« Yahoo launches Live! - buggy version of Mogulus | Main | LinkedIn - Missing the obvious »
February 13, 2008
US Primary Politics, Illustrated 
Note- This is a first draft and quick notes; I will edit this document properly as I have time.
----
I decided to make a visual guide to the U.S. Primaries right now, as I constantly find myself explaining this to friends and family who don't keep up with Politics.
The political spectrum should really be a circle (to be exact, a 3d sphere, but lets keep things in 2d!)... Why? On a circle we see an endless array of polarized beliefs on the edges, with a lot of space for common ground and shared viewpoints in the middle.
The United States has a very special political system. The dominance of two parties (a concept despised by the country's "Founding Fathers") has resulted in a narrow spectrum that fosters polarized ideals and divisiveness. With only two choices, the populace is essentially captive to aligning themselves with either group. The two groups tend to find 'hot button' issues such as the abortion debate or public services, and use them as rallying points. The party leaders create and push policy platforms that try to maximize the appeal to the polar ends of the spectrum, while drawing support from some more moderates.
This system fosters what is essentially a 'vicious cycle' as well- when one party gains legislative or executive power, it often enacts policy that is meant to undo the actions of the last party and re-centralize the government to favor their party. In every election, power & policy shift from one extreme to the other. The term "Partisan Politics" refers to fervent and overzealous support of these polarized platform ideals.
Because the United States has this extremely polarized political system, each party can count on a group of voters to always vote 'The Party Line', regardless of Candidate. I've identified those people in this diagram.
Important to note about this diagram is the following:
1) There are small ultra-polarized groups that may jump to independent/small party candidates with more hardline views. We often see 'conservatives' push for a Evangelical candidate (someone who runs on Christian ideals and tries to fuse Church with State), and 'liberals' push for a Socialist candidate.
2) These circles don't represent the registered base of democrats/republicans.. just those people who will always vote on the party lines.
3) There is a huge void in the middle... this is where elections are won & lost. These 'swing' voters are the independents/unaffiliateds, and those who have declared affiliation to one party but may vote with or switch to the other party depending on the candidate.
In this diagram I've plotted each of the candidate's recent appeal ( mid January 2008 - platform, policy, rhetoric, charisma) against voters who always vote the party line. This isn't a mapping of popularity or support - merely a mapping of where on this spectrum the candidates are pulling their appeal from. As we grow closer to election day and narrow the primary candidates into general-election candidates, the chart will change into two large circles.
There are two incredibly important things to note in this diagram in relation to the current frontrunners:
1) Obama and McCain show strong appeal to Independent voters... this is appeal that transcends their party's dedictaed voters
2) Clinton and Huckabee have strong appeal within their party base, but don't necessarily appeal to independents and swings.
This is important because we often hear media pundits - and losing candidates - talking about appealing to the 'Party Base'.
The 'Party Base' is a weird term. There are many competing definitions for it... Some consider the base to the the core population of the Party, others consider it to be the group that consistently identifies with and votes for the Party - regardless of candidate. I am using the latter definition- The 'Party Base' are those Democrats & Republicans who will always vote for their party's candidate, regardless of who runs.
With that in mind, Primary elections are not Federal elections - they're party elections. Since they're party based, the state party delegations/leadership decide if they will be closed (only party members may vote) or open (anyone can vote, but must join the party at the polling place). This varies from state to state.
Appealing to the Party Base is extremely important in closed primaries, because they make up a larger percentage of the eligible voters.. and consequently have greater influence on the nomination process.
In open primaries, the electorate is free to choose which party to vote with... which decreases the importance of the party base, increases the importance of the swing voters, and gives a much better understanding of how the candidates would fare against one another in a General election.
Recent primary results and exit polls have resulted in these notable facts:
• Obama has been gaining ground with the party base which typically went for Clinton, the establishment candidate. Clinton has not been converting the independents or swings.
• McCain has been gaining ground with the party base that typically went for Evangelicals ( Romney, Huckabee ). McCain has ben converting independents and swings.
• According to CNNs 2008-02-12 exit polls
- - Independents have been going for Obama and McCain at significantly higher numbers than Clinton or Huckabee
- - Obama has been wooing more independents than McCain
- - Obama has gotten more Republicans to switch and vote for him, than McCain has convinced Democrats to switch.
What is particularly important to note here is the voter appeal in Obama and McCain
• both are getting their parties behind them
• both are doing stellar with the independents/swing votes
• both are convincing voters to switch sides, when possible/measurable
If you look at the Obama and McCain circles, they're the largest areas for their parties -- despite election results showing their races to be fairly tight. This is because primary voting is often limited to the registered party members / loyalist base. The size of these circles doesn't mean that they are leading their party -- it simply covers their appeal among party and non-party members. The party races are tight, because Obama and McCain both appeal heavily to non-party voters who are more moderate in beliefs, and are fighting for the party support among polarized party members who are more extreme.
Based on voter appeal alone, we can draw these conclusions ( which match with exit polls ):
• Obama vs McCain will be a tight race
• Clinton vs McCain or Obama vs Huckabee will likely have a wide margin on the win
• Clinton vs Huckabee will be a polarizing election, with many dissatisfied independents.
In terms of a Clinton vs Huckabee[/Romney] lineup... this is probably what NYC Mayor Michael Bloomberg has been silently waiting out, and would enter the race to easily capitalize on as being a moderate.
Some notes on primary elections...
• When primaries are 'open', Obama & McCain have a clear advantage.
• The battles right now are for the party base, and convincing them to end decades of heavily partisan politics to search for some middle ground that offers compromise and unity. The party bases are very reluctant to let go (but moving in that direction) - they are used to voting for a polarizing candidate who advocates [often unattainable] ideals and delivers on few promises; they are having trouble voting for attainable and likely-deliverable goals such as those advocated by Obama and McCain.
Posted by Jonathan at February 13, 2008 4:12 AM
Comments
Post a comment
Thanks for signing in, . Now you can comment. (sign out)
(If you haven't left a comment here before, you may need to be approved by the site owner before your comment will appear. Until then, it won't appear on the entry. Thanks for waiting.)