Ten weeks ago, when Vice President George Bush last visited this city, he was trailing Massachusetts Gov. Michael Dukakis by more than 10 points in the national polls. And it was widely felt that Bush had no semblance of a campaign organization here in California.
When he came back here this time, most national polls put him a step ahead of Dukakis, and he seems to have drawn even in the battle for California.
One person who was not surprised by the improvement in Bush`s fortunes was Martin P. Wattenberg, a political science professor at the University of California`s Irvine campus. Weeks ago, between the two conventions, he put the finishing touches on a paper he presented at the pre-Labor Day convention of the American Political Science Association. In it, he wrote, ”If the recent past is a guide to the future, then George Bush should rally from his summer deficit in the polls to defeat Michael Dukakis.”
He used this historical ”rule”: ”The candidate with the most united party behind him has won every presidential election from 1964 to the present.” The longer and tougher the nomination battle, the harder time that contender has in November.
At first glance, that generalization would not seem to apply to 1988. The Democratic nomination fight was a rather bloodless affair. Still, as Wattenberg noted, there was a real difference in the ways in which Bush and Dukakis secured their nominations.
”Aside from his weak showing in Iowa and tough battle to win New Hampshire,” Wattenberg wrote, ”Bush rode along a smooth trail to the nomination. . . . In contrast, Dukakis didn`t even emerge as the clear front- runner until a month after Super Tuesday. Furthermore, he continued to face opposition from Jesse Jackson throughout the primaries and pre-convention maneuvering.”
Wattenberg argues that in an era of mass-media, mass-participation nomination politics, long primary battles that continue into the convention tend to undermine the nominee`s credibility and approval ratings. That may help explain why Dukakis` support cracked so quickly under Bush`s attacks.
Wattenberg said in an interview that he believes 1988 will follow the historical pattern and Bush will win a reasonably close popular-vote victory- 53 to 47 percent or so. But he concedes that ”the past is not always prologue.”
At the very least, his analysis suggests the difficulty of Dukakis`
challenge, one more reason why he must run a nearly flawless campaign if he is to win. It may also suggest why, if Bush prevails, Dukakis should be spared some of the denunciation which fell on Jimmy Carter in 1980 and Walter Mondale in 1984. The Democrats may have written the script for their own defeat when they indulged in another long battle for the nomination.
