Barbara McQuade, an actual law professor and former US attorney, argues that what the testimonies from the impeachment hearings add up to bribery.
Still not sure if I really get how it works (there is always the original Gelman piece), but here is a useful primer to “Mr P” and its application to the upcoming General election in the UK
In Germany, a soldier who planned a (false flag) far-right terror attack is to stand trial. Just as scary as his plan is that the magistrate court wanted to dismiss his case. Thankfully, the federal prosecutor appealed to the high court, which ordered their colleagues further down the food chain to begin proceedings. This is very scary, and woefully under-reported.
Why do some political actors spout obvious lies? There is a Rand paper on Russian propaganda which claims that this is a deliberate strategy. And this article in the Guardian applies the idea to anti-vaxxers. Fun fact/bonus track: this is what I see in position 0 (i.e. before any hits) when I type “he spouts lies” into Google.
Unsurprisingly, I provided too much detail, so my comments disappeared from the published piece. Since it is Friday afternoon and all the stuff is on file anyway, for your edification, here’s our virtual conversation:
Would you characterize the Sweden Democrats as a radical right party? How similar are they to other radical right parties in Europe? What is different about them?
Yes, I the Sweden Democrats fit well into the family of Radical Right parties that have emerged in most West European countries since the 1980s. The most unusual thing about the SD is perhaps that they started out as a pretty militant group, with uniforms reminiscent of the 1930s. Many modern European Radical Right parties have carefully avoided this association from the start.
It seems to me that the Sweden Democrats have done a lot of “soften” their image, with their flowery logo and the party leader’s choice of clothes. Is this something you would agree with? Is this something other radical right parties have adopted?
That’s correct. The new-ish leadership has banned the uniforms, purged the ranks of Neo Nazis, and replaced the fierce Viking warrior of their original logo with a flower. Their relatively moderate appeal is very much in line with other Radical Right parties.
How important is this election in Sweden in determining the future of the European Union?
For the time being, no other party will form a coalition with the SD, so their likely success will have no direct short-term impact on the EU. However, having a strong Radical Right party in the Swedish parliament will make it more difficult to form a stable government and will likely lead to Swedish mainstream parties adopting more nationalist and restrictive positions.
Do you think the Sweden Democrats are further evidence of a rising tide of nationalism across Europe? What is behind this rise? Immigration? Neo-liberal economic policies? Economic hardships? Changes in society?
Radical Right Parties that poll between 10 and 25 per cent are now a fact of political life in most West European countries, and in all likelihood, these parties will also do well in the 2019 EP elections, where the barriers to entry are particularly low. One important but often overlooked factor behind this rise is dealignment, i.e. the slow but steady decline of the long standing ties between large social groups such as workers, farmers, or religious groups on the one hand and traditional parties on the other. Through dealignment, voters have become available for new parties including, but not limited to, the Radical Right.
One second important point to note is that the Radical Right vote is driven by perceptions of migration as an economic and cultural threat. While these perceptions are by no means confined to the Radical Right’s electorate, they seem to constitute a necessary pre-condition for Radical Right support: unless someone is seriously worried about immigration, it is highly unlikely that they would ever vote for the Radical Right. Third, economic decline plays a role, but many Radical Right voters are relatively well of themselves. What worries them is a feeling that their native compatriots get less than they deserve, that the country is going into a negative direction because of immigration, and the (often irrational) fear that immigration might hurt their own economic prospects in the future. It is also worth noting that the Radical Right is particularly strong in the rich and stable countries of Scandinavia and in Austria and Switzerland, whereas it is surprisingly weak in crisis-hit Greece and nonexistent in Spain and Portugal.
Here’s a question unrelated to Sweden … How significant of a role do you think Steve Bannon can play in Europe?
Bannon plays no role whatsoever. Populist Radical Right Parties have thrived in Europe since the 1980s. International co-operation amongst them has proven difficult time and again because of their inherently nationalist agendas, but they were quite good at learning from each other and swapping ideas long before Bannon began his European tour. In my view, Bannon hugely overplays his influence in Europe, and American media sometimes fall for his spiel.
Elections in Europe: great expectations.
2017 was a year of high-profile national elections in Europe, in which the Radical Right was expected to do particularly well. Balanced and neutral as ever, the Express claimed that the votes in France, Germany, and the Netherlands could DESTROY the EU. The Independent also flagged up the Dutch, German, and French elections, but added the Italian referendum, the Austrian presidential elections (both actually in 2016), and the British local elections, which, in hindsight, seems particularly quaint. Most observers missed the much more problematic Austrian parliamentary elections, and no one (arguably including the PM) expected Britain to go the polls, again.
SCoRE election data from four European countries
For better or worse, the individual-level data collection for our project on sub-national context and radical right support in Europe (SCoRE) was scheduled for 2017 anyway. In SCoRE, we try to bring together particularly fine-grained official data on living conditions (including immigration, unemployment, local economic growth, and access to basic services) with survey data on right-wing attitudes and other attitudinal and behaviour variables that are geo-referenced. In other words: we can see how the way people think is linked to where they live, and what it is like there. And with the British PM’s decision to have a snap election, we became an election study on the side.
All politics is local: a close look at regional patterns of radical right voting in France, Germany, the Netherlands, and the UK
What sets SCoRE apart from other projects is its focus on regional and even local patterns of voting. To showcase this, my colleagues have produced a series of reports on the elections in Europe from this particular angle.
Will Allchorn and Jocelyn Evans (University of Leeds) study the switch from UKIP to the Conservatives in the 2017 election. One of their most interesting findings (I think) is that “the switchers are more strongly anti-European suggesting a tactical preference for a governing party able to deliver Brexit.
Eelco Harteveld and Sarah de Lange show that support for the Dutch Radical Right is not strongly correlated with a rural-urban divide. The PVV thrives in areas that are economically deprived and suffer from demographic stagnation, independent of urbanisation.
In Germany, the AfD is very much an eastern party. However, Carl Berning demonstrates that in the 2017 election, the
AfD did also well in the south-western states. A (perceived) sense of local decline seems to be a major factor.
Finally, a strong rural/urban divide sets in radical right voting is characteristic for France. Gilles Ivaldi and Jocelyn Evans show that support for the Front National was broken up into two distinct clusters, one in the northern rust belt, the other in the south.
Introduction (Kai Arzheimer, Jocelyn Evans and Michael S. Lewis-Beck)
PART I INSTITUTIONAL APPROACHES
Institutions and Voter Choice: Who Chooses, What Do They Choose Over, and How Do They Choose (Shaun Bowler)
Party Systems and Voter Alignments (Åsa von Schoultz (née Bengtsson))
The Study of Less Important Elections (Hermann Schmitt and Eftichia Teperoglou)
Clarity of Responsibility and Vote Choice (Thiago Silva and Guy D. Whitten)
Voting in New(er) Democracies (Lenka Bustikova and Elizabeth Zechmeister)
PART II SOCIOLOGICAL APPROACHES
Age and Voting (Ruth Dassonneville)
Gender and Voting (Rosie Campbell)
Social Class and Voting (Geoffrey Evans)
Religion (Martin Elff and Sigrid Roßteutscher)
Race, Ethnicity and Elections: From Recognizable Patterns to Generalized Theories (Maria Sobolewska)
Social Networks and Voter Mobilization (Marc Hooghe)
PART III PARTISANSHIP
The Evolving Role of Partisanship (Elias Dinas)
Party Identification: Meaning and Measurement (Donald P. Green and Susanne Baltes)
Cognitive Mobilization (Todd Donovan)
PART IV VOTER DECISION-MAKING
Strategic Voting (Thomas Gschwend and Michael F. Meffert)
Integrating Genetics into the Study of Electoral Behavior (Carisa L. Bergner and Peter K. Hatemi)
Emotions and Voting (David P. Redlawsk and Douglas R. Pierce)
Referendums (Alan Renwick)
Turnout (Hanna Wass and André Blais)
PART V ISSUES AND ATTITUDES
Ideology and Core Values (Robert N. Lupton, Adam M. Enders, and William G. Jacoby)
Issue Ownership: An Ambiguous Concept (Wouter van der Brug)
Valence (Jane Green and Will Jennings)
Value Cleavages (Romain Lachat)
The Economic Vote: Ordinary vs.Extraordinary Times (Michael S. Lewis-Beck and Marina Costa Lobo)
The VP-Function: A Review (Mary Stegmaier, Michael S. Lewis-Beck and Beomseob Park)
PART VI CANDIDATES AND CAMPAIGNS
Voter Evaluation of Candidates and Party Leaders (Diego Garzia)
Candidate Location and Vote Choice (Jocelyn Evans)
The Personal Vote (Thomas Zittel)
Candidate Attractiveness (Markus Klein and Ulrich Rosar)
Campaign Effects (Richard Johnston)
Economic Voting in a New Media Environment:Preliminary Evidence and Implications (Diana C. Mutz and Eunji Kim)
Campaign Spending (Zachary Albert and Raymond La Raja)
PART VII POLLING AND FORECASTING
Polls and Votes (Robert Ford, Christopher Wlezien, Mark Pickup and Will Jennings)
Econometric Approaches to Forecasting (Éric Bélanger and David Trotter)
Wisdom of Crowds (Andreas Murr)
Political Markets (Andreas Graefe)
Social Media and Elections: A Meta-analysis of Online-based Electoral Forecasts (Andrea Ceron, Luigi Curini and Stefano M. Iacus)
PART VIII Candidates and Campaigns
Experiments (Robert Johns)
Multi-level Modelling of Voting Behaviour (Marcel Lubbers and Take Sipma)
Cross-national Data Sources: Opportunities and Challenges (Catherine de Vries)
Conclusion (Marianne Stewart)
If you are still reading, you will have noticed that we got away with not having devoted a chapter (exclusively) to Rational Choice
by James E. Campbell, Guest Columnist Sabato’s Crystal Ball, University of Virginia Center for Politics With the dust settling from one of the most brutal and nasty presidential campaigns in …
By and large, and in neat contrast to the current fad for self-flagellation, the augurs of the discipline have done well. Eight of the ten predictions that were published in PS got the winner of the popular vote right. Not that it would make a difference. Somewhat ironically, Norpoth’s Primary Model that I had (incorrectly) credited on that gloomy Wednesday morning with predicting a Trump victory performed worst. But in fairness to HN, his model has by far the longest lead.