What Can Dollar-Store Candy Teach Us About Voting? A Rational Choice Argument For Casting A Wasted Vote

You’re probably familiar with the idea that voting is ‘irrational’. Your one vote doesn’t matter. Sure, there’s some tiny probability that after you vote, your preferred candidate will end up winning by one vote – and in that scenario your vote truly did matter. But outside of that Hollywood script, your vote probably won’t decide the outcome. So why bother with the whole rigmarole of voting? Worse still, imagine that your preferred candidate isn’t even one of the frontrunners. If you support the Greens or the Libertarians, then your tiny probability of deciding the election just got a whole lot tinier. What I’d like to do here is outline an alternative perspective: even in an electorate of millions, your vote still has a remarkably high probability of affecting the outcome.

Read more

The Poor Tyrant!

Why
do dictators win elections?  The answer to this is relatively
straightforward–they hold fixed elections.  Everyone knows they’re fixed
and everyone knows who will win before the balloting even begins.  If the actual
numerical results aren’t fixed, then the rules regarding who may contest the
elections and who may vote in them certainly are.  Dictatorial regimes
hold elections to demonstrate to the world that, not only are they giving their
citizens a choice in their leadership, but also that their citizens
resoundingly love them and wouldn’t prefer a more representative, and perhaps
less repressive, government.

If all of that is true, then what went wrong in
Zimbabwe?  Discussion comes after the jump.

Read more

Strategic Behavior? It’s all in the Eye of the Beholder

Michael referred me to this Blog Entry, at Statistical Modeling, Causal Inference, and Social Science, that deals with the choices of US political parties. It links the idea of what the optimal behavior in business cycles should be to what the optimal behavior in electoral cycles should be. The blogger argues that it is in … Read more