Neoliberal

This Election is giving me a lot of 2004 vibes for various reasons. Excluding the two Trump elections, it's probably the one closest overall.

There are a lot of reasons for this, and I don't just mean the Swiftboating 'and yes it's true I won it thrice' thing.

First off, just as a whole, the VP options Tim Walz and JD Vance give very similar vibes to Bush and Kerry in a lot of ways and are making a lot of the same arguments. (Some of JD's positions that are super fringe now were a bit less fringe in 2003-2004 and many Republicans then supported them. This was the peak of the family values Anti-Gay Marriage or civil unions period) Tim Walz is a nice white guy, but he isn't exactly a super charismatic. JD Vance is being made fun of for being a weird idiot, even to the degree of a bit of fabrication(Bush wasn't illiterate, JD Vance never fucked a couch).

Second of all the previous election was close and we're in an era of weak incumbents. Some degree of reversal here(Red's won in 2000, blue's in 2020), but due to Biden dropping out the red's actually have the incumbent candidate of sorts,

And also thirdly the Democrats are somewhat on the back foot candidate wise despite being the incumbent party. They're handling it better than 2004, but also had a better starting position so you be the judge. Both times there was a bit of a scramble for the nominee without the best pool or timing. (Al Gore had lost in 2000, running him again had been Plan A, but that wasn't viable. Hillary was a known upcoming blue candidate option, but she had just gotten her senator job and wasn't ready yet. JFK Jr. was also being courted to go after Al Gore when he was ready, but he died in 1999 in a plane crash. And Obama was only just getting into major politics.).

Sure you could also draw comparisons to the 1968 scramble (Where the incumbent dropped out, the obvious successor got murdered at the last minute, and they had to settle for Hubert), but there's also some 2004 vibes. A bit of both actually. Kamala is better known nationally than John Kerry and there wasn't an assassination on that side, but she also wasn't really seen as viable for the position due to being relatively far left and also not being personally super popular (that combination isn't super ideal, you can work one or the other, see Bernie and Biden, but both is harder). But due to timing there wasn't really a better option.

Also in terms of how close the election is and how long it takes to call I'm expecting 2004 margins. 2004 was electorally margin wise closer than 2016 or 2020, and the winner won the popular vote. 2004 was called around 10-11 AM the next day(depending on time zone), compared to 2 AM in 2016, before midnight basically every other year (11 PM for 2012), and 3 or 4 days later in 2020. A lot of pollsters, most of them actually as of late, are saying to expect a closer election than either of the previous two, and that there's a pretty high chance of the Electoral College and Popular Vote agreeing. Still quite a bit higher than the pre-2016 world where it supposed to be like a 1 in 30 event (Now it's 1 in 3 and it was even higher the previous two), but still. If it doesn't come down to a tight race in Pennsylvania or Wisconsin we'll probably know the results early the day after, as a ton of other states changed their mail in counting laws to prevent another 2020. (Although it almost certainly will. The Democrats would have to sweep everything that isn't Georgia and Trump would have to sweep the non-Rust belt and get the Nebraska law passed for those two states to not matter and both outcomes are super unlikely.) If Harris wins she'll probably win the popular vote, and if Trump wins he still very well could mostly because Solid Blue State turnout is almost certainly going to drop off a bit for many reasons, not to mention there isn't a strong Libertarian this time.

Also, while the democrats are the incumbent Party, Trump is moreso the incumbent candidate which comes with advantages and disadvantages(though the fact Covid only broke out during the last 6 months before the election is interesting timing. Trump was there when it started and Democrats love to use that, but more people died after the election than before and more Pandemic time total happened under Biden).

Heck, if you buy the 13 keys, while they do predict a Harris win, this specific combination is extremely volatile. 5 False, 8 True is a rare rare Combo, it's only happened 4 times...including both 1888 and 2000. Whoops. Also as I noted the Incumbency Key really just, does not handle this sort of thing well. Rematches are rare(hey Aldi Stevenson), a rematch between two former presidents one term each (which we almost had) is unheard of. Now we've got the Incumbent Party on one side and an Incumbent Candidate on the other, a knowable party platform and a knowable person platform .If the keys fail, it'll either be because of that unique situation, or because they have a rough track record with minor third parties in tight races (1996 and 1948 had third parties, big enough to flip the key false, but that was required to get it to 5 keys, they weren't already there. Truman was holding his own fine even with that, and Clinton arguably moreso. Meanwhile 1888 and 2000 didn't flip the key, but notably the third party roster those years leaned against the eventual loser, so there's evidence in a close race third parties can sway things even if none of them crack the 5% margins).

There's a lot of elements of prior elections here. Trump is not in office and is running against a middling historic popularity woman who isn't in office, just like in 2016. Trump has a lot of baggage, but also some good times to point at, just like in 2020. A ton of specific elements being argued about, aspects of the line up, and the general rushed and imperfect Democrat pick vibes all fit 2004. And of course, the nominee violence, DNC protests in Chicago, and general issues with last minute changes fits 1968. We shall see.