Categories Politics
7 days
30 days
All time
Recent
Popular
I think itās better if you donāt ask āwhy were other parties unable to stake out a position?ā but āhow were the two parties able to claim such broad swaths of the political landscape?ā No easy answers here of course, itās one of the largest questions in political history.
I think the electoral systems, more so first past the post than presidentialism, come into it, but theyāre not the main factor. Most of it comes down to Americaās, all together now, material conditions.
As @cushbomb has been noting a lot recently, Americaās wealth of wide open land which you could keep settling allowed potential labour unrest to be diffused. There was always more to get.
So you donāt end up with a Labour party, and around the time other countries did, America was going through the progressive era, which both parties were flirting with. The Socialists and Communists were repressed, so they couldnāt be the left alternative either.
The Progressive Party probably came the closest of anyone to breaking the GOP-Dem dynamic but honestly if they did they probably would have supplanted one of those parties entirely, just as the Republicans supplanted the Whigs, so it would have just been another 2 party system.
Who has a good paper on why the US has just two parties?
— Matthew Yglesias \U0001f366 (@mattyglesias) November 28, 2020
It\u2019s not first past the post (Canada, UK) or presidentialism (Mexico, Brazil) so what gives?
I think the electoral systems, more so first past the post than presidentialism, come into it, but theyāre not the main factor. Most of it comes down to Americaās, all together now, material conditions.
As @cushbomb has been noting a lot recently, Americaās wealth of wide open land which you could keep settling allowed potential labour unrest to be diffused. There was always more to get.
So you donāt end up with a Labour party, and around the time other countries did, America was going through the progressive era, which both parties were flirting with. The Socialists and Communists were repressed, so they couldnāt be the left alternative either.
The Progressive Party probably came the closest of anyone to breaking the GOP-Dem dynamic but honestly if they did they probably would have supplanted one of those parties entirely, just as the Republicans supplanted the Whigs, so it would have just been another 2 party system.
The only poll that counts is a vote.
Until people can vote for or against what Greenpeace and the UN want, opinion polls are for the birds.
"The survey was conducted by the United Nations Development Program (UNDP), analysts at the University of Oxford, and NGO partners using a new approach: mobile gaming."
Seriously...
"From October 7 to December 4, 2020, advertisements in popular mobile games like Angry Birds and Words With Friends were replaced by the survey in 17 languages. "
That's not how "the people" express their voices, Greenpeace.
Moreover, it's f***ing weird.
"Survey questions were drawn from a game that puts players in the role of politicians who are trying to limit global warming to 1.5 degrees or less through different policy areas. "
It is therefore self-selecting, you cretins.
"The survey results provide an invaluable asset for world leaders who will come together later this year at COP26, the UNās annual climate change conference..."
Imagine that! A mandate manufactured out of a computer game that runs on smartphones.
They are insane.
Until people can vote for or against what Greenpeace and the UN want, opinion polls are for the birds.
Dear Policy Makers,
— Greenpeace (@Greenpeace) January 29, 2021
The people have spoken.
Free yourself of exploitative interests and do your damn job.https://t.co/isCJc6faOq
"The survey was conducted by the United Nations Development Program (UNDP), analysts at the University of Oxford, and NGO partners using a new approach: mobile gaming."
Seriously...
"From October 7 to December 4, 2020, advertisements in popular mobile games like Angry Birds and Words With Friends were replaced by the survey in 17 languages. "
That's not how "the people" express their voices, Greenpeace.
Moreover, it's f***ing weird.
"Survey questions were drawn from a game that puts players in the role of politicians who are trying to limit global warming to 1.5 degrees or less through different policy areas. "
It is therefore self-selecting, you cretins.
"The survey results provide an invaluable asset for world leaders who will come together later this year at COP26, the UNās annual climate change conference..."
Imagine that! A mandate manufactured out of a computer game that runs on smartphones.
They are insane.
I'm kind of surprised I haven't seen an article in @FiveThirtyEight or somewhere similar using the Total Survey Error framework as a tool for categorizing potential sources of survey error and tests for those hypotheses as election results get finalized.
When survey researchers hear about "Shy Trump" voters, we hear it as measurement error, and there's good evidence that it's vanishingly small. But I think the broader public might also be including non-response error as part of how they understand that term
As we unpack the sources of survey error, it's worth keeping our eye on some patterns. For instance, this comparison of survey averages to projected results by @gelliottmorris shows a correlation between 2016 and 2020, but also an intercept shift
Putting out some hypotheses now that can be tested as vote counts get finalized (still not done counting!) and pollsters look back at their own data
1) Everything @davidshor says here about trust and non-response: https://t.co/aXYZMc5QO5
It's tricky to test for, because surveys aren't asking about trust and we don't have great national benchmarks either. That said ...
When survey researchers hear about "Shy Trump" voters, we hear it as measurement error, and there's good evidence that it's vanishingly small. But I think the broader public might also be including non-response error as part of how they understand that term
As we unpack the sources of survey error, it's worth keeping our eye on some patterns. For instance, this comparison of survey averages to projected results by @gelliottmorris shows a correlation between 2016 and 2020, but also an intercept shift
Putting out some hypotheses now that can be tested as vote counts get finalized (still not done counting!) and pollsters look back at their own data
1) Everything @davidshor says here about trust and non-response: https://t.co/aXYZMc5QO5
It's tricky to test for, because surveys aren't asking about trust and we don't have great national benchmarks either. That said ...
