The poll result that explains the election

Source: washington post

The poll result that explains the election
by Ezra Klein on September 21, 2012

Washington has been a bit perplexed by President Obama’s small but persistent lead in the polls. His administration would seem to fail the “Are you better off than you were four years ago” text. And presidents who fail that test lose, right?

But perhaps that’s the wrong question. We focus on the question “Are you better off than you were four years ago” because we assume voters aren’t sophisticated enough to vote based on the right question, which is “are you better off than you would have been if the other party’s candidate had won the presidency four years ago?”

The conventional wisdom: Voters don’t do counterfactuals. “It could have been worse” is a losing message. That’s been the Romney campaign’s theory of the case, certainly, and many in the media have bought it. But perhaps we’re not giving voters enough credit.

The new Allstate/National Journal/Heartland Monitor poll tested this directly. First, they asked the standard “are you better off now than you were four years ago?” A plurality said they were not. Then they asked, “are you better off because Obama won in 2008? A plurality said they were. Here’s the graph:



Read more: http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/ezra-klein/wp/2012/09/21/the-poll-result-that-explains-the-election/

---

I can't believe this is the first time I have seen this question asked? it's a good one.