IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/pra/mprapa/42464.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Too close to call: Growth and the cost of ruling in US presidential elections, with an application to the 2012 election

Author

Listed:
  • Kurrild-Klitgaard, Peter

Abstract

The note briefly outlines a new model for the explanation of US presidential elections, founded on (a) recent economic growth and (b) a measure of what may be called “’the cost of ruling”. The former is based in changes in real disposable income for the period following a mid-term election, while the latter combines factors of incumbency and terms-in-office. The model is applied to data from the US presidential elections 1932-2008 and has considerable explanatory power for the variation in the incumbent party’s candidate’s share of the two-party vote (R2=0.74). The model is controlled against a number of other frequent explanations and is found to be quite robust. When augmented with approval ratings for incumbent presidents, the explanatory power increases to 83 pct. and only incorrectly calls one of the last 15 US presidential elections. Applied to the 2012 election as a forecasting model the prediction is that President Obama will win 49,6 pct. of the two-party vote.

Suggested Citation

  • Kurrild-Klitgaard, Peter, 2012. "Too close to call: Growth and the cost of ruling in US presidential elections, with an application to the 2012 election," MPRA Paper 42464, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    • Handle: RePEc:pra:mprapa:42464
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://mpra.ub.uni-muenchen.de/42464/2/MPRA_paper_42464.pdf
    File Function: original version
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Douglas Hibbs, 2000. "Bread and Peace Voting in U.S. Presidential Elections," Public Choice, Springer, vol. 104(1), pages 149-180, July.
    2. Abramowitz, Alan I., 2008. "It's about time: Forecasting the 2008 presidential election with the time-for-change model," International Journal of Forecasting, Elsevier, vol. 24(2), pages 209-217.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Kurrild-Klitgaard, Peter, 2019. "Var det fortsat ”the economy, stupid!” i 2016 og 2018? [Was it still "the economy, stupid!" in 2016 and 2018?]," MPRA Paper 97297, University Library of Munich, Germany.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Graefe, Andreas & Küchenhoff, Helmut & Stierle, Veronika & Riedl, Bernhard, 2015. "Limitations of Ensemble Bayesian Model Averaging for forecasting social science problems," International Journal of Forecasting, Elsevier, vol. 31(3), pages 943-951.
    2. Montgomery, Jacob M. & Hollenbach, Florian M. & Ward, Michael D., 2015. "Calibrating ensemble forecasting models with sparse data in the social sciences," International Journal of Forecasting, Elsevier, vol. 31(3), pages 930-942.
    3. repec:cup:judgdm:v:15:y:2020:i:5:p:863-880 is not listed on IDEAS
    4. Sinha, Pankaj & Verma, Aniket & Shah, Purav & Singh, Jahnavi & Panwar, Utkarsh, 2020. "Prediction for the 2020 United States Presidential Election using Machine Learning Algorithm: Lasso Regression," MPRA Paper 103889, University Library of Munich, Germany, revised 31 Oct 2020.
    5. Sinha, Pankaj & Srinivas, Sandeep & Paul, Anik & Chaudhari, Gunjan, 2016. "Forecasting 2016 US Presidential Elections Using Factor Analysis and Regression Model," MPRA Paper 74618, University Library of Munich, Germany, revised 17 Oct 2016.
    6. Hibbs, Douglas A., 2010. "The 2010 Midterm Election for the US House of Representatives," MPRA Paper 25918, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    7. Andrew Gelman & Jessica Hullman & Christopher Wlezien & George Elliott Morris, 2020. "Information, incentives, and goals in election forecasts," Judgment and Decision Making, Society for Judgment and Decision Making, vol. 15(5), pages 863-880, September.
    8. Geys, Benny & Vermeir, Jan, 2008. "The political cost of taxation: new evidence from German popularity ratings [Besteuerung und Popularität von Politikern: Neue Ergebnisse für die Deutsche Bundesregierung 1978-2003]," Discussion Papers, Research Unit: Market Processes and Governance SP II 2008-06, WZB Berlin Social Science Center.
    9. Graefe, Andreas, 2023. "Embrace the differences: Revisiting the PollyVote method of combining forecasts for U.S. presidential elections (2004 to 2020)," International Journal of Forecasting, Elsevier, vol. 39(1), pages 170-177.
    10. Irem Batool & Gernot Sieg, 2009. "Bread and the attrition of power: Economic events and German election results," Public Choice, Springer, vol. 141(1), pages 151-165, October.
    11. George A. Krause, 2006. "Beyond the Norm," Rationality and Society, , vol. 18(2), pages 157-191, May.
    12. Mark Quigley & Jeremy D. Silver, 2022. "Science advocacy in political rhetoric and actions," Environment Systems and Decisions, Springer, vol. 42(3), pages 462-476, September.
    13. Lauderdale, Benjamin E. & Linzer, Drew, 2015. "Under-performing, over-performing, or just performing? The limitations of fundamentals-based presidential election forecasting," International Journal of Forecasting, Elsevier, vol. 31(3), pages 965-979.
    14. Dodge Cahan & Niklas Potrafke, 2021. "The Democrat-Republican presidential growth gap and the partisan balance of the state governments," Public Choice, Springer, vol. 189(3), pages 577-601, December.
    15. Wang, Samuel S.-H., 2015. "Origins of Presidential poll aggregation: A perspective from 2004 to 2012," International Journal of Forecasting, Elsevier, vol. 31(3), pages 898-909.
    16. Pankaj Sinha & Aastha Sharma & Harsh Vardhan Singh, 2012. "Prediction For The 2012 United States Presidential Election Using Multiple Regression Model," Journal of Prediction Markets, University of Buckingham Press, vol. 6(2), pages 77-97.
    17. Bruno S. Frey & Lasse Steiner, 2012. "Political Economy: Success or Failure?," Contemporary Economics, University of Economics and Human Sciences in Warsaw., vol. 6(3), September.
    18. Sinha, Pankaj & Nagarnaik, Ankit & Raj, Kislay & Suman, Vineeta, 2016. "Forecasting United States Presidential election 2016 using multiple regression models," MPRA Paper 74641, University Library of Munich, Germany, revised 17 Oct 2016.
    19. David Walker, 2006. "Predicting presidential election results," Applied Economics, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 38(5), pages 483-490.
    20. Dennis, Christopher & Medoff, Marshall H. & Magnera, Michael, 2008. "Constituents' economic interests and senator support for spending limitations," Journal of Behavioral and Experimental Economics (formerly The Journal of Socio-Economics), Elsevier, vol. 37(6), pages 2443-2453, December.
    21. Turgeon, Mathieu & Rennó, Lucio, 2012. "Forecasting Brazilian presidential elections: Solving the N problem," International Journal of Forecasting, Elsevier, vol. 28(4), pages 804-812.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Economic voting; US presidential elections;

    JEL classification:

    • D72 - Microeconomics - - Analysis of Collective Decision-Making - - - Political Processes: Rent-seeking, Lobbying, Elections, Legislatures, and Voting Behavior

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:pra:mprapa:42464. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Joachim Winter (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/vfmunde.html .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.