jr., and Dennis Simon.1985. Promise and performance: A dynamic model of presidential popularity. American Political Science Review79:334-58.
13.
Tufte, Edward R.1978. Political control of the economy. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
14.
U.S. Department of Commerce.1992. Survey of current business (August. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Commerce.
15.
—. 1994. Survey of current business (July. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Commerce.
