Home > Uncategorized > What the ideological content of contribution records tells us about the 2008 Presidential Election

What the ideological content of contribution records tells us about the 2008 Presidential Election

Regardless of one’s beliefs about how the 2008 Presidential Election ranks among other historic elections, it was certainly the most active and actively watched money race in the nation’s history. The $1.75 billion raised by presidential hopefuls from both parties more than doubled the amount raised during the 2004 Presidential Election. The surge of candidates declaring their intentions to run within months of the 2006 Midterm elections and the storied showdown between the Obama and Clinton campaigns for the Democratic nomination led to a primary season that started earlier and ended later than any in recent memory. All of this provided a seemingly endless stream of contribution data that, among other things, is ideal for tracking the ideological progression of the candidates over the course of the election. The figure below combines the IMWA with smoothing techniques to get an idea of how the election progressed.

Ideological Progression of Candidates during the 2008 Presidential Election: The presidential candidate trends are estimated in a two-step process. This first step recovered ideological estimates from an IMWA scaling that included all contributions from the 3125 PACs and 131,000 individuals that gave to two or more federal campaigns during the 2007-2008 Election Cycle. Holding the contributors estimates static, the presidential candidate trends are then smoothed over time using locally-weighted regression (LOESS) with a span of .3.

Although the plot largely speaks for itself, there were a few features that caught my attention. The first is that, with the exception of Biden and Richardson, the Democratic candidates generally maintain a consistent rank ordering, whereas the ordering of the Republican candidates is much more chaotic. The second point of interest is the Obama campaign’s move to the center during the run-up to the general election. I would venture to guess that this was this was the combined effect of Sarah Palin’s VP nomination and the financial meltdown, but that is just speculation.

  1. Charles S
    March 20, 2010 at 8:38 am

    Interesting that Kucinich supporters were less liberal than Edwards supporters. Also interesting that the last few Kucinich supporters were less liberal than most of his supporters. I wonder if they were also specifically Ohioans.

  2. shimey
    March 21, 2010 at 5:35 am

    Yes, people still have hope. But we have it in spite of what Obama/Biden have been offering us. Obama/Biden have NOT been offering up much. They’ve clearly pre-negotiated the health care bill to the point where it’s mostly meaningless. They have failed to counter the right wing hate machine with a hope machine of thier own. They have extended the wars, with no real visions of optimism or change, just more death and defense contractor profits. As we look around, the Obama/Biden administration is a huge dissapointment to date. But, as always, we hold out hope for a better tomorrow. We hope and pray our leaders will have the courage to utter the blasthemous words of “universal health care” or “cradle to grave health care” or “lifelong learning” or any of the dozens of things we are capable of, that they keep ignoring, caught up in the web of the current corporate-only limited vision of the future. Screw the corporate future. We’ll take democracy for $500. We’ll take the hope behind the curtain.

  1. No trackbacks yet.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: