Re:Arrow's Theorem (2014)
by baddox on Friday November 10, 2017 @08:07PM
(#15674411)
Why do you think that people have a hard time choosing which of two parties to vote for? My impression is that the opposite is true, at least in the United States. My impression is that most elections are largely decided by the relative turnout of existing populations of individuals, each of which are firmly committed to one party and simply haven’t decided whether to actually show up and vote.
[ Parent
| on HN ]
Re:Arrow's Theorem (2014)
by wildmusings on Friday November 10, 2017 @08:20PM
(#15674443)
You make a good point, but a good percent of the population is swing voters and they do decide elections, in addition to turnout dynamics. All of the movement that you see in polls is people shifting their opinions, as well as moving from undecided to a particular preference. Some polls account for intention to vote, but others are of all registered voters, and others even all Americans. They see a lot of movement too.
Re:Arrow's Theorem (2014)
by winstonewert on Friday November 10, 2017 @08:28PM
(#15674479)
Actually, apparently there is some reason to think that a lot of poll movement isn't really people shifting their opinion. Instead, people shift in how willing they are to talk to pollsters. On good news day for your candidate, you are much more likely to be willing to talk to a pollster about it.
Re:Arrow's Theorem (2014)
by dragonwriter on Saturday November 11, 2017 @02:27AM
(#15675356)
> You make a good point, but a good percent of the population is swing voters
No, they aren't. Studies have repeatedly shown that US voters have very high party voting consistency, and that those that identify as independents are almost as consistent as those that identify with a party.
Turnout and change in composition of the electorate decides elections, more than anything.