Is a McCain Comeback Even Possible? Let's Check the History Books

A question I was mulling over the weekend while watching a sweet, sweet Patriots defeat: Has any candidate in recent times been able to come back from seven to 10 points down with three weeks left in a presidential election? John Harwood, writing in the New York Times, suggests the precedent doesn't look good McCain.

Since Gallup began presidential polling in 1936, only one candidate has overcome a deficit that large, and this late, to win the White House: Ronald Reagan, who trailed President Jimmy Carter 47 percent to 39 percent in a survey completed on Oct. 26, 1980.

Yet Mr. Carter, like Mr. McCain today, represented the party holding the White House in bad times. After Mr. Reagan successfully presented himself as an alternative to Mr. Carter in their lone debate, held on the late date of Oct. 28, he surged ahead...

In 1968, Vice President Hubert H. Humphrey all but erased a 12-point early-October deficit before losing narrowly to Richard M. Nixon. In 2000, Vice President Al Gore wiped out a seven-point deficit in the final 10 days of the election, winning the popular vote but losing the Electoral College to Mr. Bush.

Harwood cites a figure from Princeton political scientist Larry Bartels: since 1948, the candidate leading in October has won three-fourths of the time. Bartels puts Obama’s chance of winning the popular vote at "a little over 90 percent."

Comments

From Undernews (prorev.com) today:

The 2000 Gallup tracking poll for Oct 2-4 had Gore ahead by eleven points. A warning for Democrats as well as another reminder of why Nader was not responsible for Gore's loss. He lost those votes.

Posted by: David Green on 10/13/08 at 9:30 AM Respond

Obama Toadie (examining a basket of eggs):
That's 1 chicken
That's 2 chickens
This makes 3 chickens
...

Posted by: The Old Saw on 10/13/08 at 9:45 AM Respond

There's a great Kurt Vonnegut quote that says that history is a series of surprises and that by studying it we can only learn to be surprised yet again. Given the present financial disaster, I find it rather touching that someone would look at past results to try to predict the outcome of this very strange presidential race.

Posted by: Kathy Giannini on 10/13/08 at 12:51 PM Respond

How patronizing Kathy Giannini is these days - I find that touching.

Posted by: Paul Miller on 10/13/08 at 3:04 PM Respond

At least 33% of the Republicans don't like McCain and they will not vote for him. You need to tear down to rebuild(the party). Obama's presidency will be good for the GOP, it will energize the party to rebuild it. It will also be good for talk radio Many good things will come from Obama. Anyway, McCain is too much of a Zionist for the paleoconservatives to stomach. Palin is a nut case as we all know.

Posted by: Savage on 10/14/08 at 7:05 AM Respond

The Reverend Jesse Jackson believes that, although "Zionists who have controlled American policy for decades" remain strong, they'll lose a great deal of their clout when Barack Obama enters the White House.

Posted by: JJ on 10/14/08 at 5:00 PM Respond

Just for the record, it was not my intention to lure Obama supporters into saying rude things about the Republican Vice-Presidential candidate which will also "energize" that party perhaps "prematurely" for certain people contributing here.

I agree with Jesse Jackson that if he wins, Obama will be less allied with Israel than McCain will be if he wins, but once again -- I wasn't the one that brought that point up either. I totally agree that Obama's pro-Israeli statements are so much expedient lip service. And liberals -- if Jewish -- may also cool off toward Obama after reading your statements.

The Palestinians have already remarked the alacrity with which Obama abandoned them. So that's nothing new. What is striking to me is the unconscious effort to sabotage Obama's campaign by those who claim to be his ardent supporters.

Posted by: Kathy Giannini on 10/18/08 at 10:25 AM Respond