Category Archives: Elections

Vote for Me

Politico: Vitter in new ad: ‘I failed my family’

Slow News Day

The Washington Post: How tall is Jeb Bush?

Revealing Quotes

From a Politico story on the U.S. Chamber of Commerce possibly gearing up to oppose politicians with certain pro-market stances in future primary elections:

Chamber spokeswoman Blair Holmes said the group supports “pro-business candidates in every election, regardless of whether they are a Republican, Democrat, incumbent or challenger.”

The distinction between pro-business and pro-market is important; for one example, see here. Never confuse the two.

And as Holmes correctly points out, the divide does not respect party lines. Both parties have largely pro-business leadership. It’s some of their upstart underlings, and much of the public, who are pro-market. Hence the Chamber’s primary threats.

Incumbents in Trouble?

According to a new poll, only 22 percent of respondents intend to vote for their current representative. Nearly 70 percent intend to vote for a challenger.

While this blogger finds the sentiment encouraging, it is likely just bluster. Incumbents will almost certainly continue their usual 90 percent-plus re-election rate. In most cycles, more members retire than are defeated by challengers. The number of retirements is currently in the low 20s, and there will likely be a few more. If the number of incumbent defeats is higher than that, all the better, though it is unlikely.

The Median Voter Theorem Explained

There is a good reason for the time-tested presidential election strategy of candidates taking relatively progressive or conservative positions during the primaries, and then moving to the center for the general election. It’s because the way to win an election is to appeal to the median voter. In a partisan primary, that median voter is relatively ideological. But in a general election, the median voter is centrist.

This is the median voter theorem, and it plays a key role in understanding how politicians behave during election season. It explains why the two parties can be so hard to tell apart — they’re chasing after the same voter. Utah State University economics professor Diana Thomas ably explains the median voter in this short Learn Liberty video (click here if the embed doesn’t work):

CEI Podcast for February 28, 2013: Italy’s Troubling Election Results

Italian-flag
Have a listen here.

The results of Italy’s general election were announced this week, setting markets on edge across the Eurozone. For all intents and purposes, Italy is without a government. There is no clear majority in the parliament’s upper house, and former comedian Beppe Grillo’s populist Five Star Movement captured a quarter of the vote. Warren Brookes Fellow Matthew Melchiorre finds the outcome surprising, as well as troubling.

Politics: The Art of Disappointment

horseshoe-crab
In his annual Year in Review column, humorist Dave Barry explains why electoral politics are inevitably disappointing:

With polls showing a very tight race, the final weeks of the campaign are a textbook example of what this great experiment called ‘American democracy’ is all about: two opposing political parties, each with valid positions, spending hundreds of millions of dollars on comically simplistic radio and TV ads designed by consultants to terrify ill-informed halfwits.

And so long as the median voter’s political acumen continues to rival that of a horseshoe crab, not a thing will change.

GOP Evolving on Immigration

The hardline stance that many Republicans hold on immigration policy has long struck me as immoral, not just economically harmful. High-skilled immigrants are the most entrepreneurial group in America. Low-skilled immigrants not only improve their own lives by coming here, they improve everyone else’s by further refining the division of labor. Economics jargon aside, it is unethical for some people to decide where other, peaceful people may or may not live — and to use force to do so.

Tuesday’s election results are causing many GOP leaders to reconsider their nativist leanings. Just look at these Politico stories from the last 24 hours or so. Their sheer number is surprising, since immigration isn’t a particularly hot issue right now:

  • Haley Barbour urges immigration reform
    “[W]e are in a global battle for capital and labor, and we need to have what is good economic policy for America on immigration because we do need labor. We not only need Ph.Ds in science and technology, we need skilled workers and we need unskilled workers. And we need to have an immigration policy that is good economic policy, and then — and then the politics will take care of itself.”
  • Rick Santorum: GOP must reach Latinos
    “Yeah, I think we did lose a lot of [the] Hispanic vote,” he said. “I think one of the reasons [is], we didn’t talk about all the issues that that community, which, as all immigrant communities are, there are a disproportionate [number who are] middle and lower income who are trying to struggle to rise. We didn’t have a strong message for those folks. And I’m not just talking Hispanics, I’m talking writ large.”
  • Can Marco Rubio save the GOP on immigration?
    Rubio and his advisers are well aware of the risks: He must thread a needle as he tries to portray an open, tolerant party while not incensing the ultraconservative base who want tall fences, closed borders and nothing that looks like amnesty for illegal immigrants.
  • Krauthammer pro-amnesty, not citizenship
    “I think Republicans can change their position, be a lot more open to actual amnesty with enforcement — amnesty, everything short of citizenship — and to make a bold change in their policy.
  • Hannity: I’ve ‘evolved’ on immigration and support a ‘pathway to citizenship’
    “The majority of people here, if some people have criminal records you can send them home, but if people are here, law-abiding, participating for years, their kids are born here, you know, first secure the border, pathway to citizenship, done.”

This is big. I suspect that their motives for opening up are electoral, rather than from economic knowledge or humanitarianism. It could even be that they’ve always been on the tolerant side of things, but thought until now that saying so wouldn’t fly with the median GOP voter. I don’t much care if motives are pure or impure; results are what matters. It may have taken the GOP until Tuesday to learn that threatening mass deportation tends to alienate Hispanic voters, but at least they’re learning. And their new political calculus could result in positive reform.

Immigration is not the only issue where the GOP is evolving in the right direction. Aside from Rick Santorum and a few others (and even he’s coming around on immigration!), the party took great pains to de-emphasize its traditional stances on social issues such as same-sex marriage and drug prohibition. Given how those issues fared in a number of states, this was a wise move.

Going forward, it looks like the GOP will continue to restrain its worst impulses. They’ll become politically irrelevant if they don’t. The rising generation of voters is very tolerant on social issues, regardless of party affiliation. This is unlikely to change as they age. No going back now.

Usually I bemoan the fact in a democracy, voters get what they want. But on immigration and many social issues, this is turning out to be a good thing. At the very least, Republicans are becoming a little less noxious than they used to be. They’re certainly becoming a little less embarrassing.

CEI Podcast for November 8, 2012: Election Wrap-Up


Have a listen here.

President Obama has won a second term, and neither the House nor the Senate will change hands. Land-use and Transportation Policy Analyst Marc Scribner explains why the election turned out the way it did, and what the results mean going forward for a variety of issue areas.

Obama Wins: One Positive, One Negative

One positive: Romney Derangement Syndrome will disappear shortly, if it hasn’t already.

One negative: four more years of Obama Derangement Syndrome.