Tag Archives: political science

The U.S. is a Hormonal Teenager

By John Stang

Susan Bodnar at CNN writes about conservative political scientist Charles Murray’s research indicating a gap between wealthy and lower class societies in America.  She compares it to a child like development:

A more inclusive look at the United States might reveal some commonality between beer drinking slouches and latte-sipping, yoga-loving elites who live in accomplishment ghettos. Perhaps this country is undergoing a developmental transition, a kind of socio-cultural adolescence. Teenagers typically manage the onslaught of hormonal and cognitive growth by splitting reality into volatile oppositions, like adults versus kids, up moods versus down moods, or acceptable versus unacceptable ideals of good and bad. They seem chaotic but in between the oppositions kids forge a new adult identity. In our country today, what if the distance between the upper and lower classes is a middle stage from which a more mature and interconnected nation can grow?

Consider what this country has lived through from 1960 – 2010: the assassinations of John F. Kennedy, Martin Luther King, Jr., Robert F. Kennedy; Watergate; birth control, in vitro fertilization, organ transplants, a man on the moon, cell phones, computers and the Internet; wars in Vietnam, the Gulf, Iraq and Afghanistan; September 11; two recessions; the Exxon Valdez, Three-mile Island, and the Gulf oil spill; Columbine, Virginia Tech and the shooting in Tucson, Arizona. They have also enacted civil rights legislation, created opportunity for those with disabilities, accepted changing roles of women and started to comprehend different types of sexuality.  After all these emotionally complex societal events, it makes sense that there are still aspects of our national life that don’t work perfectly. The country hasn’t finished cohering from the messy process of change.

(Credit: Shelby Duchow fro posting this to Facebook)

Leave a Comment

Filed under income inequality

5 Things that Impact Election Races

By John Stang

Luke wrote yesterday about how money can have an impact on the political system, tracing he historical roots of the problem.  With the rise of Super Pacs as a result of the Citizens United Supreme Court decision, the idea of money affecting political races can be seen right before our eyes.  I wanted to point to some factors that can tun opinion very quickly.  None of these are the only reason for changing races, but they can have the most impact:

1. Do as the “Establishment” does:  Every election cycle, regardless of party, there is this boogeyman (sorry, I mean wise pooh-bahs) that hide in the shadows to decide who the nominee of each party is going to be.  At least, that is how the media portrays them.  In reality, its just bunch of rich donors that  are staunch supporters of one party or another, and, here’s the kicker, they organize and vote in primaries.  For the Republicans, this is the Bob Dole/George H.W. Bush types that run the old fashion party of business and are supporting Mitt Romney.  Usually, they support the next guy in line. Newt Gingrich is trying to court the populist side of the party by explaining how he’s been victimized by the “establishment” conspiracy.  For Democrats, the establishment can include old hands in the party, like the late Ted Kennedy or Robert Byrd.  As a college student in the Virginia, I notice that many of the Southern Democrats do vote based on the “establishment.” Ted Kennedy was also a key endorsement for Obama in 2008.  Sometimes the establishment can’t stear an election, aka Christine O’Donnell or Sharon Angle.  I would argue that 85% of the time though, the establishment will have the upper hand in choosing candidates.  After all, they are the party leaders and the most organized.

2. 24 hour news and the blogosphere:  There are 2 ways that I see 24-hour news channels making a difference in a race.  First, the incessant repeating of stories over and over again.  If it’s negative, then that politician will have a deep hole to climb out of because if man hear’s a story in a repetitive fashion, it goes unquestioned; this makes it like a free negative campaign ad for the other politician who is not implicated in the story.  Second, the pure partisanship of a network can make a difference.  Fox News has the power to shape conservative thinking because it takes conservative talk radio and blog information and regurgitates it as news.  MSNBC tries to do the same thing, although liberals do not consume media in such a hierarchical fashion, so it does not work as well.  Although, liberals will often link information from blog to blog, getting the message out very quickly.  Watch sometime how Fox talks about Newt Gingrich versus Mitt Romney, there is clear populist tone.  Now, that is not to say it works all the time.  I would contend that not all conservatives or Republicans watch Fox, but it can spark anger on issues that are critical for Gingrich’s base, like hating the main stream media.

3.  Character Assassination Attempts:  More and more, people are starting to look at a candidates character to decide their presidential quality.  We’ve developed idiotic tests like “who would you rather have a beer with?” or “who do you want answering the phone at 3 am?”  Often, these tests have very little to do with policy debates and look like a TMZ profile.  Swift Boat Veterans for Truth, Bain Capital, and Willie Horton all discuss the integrity of a particular candidate.  While voters might vote on other things.  In the back of their minds, these mundane attacks can seal the deal.

4. When the time is right, will you be ready?:  Timing is everything in politics.  The correct placement of ads, good wording in a speech, or even shaking the right person’s hand all have the chance to change the outcome of a race.  There is a reason that Rick Santorum surged in Iowa at the last minute, he had not been brutally attacked and the Evangelicals swarmed around him.  Newt Gingrich also had a good debate performance in South Carolina close the vote, while Mitt Romney flopped at the wrong time.  The reverse could be true in Florida.  Some attacks are effective or misfires, even if they look good on paper, depending on the mood of the people.  If it comes off at just the right moment, everything can change.

5. Shrewd Calculators:  Remember, voters are not oblivious to the national scene.  They have two choices. Either pick the candidate that matches their values or the one who can win, sometimes it’s all the same package deal.  Gingrich has the momentum and Romney looks like the man to win the general election.  If someone is very active in politics and is an active party member, then like a sports bet, he can chose who has the better chance of winning.  Not everyone votes like this, but consider that primary voters are the more hardcore vote.  Sometimes, that means they vote with their gut, but they also want their party to win too.  Informed voters can be almost as calculating as a political consultant.

 

Leave a Comment

Filed under 2012 Election

‘It’s something about the way he carries himself’

By Luke Brinker

In political science, the median voter theorem holds that politicians whose views are closest to that of the median voter tend to win. Dennis Kucinich would have a hard time getting elected in, say, Alabama’s sixth congressional district, while Allen West would never stand a chance in the Bay Area ninth congressional district of California.

The median voter theorem has its limitations, of course. While candidates perceived as ideologically extreme invariably lose national elections, a presidential candidate whose views are more liberal than the median voter’s will defeat a right-of-center Republican candidate closer to the public’s views if a) the incumbent president is a Republican and b) the economy is performing poorly. Moreover, as Mitt Romney shows, politicians often respond to voter preferences, rather than vice-versa. But perhaps the most glaring limitation to the theorem is that voters often make decisions based on remarkably superficial, inconsequential factors. Today’s New York Times underscores this point.

The Times asked likely Republican voters in Iowa and New Hampshire about their perceptions of the GOP candidates. Here are but a few of the most precious gems:

Andy Schwaegler, a 45-year-old tree farmer from Orford, N.H., is drawn toMitt Romney because the well-coiffed candidate reminds him of his father, a business executive. “It’s something about the way he carries himself,” Mr. Schwaegler said.

Not all voters feel the same way about Romney, it turns out:

“It drives me crazy,” Rose Williams, a retired teacher in Bridgewater, N.H., said of Mr. Romney’s voice. “When he’s on TV or on a commercial, I put it on mute.”

But still others say Romney has what it takes to respond to unforeseen crises:

Harry Spain, 85, who lives in Belmont, N.H., said he was moved by the story of how Mr. Romney and his sons had rescued a family whose boat sank on the state’s Lake Winnipesaukee.

“It tells me he would get done what needs to be done at any moment,” Mr. Spain said.

It’s unclear what this says about Romney would respond to the eurozone debt crisis, but who knows?

Of course, we can’t forget the adorable Jon Huntsman, whose family can always take up employment as models for a J. Crew catalog if his presidential bid fails:

Kimber Harmon, 54, who described herself as a homemaker in Hollis, N.H., favors Mr. Huntsman, a long-married father of seven, explicitly contrasting his personal life with that of Mr. Gingrich. “I’ve been married for 32 years,” she said. “It bothers me.”

Mr. Huntsman’s brood, she said, feels like a natural first family. “You’ve got to think of who you want to see greeting guests at the front door of the White House,” she said.

Alas, it’s unlikely that politicians will stop responding to opponents’ attacks with the patronizing (and utterly false) line, “the American people are smarter than that.”

Leave a Comment

Filed under 2012 Election