Archive for the ‘national politics’ tag
Its official: New Hampshire voters 20 times as valuable
Via Greg Mankiw. Anyone with a passing understanding of national politics and primaries knows that some states matter more than others, but here comes the first attempt to quantify that lead I’ve come across. Two Brown economists say they’ve estimated the numerical benefit of an Iowa or New Hampshire vote compared to those cast in later primaries, finding up they’re worth up to 20 times other votes.
The paper is located here, and I’m still picking through it. A quick glance indicates that they’re arguing that at least a portion of the marginalization of later voters stems from their likelihood to follow the cues given by early primaries. Later voters base part of their opinion of a candidate on how they perceive others’ opinions.
Most responses so far are looking at this in a negative light. Lawrance Lux points to this disproportion as a source of dysfunctional democracy. Josh Patashnik on The New Republic goes further than the paper and pessimistically ascribes no influence to many states in 2004.
In 2004, at least, given that all the major candidates besides John Kerry dropped out after Super Tuesday, didn’t all the subsequent states have essentially no influence on the process? Shouldn’t the number be a little closer to, you know, infinity?
On the other hand, the argument put forward by a number of New Hampshirites is that the conditions that have existed in New Hampshire allow a small number of educated citizens to question candidates, and are not replicable elsewhere. That’s part of the reason this 2002 paper is interesting me (pdf). In studying the 96 primary in New Hampshire, the authors looked at the impact various forms of candidate contact had on voter opinion.
Our results indicate that candidate contacts are an important influence on primary
voters’ knowledge and attitudes. Meeting the candidates face-to-face, receiving direct
mail, and getting phone calls on behalf of candidates all have systematic effects on
voters’ uncertainty, knowledge, and attitudes about candidates. Voters’ personal
interactions with candidates are most important in reducing their uncertainty about how
to rate candidates.
It’s complicated, and not at all suited to blog interpretation. The sheer number of primaries held on Super Tuesday this year may take away some of the discussion.