[h=3]By ELIZABETH WILLIAMSON and NAFTALI BENDAVID[/h]
Associated PressPresident Barack Obama waves to supporters before speaking at a campaign event Thursday in Cleveland. GOP presidential candidate Mitt Romney talks about the economy at a rally in Ames, Iowa, on Friday.
Both President Barack Obama and Republican challenger Mitt Romney will win the U.S. presidential election Nov. 6, according to the candidates' campaigns.
In a reality-bending tradition, both camps are using early-vote tallies, Electoral College math and voter-turnout projections to construct a victorious narrative for their man. Meanwhile, more than 30 national polls suggest it is going to be a cliffhanger.
This week, the campaign spin in many ways became the campaign, as both sides employed the power of positive thinking to get would-be supporters to the polls. Like most confidence games, they are relying on a delicate calibration of two basic human impulses: Everybody hates a loser, but they might not bother to back a sure-fire winner.
WSJ reporters discuss the issues that are at the forefront of the final two weeks of the campaign: what swing states are in play, the latest poll numbers, the importance of women voters and how the latest economic forecasts might influence the race.
The Romney campaign is working to convince edgy backers and undecided voters that their candidate's inching progress in several polls this month has the makings of a surge. The Obama team says the president is narrowly ahead or tied in almost every swing state, giving him an Electoral College edge.
The president's advisers say early voting in swing states Iowa and Nevada is bending in their direction. The Romney campaign says the president is running behind in some states he led in 2008, such as Colorado, and so it is actually Mr. Romney who is doing better.
Add to that the fact that each campaign says it has a secret set of voter records showing that—surprise!—their candidate is favored by people who only vote once in awhile.
On Tuesday, Obama senior strategist David Axelrod told reporters on a national press call, "We're leading nationally and we're leading in these battleground states," despite the president's continuing struggle to nail down winning margins in any of a dozen hotly contested swing states.
One day later, a swaggering Mitt Romney told voters in deadlocked Iowa that "we are going to win, by the way."
When Election Day comes, Obama senior adviser David Plouffe told reporters this week, "We'll know who's bluffing."
Answer: probably both campaigns for now.
"People want to have the patina of being a winner," said Chris Lehane, a top aide to Democrat Al Gore in his race against George W. Bush in 2000.
When the Zeitgeist turned against Mr. Gore in the final stretch, Mr. Lehane recalls reaching for any poll that might show the Democrat ahead, no matter how dubious. Then he would distribute it as widely as possible.
"We were basically having to point to a variety of what people would dismiss as outlier polls on a daily basis to at least create some dissonance in the narrative that Bush was winning," Mr. Lehane said. While Gore staffers agonized, Mr. Lehane created an air of insouciance on Mr. Gore's campaign plane, playing pranks including tying a stressed-out, sleeping staffer to his own seat, all to show how little they had to worry about.
Meanwhile, the Bush campaign oozed confidence, saying for weeks before the 2000 election that their candidate had the race wrapped up. To highlight his self-assurance, Mr. Bush campaigned in states like California that he had little chance of winning. In the end, Gore closed the gap and the election was a dead heat.
The victory spin cycle has gained speed and intensity in proportion to the news cycle. With 24-hour cable television and Twitter, campaigns claim to be winners many times a day, as opposed to once or twice during the 1980s. It's the exact opposite of what happens before a presidential debate, when each side strives to diminish expectations.
Acting like a winner helps rally those on the fence, as well as campaign staff, volunteers and donors who will not throw themselves into what feels like a losing effort.
"You look to leadership to see if they really believe we really have a shot here, and it's worth working 60-hour weeks and raising more money," said Ed Rollins, national campaign director for President Ronald Reagan in 1984 and a veteran of many campaigns, including Rep. Michele Bachmann's run for the 2012 GOP presidential nomination. "You need the maximum at this point in time."
Edwin Meese, Mr. Reagan's campaign chief of staff in the 1980 race against incumbent President Jimmy Carter, said the Reagan team took a different approach to the perception game in that race.
"Even though there was a feeling of momentum, there was never any let-up in both the energy and focus," Mr. Meese recalled in an interview. "I don't think any of us were even willing to be cautiously confident until the weekend immediately before the election. By that time, our tracking polls showed that things were moving in the right direction."
That approach was in part because Mr. Reagan benefited from voters' sense of him as a big-time underdog: "And that wasn't a perception," Mr. Meese laughed. "Well into October, that was a reality."
Write to Elizabeth Williamson at [email protected] and Naftali Bendavid at [email protected]
Both President Barack Obama and Republican challenger Mitt Romney will win the U.S. presidential election Nov. 6, according to the candidates' campaigns.
In a reality-bending tradition, both camps are using early-vote tallies, Electoral College math and voter-turnout projections to construct a victorious narrative for their man. Meanwhile, more than 30 national polls suggest it is going to be a cliffhanger.
This week, the campaign spin in many ways became the campaign, as both sides employed the power of positive thinking to get would-be supporters to the polls. Like most confidence games, they are relying on a delicate calibration of two basic human impulses: Everybody hates a loser, but they might not bother to back a sure-fire winner.
WSJ reporters discuss the issues that are at the forefront of the final two weeks of the campaign: what swing states are in play, the latest poll numbers, the importance of women voters and how the latest economic forecasts might influence the race.
The Romney campaign is working to convince edgy backers and undecided voters that their candidate's inching progress in several polls this month has the makings of a surge. The Obama team says the president is narrowly ahead or tied in almost every swing state, giving him an Electoral College edge.
The president's advisers say early voting in swing states Iowa and Nevada is bending in their direction. The Romney campaign says the president is running behind in some states he led in 2008, such as Colorado, and so it is actually Mr. Romney who is doing better.
Add to that the fact that each campaign says it has a secret set of voter records showing that—surprise!—their candidate is favored by people who only vote once in awhile.
On Tuesday, Obama senior strategist David Axelrod told reporters on a national press call, "We're leading nationally and we're leading in these battleground states," despite the president's continuing struggle to nail down winning margins in any of a dozen hotly contested swing states.
One day later, a swaggering Mitt Romney told voters in deadlocked Iowa that "we are going to win, by the way."
When Election Day comes, Obama senior adviser David Plouffe told reporters this week, "We'll know who's bluffing."
Answer: probably both campaigns for now.
"People want to have the patina of being a winner," said Chris Lehane, a top aide to Democrat Al Gore in his race against George W. Bush in 2000.
When the Zeitgeist turned against Mr. Gore in the final stretch, Mr. Lehane recalls reaching for any poll that might show the Democrat ahead, no matter how dubious. Then he would distribute it as widely as possible.
"We were basically having to point to a variety of what people would dismiss as outlier polls on a daily basis to at least create some dissonance in the narrative that Bush was winning," Mr. Lehane said. While Gore staffers agonized, Mr. Lehane created an air of insouciance on Mr. Gore's campaign plane, playing pranks including tying a stressed-out, sleeping staffer to his own seat, all to show how little they had to worry about.
Meanwhile, the Bush campaign oozed confidence, saying for weeks before the 2000 election that their candidate had the race wrapped up. To highlight his self-assurance, Mr. Bush campaigned in states like California that he had little chance of winning. In the end, Gore closed the gap and the election was a dead heat.
The victory spin cycle has gained speed and intensity in proportion to the news cycle. With 24-hour cable television and Twitter, campaigns claim to be winners many times a day, as opposed to once or twice during the 1980s. It's the exact opposite of what happens before a presidential debate, when each side strives to diminish expectations.
Acting like a winner helps rally those on the fence, as well as campaign staff, volunteers and donors who will not throw themselves into what feels like a losing effort.
"You look to leadership to see if they really believe we really have a shot here, and it's worth working 60-hour weeks and raising more money," said Ed Rollins, national campaign director for President Ronald Reagan in 1984 and a veteran of many campaigns, including Rep. Michele Bachmann's run for the 2012 GOP presidential nomination. "You need the maximum at this point in time."
Edwin Meese, Mr. Reagan's campaign chief of staff in the 1980 race against incumbent President Jimmy Carter, said the Reagan team took a different approach to the perception game in that race.
"Even though there was a feeling of momentum, there was never any let-up in both the energy and focus," Mr. Meese recalled in an interview. "I don't think any of us were even willing to be cautiously confident until the weekend immediately before the election. By that time, our tracking polls showed that things were moving in the right direction."
That approach was in part because Mr. Reagan benefited from voters' sense of him as a big-time underdog: "And that wasn't a perception," Mr. Meese laughed. "Well into October, that was a reality."
Write to Elizabeth Williamson at [email protected] and Naftali Bendavid at [email protected]