This maps almost every time I've heard this observation talked about, whether UK or USA. It's fundamentally why the swing voter doesn't really exist. There's a handful out there, but they are...
However, the analysis, published on Wednesday, shows that centre-left parties promising, for example, to be tough on immigration or public spending are unlikely to attract potential voters on the right, and risk alienating existing progressive supporters.
“Voters tend to prefer the original to the copy,” said Tarik Abou-Chadi
This maps almost every time I've heard this observation talked about, whether UK or USA.
It's fundamentally why the swing voter doesn't really exist. There's a handful out there, but they are utterly dwarfed by simply improving turnout from the base. This is the most accessible entry to this rabbithole.
One of my very few political beliefs that can confidently be called firm is my belief that a major driver of toxicity is this exact realization that courting swing voters is dwarfed by playing to...
One of my very few political beliefs that can confidently be called firm is my belief that a major driver of toxicity is this exact realization that courting swing voters is dwarfed by playing to the base who is too lazy to vote. Instead of bland centrism, it promotes showboating and fiery rhetoric.
The solution is trivial, straightforward, and dead-simple. Mandatory voting. You can still spoil your vote (e.g. draw a dick on the ballot or something, so it's not counted), but everyone has to...
The real answer is to eliminate that slack of non-voters, but the solutions there are messy.
The solution is trivial, straightforward, and dead-simple. Mandatory voting. You can still spoil your vote (e.g. draw a dick on the ballot or something, so it's not counted), but everyone has to go to the voting booth and express whatever preferences they have.
And to pre-empt the standard question of "what about people who can't afford to take time off work?": make voting a public holiday. It already should be, in any sane system. And if they can't afford to take time off, they also can't afford the fine.
This is a functioning system in Australia. I'm pretty sure the only reason it's not implemented everywhere is political handwringing like "you can't make everyone vote", or "but that would require public ID cards" (as if US doesn't already have that in the form of social security cards).
I expect you're probably right, but it does bug me that my vote - which was informed by hours of research and consideration - is put on the same level as those who show up and circle the name that...
I expect you're probably right, but it does bug me that my vote - which was informed by hours of research and consideration - is put on the same level as those who show up and circle the name that seems the most familiar or funny sounding. A significant number of people do not have any sense of the issues or parties, and would effectively be voting at random. Of course I would never argue that they shouldn't have the right to vote, but I don't know that forcing them to do so would actually improve the state of governance.
I mean heck, it's what I do during the annual Steam awards. I "have to do it" because they offer the ever-important stickers, so I show up, click some buttons at random, and go on my way. I expect there are a great many people who put a lot of consideration into their votes, for which I am spoiling just by participating.
I don't disagree that holiday is important. Of course, in Amerika, people don't necessarily get paid for mandatory public holidays.... And yea...we couldn't convince Americans to wear masks...
I don't disagree that holiday is important. Of course, in Amerika, people don't necessarily get paid for mandatory public holidays....
And yea...we couldn't convince Americans to wear masks without protesting. Let alone vaccines. Pretty sure mandatory voting would go over as well as a brick floats.
Wouldn't the "base" not turning out to vote be an indicator that their political party has failed them with candidates? Why is it always the "lazy" voters that are the ones that caused the party...
Wouldn't the "base" not turning out to vote be an indicator that their political party has failed them with candidates? Why is it always the "lazy" voters that are the ones that caused the party candidate to lose? You see this with centrist left and the Democrat party more than the Republican side. "Hillary didn't win in what should of been a slam dunk against trump? Must be those pesky lazy voters that just didn't make it out there!"
Maybe what is considered centrist left and what candidates the Democrat party throws at the "base" is just more of the same loser centrist bullshit that gets us nowhere as a country? Hell, Biden only one because he was running against a literal fascist, though I doubt it will be a sure thing this time, sadly.
Yes, that's what I meant by "improving turnout from the base." I mean, in terms of fixing, Ranked Choice voting is probably the least problematic. Other solutions involve purging voter rolls which...
Yes, that's what I meant by "improving turnout from the base."
I mean, in terms of fixing, Ranked Choice voting is probably the least problematic. Other solutions involve purging voter rolls which make the problem worse, not better.
The article assumes that the parties genuinely adopt racist politics as a strategic maneuver for the greater good. I think it's more about centrist parties lacking a political foundation. So when...
The article assumes that the parties genuinely adopt racist politics as a strategic maneuver for the greater good. I think it's more about centrist parties lacking a political foundation. So when sociely moves rightward, they follow the flow, and justifies it with it being some sorta strategy.
This maps almost every time I've heard this observation talked about, whether UK or USA.
It's fundamentally why the swing voter doesn't really exist. There's a handful out there, but they are utterly dwarfed by simply improving turnout from the base. This is the most accessible entry to this rabbithole.
One of my very few political beliefs that can confidently be called firm is my belief that a major driver of toxicity is this exact realization that courting swing voters is dwarfed by playing to the base who is too lazy to vote. Instead of bland centrism, it promotes showboating and fiery rhetoric.
You're not wrong. The real answer is to eliminate that slack of non-voters, but the solutions there are messy.
The solution is trivial, straightforward, and dead-simple. Mandatory voting. You can still spoil your vote (e.g. draw a dick on the ballot or something, so it's not counted), but everyone has to go to the voting booth and express whatever preferences they have.
And to pre-empt the standard question of "what about people who can't afford to take time off work?": make voting a public holiday. It already should be, in any sane system. And if they can't afford to take time off, they also can't afford the fine.
This is a functioning system in Australia. I'm pretty sure the only reason it's not implemented everywhere is political handwringing like "you can't make everyone vote", or "but that would require public ID cards" (as if US doesn't already have that in the form of social security cards).
I expect you're probably right, but it does bug me that my vote - which was informed by hours of research and consideration - is put on the same level as those who show up and circle the name that seems the most familiar or funny sounding. A significant number of people do not have any sense of the issues or parties, and would effectively be voting at random. Of course I would never argue that they shouldn't have the right to vote, but I don't know that forcing them to do so would actually improve the state of governance.
I mean heck, it's what I do during the annual Steam awards. I "have to do it" because they offer the ever-important stickers, so I show up, click some buttons at random, and go on my way. I expect there are a great many people who put a lot of consideration into their votes, for which I am spoiling just by participating.
I don't disagree that holiday is important. Of course, in Amerika, people don't necessarily get paid for mandatory public holidays....
And yea...we couldn't convince Americans to wear masks without protesting. Let alone vaccines. Pretty sure mandatory voting would go over as well as a brick floats.
Wouldn't the "base" not turning out to vote be an indicator that their political party has failed them with candidates? Why is it always the "lazy" voters that are the ones that caused the party candidate to lose? You see this with centrist left and the Democrat party more than the Republican side. "Hillary didn't win in what should of been a slam dunk against trump? Must be those pesky lazy voters that just didn't make it out there!"
Maybe what is considered centrist left and what candidates the Democrat party throws at the "base" is just more of the same loser centrist bullshit that gets us nowhere as a country? Hell, Biden only one because he was running against a literal fascist, though I doubt it will be a sure thing this time, sadly.
Yes, that's what I meant by "improving turnout from the base."
I mean, in terms of fixing, Ranked Choice voting is probably the least problematic. Other solutions involve purging voter rolls which make the problem worse, not better.
The article assumes that the parties genuinely adopt racist politics as a strategic maneuver for the greater good. I think it's more about centrist parties lacking a political foundation. So when sociely moves rightward, they follow the flow, and justifies it with it being some sorta strategy.