Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Political Science 101

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion: Presidential (Through Nov 2009) Donate to DU
 
insanity Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun May-25-08 04:57 PM
Original message
Political Science 101
I'm going to give some people a quick lesson in political science, because some people here do not seem to understand the basic concept that was at the core of Obama's win.

First an example:

When the British Labour party allowed for devolved Scottish Parliament in the late 90s they drew up the electoral rules so they could easily win. You voted for a constituency MSP by name and one regional MSP by party. There were 8 regions and each got 7 MSPs. Then there were 73 constituency MSPs, and a large percentage of them were in urban areas where Labour got a lot of support. The idea was that Labour could at least win a plurality of the seats out of a combination of their urban support in the constituent lists and a decent showing in the urban regions. This system kept the Tories and Liberal Democrats isolated, and the Nationalists a non entity.

There was a flaw though. The ballot listed the regional selection first (by party) and the constituent second (by name, first past the post) to encourage voters to vote Labour twice as the ballots were also ordered alphabetically (knowing that the Conservatives would never win). The Nationalists got this brilliant idea to run, not as The Scottish National Party, but to run as Alex Salmond for First Minister on the regional lists. This not only made many voters think they were casting a vote for First Minister, but to also put the Nationalists ahead of Labour. Combine this little trick with a decline in Labour's poll ratings, and the Nationalists did quite well on the regional lists and fair enough of the constituent lists that they won a one seat victory over Labour.

Now, why did I spend my time to tell you about something as silly as the system of Scottish Elections? Because what the SNP understood was that the rules surrounding elections determine the winner. It does not matter that more people may have voted for a Labour on a national scale, what matters is that the SNP worked within the system to squeak out an electoral win. That is why the First Minister of Scotland is Alex Salmond.

Enter Barrack Obama:
He had to of seen Clinton's strategy of trying to wrap things up with big Super Tuesday wins. So what did he do? He worked the smaller states and more or less allowed Clinton her victories. At the end of the night though, she was no longer inevitable and the campaign he was running was better suited to go further on into the electoral battle in states like Wisconisn.

He was running a campaign to win the most delegates, just like the electoral college, the popular vote didn't matter. Don't like it? Change the rules next time.

Obama proved to me that he understands that the rules that govern elections also determine their results. It is why he is better suited to fight John McCain, because unlike Hillary (who fought hard despite running a terrible campaign because of hubris) Obama can win within the rules of the game.

The overall point is this: rules and elections go hand-in-hand. Obama knew this. Clinton did not.


Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
Wetzelbill Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun May-25-08 04:59 PM
Response to Original message
1. I actually think that was Political Science 210
:)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
insanity Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun May-25-08 05:23 PM
Response to Reply #1
9. Ha
At my university it is actually political science 345 or something like that when you do an indepth study of comparative politics.

Either way the basic assertion is so plainly obvious that anyone with half a brain could have figured it out.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Wetzelbill Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun May-25-08 05:26 PM
Response to Reply #9
11. I lied
I think around here 210 is like the Arizona Constitution or something. I almost took it, but went with some foreign policy stuff instead. More my thing, I mean really, we don't even use quaint things like a "Constitution" in our country anymore. :)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
AllentownJake Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun May-25-08 05:00 PM
Response to Original message
2. Sad thing is
Clinton had the people who wrote the rules on her campaign staff. No excuse for her campaign strategy.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Wetzelbill Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun May-25-08 05:09 PM
Response to Reply #2
6. yeah
She simply thought she'd have it all wrapped up and it wouldn't matter. She made an epic mistake. Iowa hurt, but she recovered well enough. She couldn't ever overcome Obama running 11 straight in February, it was effectively over after that, she's never made any ground back up on him since. She can go and say she has big wins like in West Virginia and Kentucky and those a good points, but he smoked her just as bad and in more states back in February too. Plus he'll win MT and South Dakota to end it. She just couldn't make up for having a bad strategy that got her rolled in February. You can't take hits like that and win.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
AllentownJake Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun May-25-08 05:11 PM
Response to Reply #6
8. The funny thing is
The Clinton staffers were mocking him for campaigning in Iowa in Kansas and not California. They got their just rewards.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Guava Jelly Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun May-25-08 05:01 PM
Response to Original message
3. This was an excellent read
Thank you. :thumbsup: K&R
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
NC_Nurse Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun May-25-08 05:02 PM
Response to Original message
4. She knows it, she's just playing it up hoping "something" will change.
No, I don't think she wants him dead. I DO think she wants something bad to happen to thwart his campaign.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
99th_Monkey Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun May-25-08 05:04 PM
Response to Original message
5. As we've seen, McSame can't seem to follow rules either e.g. election laws.
down with both of these rule-breakers. GObama!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
grantcart Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun May-25-08 05:09 PM
Response to Original message
7. Did you get my term paper yet?
I was on my way to class and then had a flat tire and there was a lost dog I had to get - well anyway I turned into your secretary the next day.

BTW who is more likely to win a general election, somebody who figures out the system and plays it or somebody that just thinks they know everything.

Now if you have roughly 40% of the population voting lets say 'D' and 40% voting rougly lets say 'R' and the other 20% splitting so that there are a number of close elections what can you do to game the election for a landslide win?



http://www.chicagomag.com/Chicago-Magazine/January-1993/Vote-of-Confidence/
Go out and get another 20% 'D' folks that have been sitting on the sidelines

A huge black turnout in November 1992 altered Chicago's electoral landscape-and raised a new political star: a 31-year-old lawyer named Barack Obama.



In the final, climactic buildup to November's general election, with George Bush gaining ground on Bill Clinton in Illinois and the once-unstoppable campaign of senatorial candidate Carol Moseley Braun embroiled in allegations about her mother's Medicare liability, one of the most important local stories managed to go virtually unreported: The number of new voter registrations before the election hit an all-time high. And the majority of those new voters were black. More than 150,000 new African-American voters were added to the city's rolls. In fact, for the first time in Chicago's history-including the heyday of Harold Washington-voter registrations in the 19 predominantly black wards outnumbered those in the city's 19 predominantly white ethnic wards, 676,000 to 526,000.

The election, to some degree, turned on these totals: Braun and Clinton had almost unanimous support among blacks. But just as important, if less obvious, are the implications black votership could have for future city and state elections: For the first time in ten years, more than half a million blacks went to the polls in Chicago. And with gubernatorial and mayoral elections coming up in the next two years, it served notice to every¬one from Jim Edgar to Richard M. Daley that an African-American voting bloc would be a force to be reckoned with in those races.

None of this, of course, was accidental. The most effective minority voter registration drive in memory was the result of careful handiwork by Project Vote!, the local chapter of a not-for-profit national organization. "It was the most efficient campaign I have seen in my 20 years in politics," says Sam Burrell, alderman of the West Side's 29th Ward and a veteran of many registration drives.

At the head of this effort was a little-known 31-year-old African-American lawyer, community organizer, and writer: Barack Obama. The son of a black Kenyan political activist and a white American anthropologist, Obama was born in Hawaii, received a degree in political science and English literature from Columbia University, and, in 1990, became the first black editor of the Harvard Law Review. In 1984, after Columbia but before Harvard, Obama moved to Chicago. "I came because of Harold Washington," he says. "I wanted to do community organizing, and I couldn't think of a better city than one as energized and hopeful as Chicago was then." He went to work for a South Side church-affiliated development group and "was heartened by the enthusiasm." But barely three years later, Washington died, and Obama, convinced he needed additional skills, enrolled at Harvard Law School. The African-American community he left, rent by political divisions and without a clear leader, went into a steep decline. By 1991, when Obama, law degree in hand, returned to Chicago to work on a book about race relations-having turned his back on the Supreme Court clerkship that is almost a given for the law review's top editor-black voter registration and turnout in the city were at their lowest points since record keeping began.


Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Swamp Rat Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun May-25-08 05:25 PM
Response to Original message
10. k&r
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
K Gardner Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun May-25-08 05:28 PM
Response to Original message
12. Can you pare that down into a couple of TPMs? That's how Hillary spoon feds 'em.. fraid they're not
used to whole sentences and concepts.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
insanity Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun May-25-08 05:53 PM
Response to Reply #12
13. Yes:
Knowing how to play the game is the first step to winning it.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Fri May 03rd 2024, 03:35 AM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion: Presidential (Through Nov 2009) Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC