Nate Silver's work over at 538 on the NY Times showed what candidates are talking about for the mid terms.
I was struck at the discrepancy on Education (72 vs 31 percent for Dem vs Rep), Environment (17 vs 7), and immigration (28 vs 59).
Clearly part of the difference is strategy. Some issues from some parties are the bread and butter of the base (Education), while others are current issues (immigration), and others only get attention in some cases (Environment).
What has been surprising on a purely political level is the size of government issue which the republicans have glommed onto (0 vs 28 percent). How can anyone justify lower government size in the face of exponentially increasing population? As a result of the increased population, we are exposed to increased geophysical risks which can amount to large financial disaster. We are also exposed to increased risk due to crumbling infrastructure (electricity grid, mass transit, etc.) This contrasts the fact that politicians are complaining about deficits and spending. Last time I checked even a small government can spend un-wisely.
No comments:
Post a Comment