• TokenBoomer@lemmy.worldOP
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      3
      arrow-down
      12
      ·
      10 months ago

      Our results suggest that voters may struggle to truly hold government coalitions accountable, as objective performance metrics appear to be largely out of the immediate control of political coalitions.

      The science says otherwise.

      • Kethal@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        9
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        10 months ago

        The literal first line of this paper is “Retrospective voting is vital for democracy.” You do not understand what the study examines or concludes.

        • TokenBoomer@lemmy.worldOP
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          3
          arrow-down
          9
          ·
          10 months ago

          Oh, I don’t,

          In the American Political Science Review (the premier journal in political science), Adam Dynes and John Holbein carefully and rigorously measure how parties affect economic, education, crime, family, social, environmental and health outcomes. They find zero difference between Republican and Democratic state governments. Source

          • Kethal@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            10
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            edit-2
            10 months ago

            I’m sorry, I didn’t realize you were going by the interpretation of the prestigious USA Today, a well known science organization, and definitely not a shitty news outlet with a vested interest in misconstruing studies if it will grab the attention of uncritical thinkers who will then arrogantly repeat these stupid ideas on the Internet.

              • Kethal@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                8
                arrow-down
                1
                ·
                edit-2
                10 months ago

                Then I will again refer you to the very first sentence in that study. Wow, your combination of arrogance and lack of understanding is remarkable.

                • TokenBoomer@lemmy.worldOP
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  2
                  arrow-down
                  8
                  ·
                  10 months ago

                  That means, in the authors’ view, that “retrospective voting” can’t really work: If the point of voting is for voters to punish parties for making their lives worse or reward parties for making their lives better, and party control doesn’t affect their near-term lives at all, then that kind of punishment and reward is going to be largely arbitrary, not driven by real changes in well-being. Source: I am that dense

                  • Kethal@lemmy.world
                    link
                    fedilink
                    arrow-up
                    7
                    arrow-down
                    1
                    ·
                    edit-2
                    10 months ago

                    Ah yes Vox, you are truly a scholarly researcher. The fact that you drag these things up like a cat that thinks it’s a lion because it left a dead mice at the door is very entertaining.