I just read Halberstam's The Coldest Winter about the Korean War. Great book that really did a good job of detailing the politics of the time regarding how and why we fought that war the way we did. One of the things that stood out was the 1948 campaign between Dewey and Truman. Harry didn't start campaigning for the presidency until SEPTEMBER of 1948. He got on a train and started the glad handing. Not even 10 weeks of stumping. Makes me wonder why we have campaigns that last 10-12 months now. I also wonder why a candidate hasn't tried the train thing again. Not necessarily for the whole tour but why not give some speeches from the back car? Pull into downtown of smaller cities/towns and give a good speech. Truman was masterful at it and he wasn't even considered a good speaker. But he connected with the small town folks. And the press of the day was negative toward Harry and his speeches. There was one example of Dewey giving a speech in front of 7,000 at Drake University in Iowa. The crowd was kind of quiet and subdued yet the reporter wrote that Dewey slayed them. Truman gave a speech at a farm convention to a considerably larger audience and was cheered throughout the speech. But the writers there downplayed how enthusiastic people were for him. That famous headline is very funny because Truman actually won pretty handily (114 electoral votes and over 2,000,000 votes.)
One big difference is they had no sophisticated polling back then. Everyone saw the newspapers making it look like Dewey would win, so that's what they expected. But they understimated how much FDR had transformed the country into a Democratic country at that point.
Maybe, maybe not on the polling. Granted, it was not like today but check this out: Page 207 "Every knowledgeable political expert had conceded the electionto the heavily favored Tom Dewey,who was considered admirable, if not likeable. Early in the campaign the Republican high command had even decided that it would be a waste of the Party's money to continue polling, because the outcome was such a sure thing. One major pollster, Elmo Roper, announced in early September that he too would stop polling because the election was a foregone conclusion: 'Thomas E. Dewey is almost as good as elected... That being true I can think of nothing duller or more intellectually barren than acting like a sports announcer who feels that he must pretend he is witnessing a neck-and-neck race." Roper was one of the pioneers of polling. I really can't recommend The Coldest Winter enough. There is some fascinating stuff in there about the decisions made regarding China in the late 40's and how the military (specifically MacArthur), the Truman administration (Acheson and others) and the Republicans sparred over Korea.
That is what happens when people discard science in favor of common knowledge and/or prediction markets. Lets face it you are never going to consistently beat out random sampling, the best you can do is trail its results.
There's also the line of thinking that Dewey actually was considerably ahead around August or September. Then, the simplistic polling they were doing stopped. Truman might have actually changed the people's minds, the thinking goes. Another line of thinking was the polling sample was flawed to favor Republicans due to a lot of people still not having phones in some areas.
As I recall from a book I read called "The Glory & the Dream," that the polling they did was by phone. Obviously in 1948, phones were only owned by upper-middle class, which was largely Republican. I read somewhere during the 2004 election, that this was beginning to be a problem because of cell phones. Many people in there 20's and 30's don't have a home phone anymore, and, generally, pollsters can't call cell phones.
I think two major reasons why campaigning has changed is the emergence of 24/7 television press coverage and the internet. The role of television in short circuiting a whistlestop tour cannot be overemphasized. To the extent possible, the candidates have opted for bus tours, but what is really the difference if what you say in Peoria is broadcasy nationwide as soon as an uplink is available? I supect that both parties are going to take a long, hard look at the timeline of the primary process when this election is over.
campaigning starts early because it works. Because it's proven to work, everyone does it. See Mack vs. RC for more info.
I don't think Iowa has a problem with the campaigning beginning about 24 months before the general election. See ethanol.
Another reason that the campaigns go on so much longer now is that the politicians can afford it. They are all very wealthy and they receive so much in the way of donations that they can afford to spend months and months campaigning. Also, it's logistically much easier: the physical infrastructure is much more built up. And its much more comfortable for the candidates: they are eating better, sleeping in five star hotels etc... Back in Harry Truman's day, he had to sleep in a train or in a supporter's house etc... I am already sick of the campaign.
