Comments for Abstract Politics http://abstractpolitics.com Reviewing the latest research in political science Tue, 06 Jul 2010 22:58:38 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.9.2 hourly 1 Comment on The Declining Talent Pool of Government by Adam Brown http://abstractpolitics.com/2010/05/the-declining-talent-pool-of-government/comment-page-1/#comment-219 Adam Brown Tue, 06 Jul 2010 22:58:38 +0000 http://abstractpolitics.com/?p=218#comment-219 My extension of the logic to U.S. elections is imperfect. But why must there be a singular authority determining talent? (Even if we needed one, the median voter could play that role.) The point is that incumbents know that voters would rather have the devil they know than the devil they don't, and that dynamic allows for some underperformance, defined however you wish. My extension of the logic to U.S. elections is imperfect. But why must there be a singular authority determining talent? (Even if we needed one, the median voter could play that role.) The point is that incumbents know that voters would rather have the devil they know than the devil they don’t, and that dynamic allows for some underperformance, defined however you wish.

]]> Comment on The Declining Talent Pool of Government by guest http://abstractpolitics.com/2010/05/the-declining-talent-pool-of-government/comment-page-1/#comment-218 guest Tue, 06 Jul 2010 20:44:01 +0000 http://abstractpolitics.com/?p=218#comment-218 What about the fact that, in the U.S. scenario at least, the incumbent may have been herself a "benchwarmer"? It seems the British example is more applicable because there is a singler authority determining which cabinet members constitute the "talent" and which potential members constitute the "benchwarmers." How would that be determined in the U.S.? What about the fact that, in the U.S. scenario at least, the incumbent may have been herself a “benchwarmer”? It seems the British example is more applicable because there is a singler authority determining which cabinet members constitute the “talent” and which potential members constitute the “benchwarmers.” How would that be determined in the U.S.?

]]> Comment on Partisan Polarization and Congressional Accountability in House Elections by KMA http://abstractpolitics.com/2010/05/partisan-polarization-and-congressional-accountability-in-house-elections/comment-page-1/#comment-211 KMA Thu, 17 Jun 2010 03:38:16 +0000 http://abstractpolitics.com/?p=228#comment-211 Might the fact that more people are considering themselves "independent" have some bearing on these results? Granted, "independents" function more like weak partisan (according to Keith et al.), but maybe because more people are identifying as "independent" means that they are are likely to hold an individual member of Congress accountable for the overall failures of Congress? Even with polarization, it stands to reason that MCs will at least attempt to win support from some portion of them (especially if one's "advantage" is closer to 62% instead of 70%); candidates hoping to unseat MCs will be mindful of the percentage of voters who are "independent" or "undecided" and will try to win them over in much the same way as current presidential candidates gravitate towards the center. Might the fact that more people are considering themselves “independent” have some bearing on these results? Granted, “independents” function more like weak partisan (according to Keith et al.), but maybe because more people are identifying as “independent” means that they are are likely to hold an individual member of Congress accountable for the overall failures of Congress? Even with polarization, it stands to reason that MCs will at least attempt to win support from some portion of them (especially if one’s “advantage” is closer to 62% instead of 70%); candidates hoping to unseat MCs will be mindful of the percentage of voters who are “independent” or “undecided” and will try to win them over in much the same way as current presidential candidates gravitate towards the center.

]]> Comment on The 2010 State Politics and Policy Conference by A.R.B. http://abstractpolitics.com/2010/06/the-2010-state-politics-and-policy-conference/comment-page-1/#comment-203 A.R.B. Wed, 09 Jun 2010 15:15:04 +0000 http://abstractpolitics.com/?p=236#comment-203 Yes, I remember that coming up. I don't remember anybody measuring corruption other than by looking at indictments, which is sketchy. But it looks like I didn't take many notes during that panel, so I can't say for sure whether there was more to it. Yes, I remember that coming up. I don’t remember anybody measuring corruption other than by looking at indictments, which is sketchy. But it looks like I didn’t take many notes during that panel, so I can’t say for sure whether there was more to it.

]]> Comment on The 2010 State Politics and Policy Conference by Matthew Holden, Jr. http://abstractpolitics.com/2010/06/the-2010-state-politics-and-policy-conference/comment-page-1/#comment-201 Matthew Holden, Jr. Wed, 09 Jun 2010 05:00:35 +0000 http://abstractpolitics.com/?p=236#comment-201 In one of the panels, the term "corruption" came up for discussion. Did any paper analyze "corruption" other than inference from the incidence of indictments? Can contemporary political science improve on Lincoln Steffens? In one of the panels, the term “corruption” came up for discussion. Did any paper analyze “corruption” other than inference from the incidence of indictments? Can contemporary political science improve on Lincoln Steffens?

]]> Comment on Partisan Polarization and Congressional Accountability in House Elections by A.R.B. http://abstractpolitics.com/2010/05/partisan-polarization-and-congressional-accountability-in-house-elections/comment-page-1/#comment-188 A.R.B. Wed, 26 May 2010 15:43:38 +0000 http://abstractpolitics.com/?p=228#comment-188 Good point. I think you're referring to <a href="http://wikisum.com/w/Jacobson:_The_marginals_never_vanished" rel="nofollow">Jacobson's "the marginals never vanished."</a> So maybe margins rose sharply in the 60s and 70s (when polarization was low) without actually changing turnover, and now margins are falling again (with rising polarization), but turnover rates remain unchanged. Good point. I think you’re referring to Jacobson’s “the marginals never vanished.” So maybe margins rose sharply in the 60s and 70s (when polarization was low) without actually changing turnover, and now margins are falling again (with rising polarization), but turnover rates remain unchanged.

]]> Comment on Partisan Polarization and Congressional Accountability in House Elections by Hans http://abstractpolitics.com/2010/05/partisan-polarization-and-congressional-accountability-in-house-elections/comment-page-1/#comment-187 Hans Wed, 26 May 2010 05:24:39 +0000 http://abstractpolitics.com/?p=228#comment-187 Haven't read the article yet, but isn't there a difference between winning an election and percentage of the vote? Isn't what he's finding essential a reversing trend of vanishing marginals? So while certain effects are increasing incumbency advantage, this is a dampening effect? Thus while partisanship has increased the ability of the public to assign blame to the majority party, other increasing incumbency advantage factors have mitigated their effect. Haven’t read the article yet, but isn’t there a difference between winning an election and percentage of the vote? Isn’t what he’s finding essential a reversing trend of vanishing marginals? So while certain effects are increasing incumbency advantage, this is a dampening effect? Thus while partisanship has increased the ability of the public to assign blame to the majority party, other increasing incumbency advantage factors have mitigated their effect.

]]> Comment on Candidate Quality, the Personal Vote, and the Incumbency Advantage in Congress by The Declining Talent Pool of Government – Abstract Politics http://abstractpolitics.com/2008/04/candidate-quality-the-personal-vote-and-the-incumbency-advantage-in-congress/comment-page-1/#comment-178 The Declining Talent Pool of Government – Abstract Politics Thu, 20 May 2010 16:12:50 +0000 http://abstractpolitics.com/?p=8#comment-178 [...] scientists have had lots and lots and lots and lots and lots and lots and lots and lots and lots to say about what might cause the incumbency [...] [...] scientists have had lots and lots and lots and lots and lots and lots and lots and lots and lots to say about what might cause the incumbency [...]

]]> Comment on Using Experiments to Estimate the Effects of Education on Voter Turnout by Matt http://abstractpolitics.com/2010/02/using-experiments-to-estimate-the-effects-of-education-on-voter-turnout/comment-page-1/#comment-135 Matt Wed, 10 Feb 2010 20:16:21 +0000 http://abstractpolitics.com/?p=172#comment-135 Okay, so education causes turnout. Then how do we explain Brody's paradox about turnout not rising since the 1960s even though education levels have risen? Seems all the more paradoxical now. I would guess that education has a sorting effect of sorting people into classes, and it's the higher classes that turn out more. If you can randomly induce one group to get more education and thereby end up in a higher class, then they experience an entirely different set of peer pressures when it comes to turnout than they would experience in a lower class. And those social pressures could be the proximate cause of higher turnout. <a href="http://abstractpolitics.com/2008/05/social-pressure-and-voter-turnout/" rel="nofollow">This article</a> would seem to support that sort of mechanism. Okay, so education causes turnout. Then how do we explain Brody’s paradox about turnout not rising since the 1960s even though education levels have risen? Seems all the more paradoxical now.

I would guess that education has a sorting effect of sorting people into classes, and it’s the higher classes that turn out more. If you can randomly induce one group to get more education and thereby end up in a higher class, then they experience an entirely different set of peer pressures when it comes to turnout than they would experience in a lower class. And those social pressures could be the proximate cause of higher turnout. This article would seem to support that sort of mechanism.

]]> Comment on Partisanship, Political Control, and Economic Assessments by Matt http://abstractpolitics.com/2010/02/partisanship-political-control-and-economic-assessments/comment-page-1/#comment-133 Matt Thu, 04 Feb 2010 15:53:57 +0000 http://abstractpolitics.com/?p=154#comment-133 <blockquote>“For many Americans, there is no rational basis to suppose that one party is better than the other at managing the economy.” If that’s true, is our entire democratic process a farce?</blockquote> Isn't our process a farce either way?

“For many Americans, there is no rational basis to suppose that one party is better than the other at managing the economy.” If that’s true, is our entire democratic process a farce?

Isn’t our process a farce either way?

]]>