How could Bush win the 2000 presidential election?

[Sumner 1868]

I think it's quite clear why he won, going by statistics collected in Erika Shaker's book "Great Expectations" comparing American attitudes between 1992 and 2000. The results are...unpleasant. Here's a sampler:

-In 1992, 16% of Americans believed non-whites should not be allowed to immigrate. By 2000, it was 25%

-34% of Americans believed a widely advertised product was probably good in 1992. In 2000, it was 45%.

-In 1992, 66% of Americans discussed local issues with other people. That number was 34% in 2000.

-36% of Americans believed that men should be heads of their household in 1992. In 2000, that number was 49%.

-The number of Americans who believed that violence is a normal part of life rose from 9% in 1992 to 31% in 2000.

-The number who believed that violence is an acceptable way to meet your goals rose from 14% in 1992 to 26% in 2000.

-In 1992, 72% of Americans considered defending the environment a priority. In 2000, 57% did.

-American's time spent watching television increased from 35% to 40% between 1992 and 2000.

-65% of Americans considered materialism a threat to society in 1992. In 2000, that number was 48%.

- In 2000 34% of Americans said they enjoyed showing foreigners that they're smarter and stronger, up from 27% in 1992.

I could go on, but you get the point. Something about the Clinton presidency caused a shift from relatively progressive attitudes toward reactionary conservatism and shallowness. This is why Bush was elected.

[Sumner 1868]

Dubya came across as the change agent and Gore came across as a conventional politician. And the Lieberman pick didnt do him any favors. Had Bob Graham, been picked, maybe it would have been overlooked, and squeaked out a narrow victory.

Sure, but it seems a disturbing psychological shift during the Clinton era also helped Bush, as I observe above.

[Sumner 1868]

I think it's quite clear why he won, going by statistics collected in Erika Shaker's book "Great Expectations" comparing American attitudes between 1992 and 2000. The results are...unpleasant. Here's a sampler:

-In 1992, 16% of Americans believed non-whites should not be allowed to immigrate. By 2000, it was 25%

-34% of Americans believed a widely advertised product was probably good in 1992. In 2000, it was 45%.

-In 1992, 66% of Americans discussed local issues with other people. That number was 34% in 2000.

-36% of Americans believed that men should be heads of their household in 1992. In 2000, that number was 49%.

-The number of Americans who believed that violence is a normal part of life rose from 9% in 1992 to 31% in 2000.

-The number who believed that violence is an acceptable way to meet your goals rose from 14% in 1992 to 26% in 2000.

-In 1992, 72% of Americans considered defending the environment a priority. In 2000, 57% did.

-American's time spent watching television increased from 35% to 40% between 1992 and 2000.

-65% of Americans considered materialism a threat to society in 1992. In 2000, that number was 48%.

- In 2000 34% of Americans said they enjoyed showing foreigners that they're smarter and stronger, up from 27% in 1992.

I could go on, but you get the point. Something about the Clinton presidency caused a shift from relatively progressive attitudes toward reactionary conservatism and shallowness. This is why Bush was elected.

Uh, how have I not seen this before? What is this attributed to?

No theories were given in the book, the data was in a chapter on global attitudes.