Douglas Hibbs
September 9 2009
The Bread and
Peace Model Applied to the 2008 US Presidential Election
The 2008 Presidential
Election Popular Vote Result: The official final vote count released on January
22 2009 by the Federal Election Commission gives John McCain 59,934,814 votes
out of 129,391,711 votes cast for McCain and Barack Obama. McCain’s 2-party
vote share is therefore 46.3% and Obama’s margin of victory is 7.4
percentage points.
On June 7 2008
I posted the essay “The
Implications of the ‘Bread and Peace’ Model for the 2008 US presidential election outcome.” At the time I
predicted a Republican 2-party vote share centered on 48.2% which
implied that the odds of the Democrats taking the presidency were better than 3
to 1. The June 7 essay was published in the October
2008 issue of Public Choice.
A
shorter, more casual essay discussing the Bread and Peace model’s predictions “Why
Are the Democrats Likely to Win the 2008 US
Presidential Election?” was published in translation to German as an op-ed piece in Welt am Sonntag on August 24 2008; “Das
Brot-und-Frieden-Modell
– Warum Obama gewinnt.”
The preliminary estimates of 2008q3 national income
data released on October 30 2008 by the Bureau of Economic Analysis indicated
that the US economy had weakened so much since the preceding summer that I
updated my June 7 2008 election forecast on October 31 2008. Based on those
preliminary estimates the Bread and Peace model predicted a 2-party vote share
for McCain of 46.25%, implying Obama would win by a margin of 7.5
percentage points. Although the Bread and Peace model is designed to
explain votes for president in terms of just two fundamental political-economic
factors rather than to forecast optimally election outcomes, the October 31
prediction was extremely accurate: “October
31 2008 update of Presidential Vote Forecast.”
On
August 28 2009 I re-estimated the Bread and Peace model including the 2008
election result (N=15 elections, 1952-2008) using the revised disposable
personal income data for 2008 and earlier years released by the Bureau of
Economic Analysis on August 27 2009. The coefficient estimates are nearly
identical to those obtained for earlier samples:

![]()
|
Coefficient estimate: |
α = 46.0
λ = .91 |
β1 = 3.6 |
β2 = -.052 |
|
Adj R2 = .86 |
|
(Std. error|p-value): |
(1.1|.00) (0.05|.00) |
(0.55|.00) |
(0.01|.00) |
Root MSE = 2.19 |
The
graph below shows the strong association of aggregate votes for president to
average per capita real income growth in combination with US military
fatalities suffered in Korea, Vietnam and (the comparatively small number) in
Iraq. Those two fundamental factors explain postwar votes for president
remarkably well. Note that the allegedly “ideological” elections of 1964 (when
Lyndon Johnson trounced Barry Goldwater) and 1980 (when Jimmy Carter was routed
by Ronald Reagan), which anchor the extremities of postwar election outcomes,
are explained perfectly by the Bread and Peace objective fundamentals.

Here are the Stata do and Stata dta
files used to estimate the regression and create the graph shown above. And
here are a pdf of the Stata input program and output results and
an XLS file giving the input data. A pdf of two Bread and
Peace model graphs
is here.
Background
Literature
I
first proposed that an over-the-term weighted-average of per capita real
disposable personal income growth rates was the best way to quantify how the
economy affects aggregate votes for president in my 1982 article in the American Politics Quarterly “President
Reagan’s Mandate From the 1980 Elections: A Shift to the Right?”. The same single-variable set-up was used in
chapter 6 of my 1987 Harvard University Press book The American Political
Economy: Macroeconomics and Electoral Politics.
The
first published write-up of the Bread and Peace model was in my 2000 article in
Public Choice “Bread
and Peace Voting in U.S. Presidential Elections.” Various properties of the model were also discussed
in my 2007 paper “The Economy,
the War in Iraq and the 2004 Presidential Election.” The basic Bread and Peace equation was also used to
generate presidential vote predictions in memos circulated or in web site
documents posted prior to the 1992,
1996,
2000
and 2004
elections.
I
reviewed the broader literature on macroeconomic conditions and voting behavior
in my 2006 essay for the Oxford Handbook
of Political Economy “Voting
and the Macroeconomy.”