Two eminent political scientists: The problem with democracy is voters

[Virginiá]

You must be logged in to read this quote.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

It's a huge article/interview, so that is only a few chunks of what I think are the most revealing ideas.

[Virginiá]

TD / Technocratic Timmy : what do you think of this interview? Do you think some of the ideas from it work with your theories of American political cycles? (I highlighted some of them in my post)

[Technocracy Timmy]

I'm not sure exactly what they're getting at here. It's true that the vast majority of people don't think critically about policy, but they clearly do vote based on feelings and those feelings are derived from their current standing.

Hoover won by 17 points in 1928 only to lose by 17 points in 1932 to Franklin Roosevelt. Roosevelt did run on a balanced budget platform but it wasn't that policy that necessarily propelled him to the presidency but the GOP presiding over the Great Depression. Stagflation and a nasty recession in the Spring of 1980 allowed for Reagan to swoop in.

[Virginiá]

I'm not sure exactly what they're getting at here. It's true that the vast majority of people don't think critically about policy, but they clearly do vote based on feelings and those feelings are derived from their current standing.

Well that is sort of the point. They frequently note that their choices are often associated with who was the incumbent at the time when [whatever] happened that swayed their decision. This isn't the only point they are making, but it's a general idea that whatever book they wrote touches on. People don't think that logically, and the fact that they just associate whatever happens with the incumbent president is a clear example of their failure of logic. Sometimes they are actually correct to associate the current situation with the president, but other times they aren't. It's mostly just luck in that respect.

[Technocracy Timmy]

I'm not sure exactly what they're getting at here. It's true that the vast majority of people don't think critically about policy, but they clearly do vote based on feelings and those feelings are derived from their current standing.

Well that is sort of the point. They frequently note that their choices are often associated with who was the incumbent at the time when [whatever] happened that swayed their decision. This isn't the only point they are making, but it's a general idea that whatever book they wrote touches on. People don't think that logically, and the fact that they just associate whatever happens with the incumbent president is a clear example of their failure of logic. Sometimes they are actually correct to associate the current situation with the president, but other times they aren't. It's mostly just luck in that respect.

Oh I see. Yeah, I do agree with their assessment then. I do believe that incumbent fatigue is also a likely factor to.