An Exchange With Samuel Popkin on the Obama-Romney Showdown

In my big story on "Obama, Explained" two months ago I quoted Samuel Popkin, a political scientist at UCSD (and longtime friend), on what the Obama re-election campaign could learn from Harry Truman's strategy in 1948. Popkin's responses included references to the famous (and invaluable) "Rowe memo," sent by James H. Rowe Jr to Truman shortly after Republicans gained control of the Congress in the 1946 mid-term elections.

Candidate.jpgThat memo is one of many gems included in Popkin's new book The Candidate: What It Takes to Win and Hold the White House. (Another quasi-gem: a borderline-embarrassing episode involving me, during the 1976 Carter campaign, in the book's early pages. You'll have to find it for yourself.) The book concerns the modern history of the process that will flood the airwaves and internets over the next six months: a first-term president's attempt to present himself anew to the public, and a challenger's attempt to say the incumbent doesn't deserve another chance.

Over the years I've turned to Popkin for guidance about both the substance and the mechanics of politics. His earlier book The Reasoning Voter argued that for all the nuttiness, irrelevancies, and vituperation of political campaigns, they are surprisingly effective in conveying the policy information that voters care about. He's agreed to several rounds of online Q-and-A to apply the lessons of his new book to the Romney-Obama showdown we're about to live through.

Here is my opening question, followed by his reply. More in the week ahead.

Dear Sam:

Thanks very much for agreeing to this online exchange. Over the years, I've been one of many journalists to come to you for insights about aspects of the political campaign that we reporters were missing. Now with your new book, you're threatening to cut out the middleman and let readers hear from you directly.

I suppose I should object, on guild-protection principles. Instead I'll just ask you a few questions arising from your book and your observation of politics over the years.

I'll start with a simple but open-ended one. It is: what is the conventional wisdom missing, when it comes to this year's presidential race?

With some differences in detail and emphasis, I think the following points are a basic summary of media-world conventional wisdom six months before election day.

  • It's all about the economy, and unless the unemployment rate gets much worse, Obama has an edge;
  • Obama is vulnerable, but you can't beat something with nothing (or, in the alternative phrasing, an election is a choice, not a referendum), and Mitt Romney is just plain bad at politics -- and unlike the president, he is "underwater" in personal ratings, more "disliked" than "liked";
  • On the other hand, you should never underestimate how much better (and more ruthless) the post-Rove Republicans are at campaigning than modern Democrats are, nor how much more SuperPac money they will have in their hands;
  • On this same other hand, you can never underestimate the residual suspicion about our first non-white President, plus the diminished enthusiasm of young voters who were so important to Obama's success last time;
  • But back on the original hand, through the primaries the Republican party seemed willfully to be antagonizing: women, blacks, Latinos, the young, LBGTs, and the highly educated, leaving themselves with a shrunken base for the general election;
  • And as a result, who knows what's going to happen!

So for the opening question I ask:

What drives you crazy when you hear DC-based conventional-wisdom pundits opine about how the next six months will shape up?

What do you know that you think the rest of us should pay attention to?

I look forward to your answers.
[with bonus question below]
Samuel Popkin's reply.

Dear Jim;

Thanks for giving me the chance to join in on your election discussions.  These questions are a great way to start thinking about this election -- for me, after hunkering down to revisit the presidential elections since 1948 and look at them from the point of view of a candidate.
I don't think you should worry about my book undercutting reporters and opinionators.  My goal is to draw more people into the complexity of campaigns and help them appreciate the planning and preparation necessary to get to the White House or stay there.  There is a lot of substance too easily missed by even your readers, and they should appreciate you and your colleagues more if and when they read me.  Looking back, the top reporters got it more right at the time than people like me in the campaigns dared acknowledge.  And  you got it right first on Jimmy Carter, to say nothing of Iraq or most of the SOTUs

Two things that drive me most crazy are over-simplifying "the economy" and missing the critical differences between incumbent campaigns and challenger campaigns.

The Economy
Economics always matters, but the specific economic issues that matter, and the ways voters react have been in flux since the 70s.   Voters don't vote on their actual economic welfare. They vote on their opinions about their welfare, which in turn  partly means their expectations about the future.

From 1948 until 1980 the two economic issues dominating presidential elections were unemployment and inflation.  Now the role of government in the economy, the value of immigration, the role of foreign trade, and the fight over  entitlements are all seen as economic issues.

Presented by

James Fallows is a national correspondent for The Atlantic and has written for the magazine since the late 1970s. He has reported extensively from outside the United States and once worked as President Carter's chief speechwriter. His latest book is China Airborne. More

James Fallows is based in Washington as a national correspondent for The Atlantic. He has worked for the magazine for nearly 30 years and in that time has also lived in Seattle, Berkeley, Austin, Tokyo, Kuala Lumpur, Shanghai, and Beijing. He was raised in Redlands, California, received his undergraduate degree in American history and literature from Harvard, and received a graduate degree in economics from Oxford as a Rhodes scholar. In addition to working for The Atlantic, he has spent two years as chief White House speechwriter for Jimmy Carter, two years as the editor of US News & World Report, and six months as a program designer at Microsoft. He is an instrument-rated private pilot. He is also now the chair in U.S. media at the U.S. Studies Centre at the University of Sydney, in Australia.

Fallows has been a finalist for the National Magazine Award five times and has won once; he has also won the American Book Award for nonfiction and a N.Y. Emmy award for the documentary series Doing Business in China. He was the founding chairman of the New America Foundation. His recent books Blind Into Baghdad (2006) and Postcards From Tomorrow Square (2009) are based on his writings for The Atlantic. His latest book is China Airborne. He is married to Deborah Fallows, author of the recent book Dreaming in Chinese. They have two married sons.

Fallows welcomes and frequently quotes from reader mail sent via the "Email" button below. Unless you specify otherwise, we consider any incoming mail available for possible quotation -- but not with the sender's real name unless you explicitly state that it may be used. If you are wondering why Fallows does not use a "Comments" field below his posts, please see previous explanations here and here.

How to Cook Spaghetti Squash (and Why)

Cooking for yourself is one of the surest ways to eat well. Bestselling author Mark Bittman teaches James Hamblin the recipe that everyone is Googling.


How to Cook Spaghetti Squash (and Why)

Cooking for yourself is one of the surest ways to eat well.


Before Tinder, a Tree

Looking for your soulmate? Write a letter to the "Bridegroom's Oak" in Germany.


The Health Benefits of Going Outside

People spend too much time indoors. One solution: ecotherapy.


Where High Tech Meets the 1950s

Why did Green Bank, West Virginia, ban wireless signals? For science.


Yes, Quidditch Is Real

How J.K. Rowling's magical sport spread from Hogwarts to college campuses


Would You Live in a Treehouse?

A treehouse can be an ideal office space, vacation rental, and way of reconnecting with your youth.

More in Politics

From This Author

Just In