Is voting inherited?

So, is voting behavior inherited? According to three fellow Political Science professors, the answer might — might — be yes…

In the latest issue of the American Political Science Review, James Fowler and Christopher Dawes of the University of California-San Diego and Laura Baker of the University of Southern California, suggest in “Genetic Variation in Political Participation” (download it for free at APSA’s website) that a significant proportion of the variation in voting turnout can be accounted for by genes.

Genetic effects account for around 50% of the variance.  Everything not genetic — whatever they may be — account for the rest.

One thought that we have, considering that only 50% of the variance is explained via genetics: Factor Analysis.

Nota Bene: Today’s Reading Assignment

• Late-Period Limbaugh — Zev Chafets, New York Times
• Bush Can Take Pride in Scorn — Mark Davis, Dallas Morning News
• Why More Jews Won’t Vote Dem This Year — Jennifer Rubin, Jerusalem Post
• What Latinos Want from Their President — Alberto Gonzales, Los Angeles Times
• ’60s Begin to Fade as Liberal Professors Retire — Patricia Cohen, New York Times
• The Three Geographies of This Election — Joel Kotkin and Mark Schill, The Politico
• GOP’s Flawed Attack on Obama — Noam Scheiber, The New Republic
• Attacking McCain’s War Record Not Working — Jay Newton-Small, Time Magazine
• The Return of Thomas Malthus — Robert Kaplan, The Atlantic
• Debating Obama’s ‘Move’ to the Middle — Ed Kilgore, RealClearPolitics
• Area residents seek upgrades from city — Jennifer Friedberg, Houston Chronicle
  
• End of Wes Clark’s VP Campaign — Steve Kornacki, New York Observer
• Dallas Cowboys stadium bonds rise in cost for Arlington — Jeff Mosier, Dallas Morning News
• McCain Not Fundraising for GOP — Aaron Blake, The Hill
• Obama Opposes Gay Marriage Ban — John Wildermuth, San Francisco Chronicle
• Grill Power: Elitist feminism and the New York Times — Heather MacDonald, City Journal
• In Praise of Political Insults — By Joseph Tartakovsky, Wall Street Journal
• Citizen Stupid — Rick Shenkman, Mother Jones
• Guts or a PhD? — The Economist
• The Conservative Welfare State — Peter Ferrara, American Spectator
• Cindy’s fortune: An asset and a liability — Kenneth Vogel, The Politico
• Decades Later, Still Asking: Would I Pull That Switch? — Benedict Carey, New York Times
• Can Barack Buy the Presidency? — Karl Rove, Wall Street Journal
• The Battle for Catholic Voters — Amy Sullivan, Time
• Why I’m Not Patriotic — Matthew Rothschild, The Progressive

Tyranny of the Old: Are senior citizens hurting politics?

An interesting video discussion from the New York TImes.  Reason Magazine Senior Editor Kerry Howley talks with The Cato Institute’s Will Wilkinson about how elderly voters are distorting American politics.  Click the image above to watch.

Nota Bene: Today’s Reading Assignment

• Tyranny of the Old — Will Wilkinson and Kerry Howley, New York Times Video
• Court Will Be Last Bastion of Conservatives — E. J. Dionne, Washington Post
• Obama Faces Netroots Revolt Over FISA — Ari Melber, The Nation
• Hillaryland at War — Gail Sheehy, Vanity Fair
• Do the Math: Obama Won’t Win the South — Thomas Schaller, New York Times
• The GOP’s December Surprise — James K. Galbraith, Mother Jones
• Drill Now as the conservative MoveOn? — Avi Zenilman, The Politco
• Women prefer men with stubble for love, sex and marriage – Roger Dobson, London Daily Telegraph
• Can’t Darwin and God get along? — Vincent Rossmeier, Salon Magazine
• Obama Turns Centrist — Ruth Conniff, The Progressive
• Strange Currencies — Eliza Caney, National Journal
• McCain game plan worries insiders — David Paul Kuhn, The Politico
• Free the Fireworks! Can individual citizens be trusted to celebrate Independence Day with a bang? — Greg Beato, Reason Magazine
• Starbucks to close 600 US stores, rein in growth – Jessica Mintz, Seattle Post-Intelligencer

Gallup’s Congressional generic ballot: Democrats favored to gain House seats in November

There is a new post on Gallup’s website today about the Congressional generic ballot.  Given the shifts in party identification (PID) in the last couple of years toward the Democrats, as well as Bush’s approval level, it’s mildly surprising that it’s “only” an 11-point spread.

It is generally assumed that the spread will close as the election approaches — it usually does.  The spread will also close if the McCain-Obama race remains highly competitive.  The million dollar question is GOP turnout, particularly in light of all of the discussion about Republican enthusiasm.  If GOP turnout manages to narrow the Democrats’ advantage, then the Republicans’ House losses might — might — be relatively small.  However, if Democratic support levels remain anywhere near where they are now, expect a return to pre-1994 Democratic levels in the House and a gain of at least 15-20 seats.  Even if the Democrats advantage is reduced to 5 points or so, it should still guarantee a gain of anywhere between 5-10 seats or so in the House.

While the generic ballot is a good predictor of House seats gained/lost, it’s not perfect.  It is, in fact, a better predictor for mid-term election years than Presidential years.  That being said, it has to be of real concern to both the RNC and NRCC, as well as the McCain campaign.  Self-reported party ID levels, combined with a generally favorable playing field for the Democrats, suggest that the generic ballot numbers might be a good predictor this time around.

In fact, since 1950 (when Gallup first started polling with the Congressional generic ballot question), the Republicans have held an advantage only twice — both times in mid-term elections: 1994 and 2002 — years that saw the GOP win more votes nationally and more House seats than the Democrats.

Feel free to cuss and discuss.  We’ll be doing so this afternoon over some Guinness Extra Stouts…

Memory Hole Candidate: Marxists/Socialists/Communists for Obama Blog…

“Marxists/Socialists/Communists for Obama“…

Perhaps former Weather Underground leader Bill Ayers had more influence than has previously been reported…

From their blog intro:

This group is for self-proclaimed Marxists/Communists/Socialists for the election of Barack Obama to the Presidency. By no means is he a true Marxist, but under Karl Marx’s writings we are to support the party with the best interests of the mobilization of the proletariat. Though the Democratic Socialists of America or the Communist Patty of America may have more Socialistic values, it is pointless to vote for these candidates due to the fact that there is virtually no chance they will be elected on a National level. The members of this group are not Leninists, Stalinists, etc. and do not support or condone the actions of North Korea, China, Cuba or any other self-proclaimed “Marxist States.” They do not in anyway represent the Marxist philosophy nor do they represent Socialism/Communsim. We support Barack Obama because he knows what is best for the people!

Huh?  Whatever.  We’re sure that the Obama campaign will love this little meme: He ain’t a Muslim, he’s a commie sympathizer…

Our advice to these Marxian bloggers: Go sell your Che t-shirt, drink some normal coffee, and take a Political Theory course that can actually explain — in painful detail — that Marxism really does equal Leninism, Stalinism, and Maoism…  Hell, make ‘em read all three volumes of Marx and Engels’ Das Kapital and they’ll likely become Polo-wearing, beer-drinking Finance majors by the end of the Fall Semester.

Pajamas Media Veepstakes Contest

From Pajamas Media.  For those of you who have a problem with it’s political ideology — set it aside. This is an opportunity to win something…

Win an Asus Eee PC mini notebook or an Amazon Kindle from Pajamas Media!

It’s been a long and heated battle to the White House and it’s not over yet! Here’s your chance to make your prediction for who will snag the vice presidential nominations.

If you correctly choose the V.P. nomination for both the Democrats and the Republicans, you will be entered into a grand prize drawing to receive an Asus Eee PC mini notebook; one lucky runner-up will receive an Amazon Kindle. Twenty-five entrants will be chosen randomly to receive a Pajamas Media hat or t-shirt. Contest ends August 1, 2008.

Nota Bene: Today’s Reading Assignment

• Pioneering Chinese City Offers a Peek at Political Ferment — Edward Cody, Washington Post
• Some on Left Target McCain’s War Record — Ben Smith, The Politico
• Dreams From Obama’s Grandmother — Victor Davis Hanson, National Review
• Attacks on Michelle Obama Won’t Work — Ed Kilgore, The New Republic
• Is Carly Fiorina McCain’s VP Answer? — Stuart Rothenberg, Roll Call
• Obama Works to Close Faith Gap — Reid Wilson, RealClearPolitics
• Obama’s Iraq Problem - George Packer, The New Yorker
• The Function of Dysfunction — Nathan Reeson, Chronicle of Higher Education
• Obama’s Boys of Summer — Daniel Flynn, City Journal
• McCain’s Univeralism vs. Obama’s Particularism - Gregory Scoblete, RealClearPolitics
• Democrats, Not Just Obama, Are Weak with Whites - Peter Brown, Wall Street Journal
• A Game Changer Left Unchanged by the Game — Thayer Evans, New York Times
• Hard Times for Student Borrowers — James H. Ewert, In These Times
• Editorial: How The Next President — Whoever It Is — Should Deal With Our China Problem — The New Republic
• What Pawlenty Can’t Do for McCain — Steve Kornacki, New York Observer
• Reputation makes or breaks a cult beer — Tom Feran, Houston Chronicle

Is Mayor White ready for state politics?

Gardner Selby, writing in today’s Austin American-Statesman poses that question…

If the methodologically weak Texas Lyceum Poll is to believed, maybe yes, maybe no.

Three discussion points regarding White and the Governor’s race in 2010:

1. Does Bill White actually have the strong name identification outside of Houston that we, living in Houston, assume that he has?
2. Assuming an Obama victory in 2008, will 2010 — a mid-term election with the Democrats playing defense — really be a good playing field for a Democrat running statewide in Texas?
3. Assuming that Kay Bailey Hutchison is the nominee for Governor, could White defeat her?

While the Texas Lyceum Poll is not the best measure to make an assessment of White’s chances, their numbers nonetheless suggest that he has some name ID work to do before mounting a statewide effort.

Fortunately for White, he can afford to take a wait-and-see approach to his post-Mayor future. 2010 is a long way off.  An Obama win may mean a return trip to D.C.  An Obama loss may strengthen his case for a Gubernatorial run in 2010.  A run by KBH for Governor may mean a run by White for the Senate instead, potentially against a Perry-appointed incumbent (a la Krueger vs. KBH), perhaps Greg Abbott or maybe even The Dew.  This is assuming, of course, that KBH doesn’t do her usual flirting with a run for Governor and then backs away — again. Oh, and did we mention Rick “I’m Running Again” Perry?  If KBH actually pulls the trigger and runs, she would be the prohibitive favorite to win — even against ol’ Slick Rick.

However, as college football has so painfully taught us, correlation does not imply causation — in this case, that the prohibitive favorite does not always equal the actual winner in the 2010 Governor’s race…

Stay tuned!

Nota Bene: Today’s Reading Assignment

• ‘Exceptions’ let some schools fall short on tests and still boost state ratings — Holly Hacker and Katherine Unmuth, Dallas Morning News
• Dallas tougher than Houston on apartments’ owners — Mike Snyder, Houston Chronicle
• Longshots in the veepstakes — Lisa Lerer, The Politico
• Political Freelancers Use Web to Join the Attack — Jim Rutenberg, New York Times
• Dobson vs. Obama — Peter Wehner, Washington Post
• The Waitress Test: Obama’s Challenge With Working-Class Women — Connie Schultz, The Nation
• How Can a “Fellow Black Republican” Oppose Obama? — Larry Elder, Townhall.com
• Microsoft: The meaning of Bill Gates — The Economist
• What onions teach us about oil prices — Jon Birger, Fortune Magazine
• Parenting - So Ready to Send the Kids Off to College — Michael Winerip, New York Times
• Habitat for Houston — Will Holder, Houston Chronicle
• What Will It Take to Save Zimbabwe? — Alexandra Fuller, Vanity Fair
• Hansen Unhinged — Patrick Michaels, National Review
• America’s Economic Outlook: A Symposium — The American Magazine
• Editorial: Obama’s America is Canada – Washington Times
• Editorial: Don’t Give Bush Too Much Credit — Philadelphia Inquirer
• A silver bullet for Obama? — Jeff Jacoby, Boston Globe
• Character judgment — Salena Zito, Pittsburgh Tribune-Review
• Yes, it’s messy, but toppling Mugabe may be the only option — Martin Ivens, The Times of London
• No Babies? - Declining Population in Europe — Russell Shorto, New York Times
• Drug Wars Next Door – Clarence Page, RealClearPolitics
• A New Political Geography — Alec MacGillis, Washington Post
• Our Broken Senate –Norman Ornstein, The American Magazine

Mexicans and Machines: Why it’s time to lay off NAFTA

Thoughts to ponder from Drew Carey at Reason TV. Yes, that Drew Carey.  He’s definitely not your usual Hollywood liberal:

Campaign season is just getting warmed up, but looking back on the primaries we’ve already seen plenty of the usual fare: candidates shaking hands, hanging out at diners, and scaring voters about foreigners who are taking your jobs.

Sometimes the threat comes from China, Japan, or outsourcing to India. Today, it’s NAFTA, the North American Free Trade Agreement—you know, all those Mexicans taking our jobs.

Senator Barack Obama joins the likes of CNN’s Lou Dobbs in decrying NAFTA. So many free trade foes fret about cheap foreign labor, yet they rarely holler about competitors who will work for far less than any foreigner. Politicians don’t pay much attention to it, but—from Terminator to Ice Pirates—Hollywood films have been warning us about humanity’s inevitable war against the machines.

“Now, think about it,” says Reason.tv host Drew Carey. “How are we supposed to compete against something that doesn’t get paid, doesn’t get health insurance, and never goes on breaks?”

Today, we don’t need human workers to book our travel, do our banking, or file our taxes. From factory workers to symphony conductors, countless workers are locked in battle with soulless job stealers known as computers, websites, and robots.

“No job is safe from the robot threat!” warns Carey. Of course, the warning is more than a little tongue-in-cheek. There’s no need to take a sledgehammer to a robot, because, although technology shakes up the labor market, it ends up giving us higher living standards as well as more and better job opportunities.

Like technology, trade gives us more good stuff than bad—yet Americans are likely to cheer technology and fear trade. No doubt TV talkers and White House wannabes will keep stoking our fears of foreigners until voters and viewers stop buying it—or until robots snag their jobs, too.

Related: Why Are These People So Ashamed of NAFTA? The Democratic myths about free trade – Steve Chapman, Reason Magazine 

Nota Bene: Today’s Reading Assignment

• Perry marks milestone as poll shows problems for 2010 — Peggy Fikac, Houston Chronicle
• Why Veeps Now Matter — Michael Barone, RealClearPolitics
• A Tactical Leap of Faith – Michael Gerson, Washington Post
• We All Deserve To Die — Noah Millman, The American Scene
• Winning Sam’s Club Voters — Rich Lowry, National Review
• How Obama can lose — Paul West, Baltimore Sun
• Conservatives warm to McCain’s view of the law — Ben Adler, The Politico
• How Obama can lessen the intensity of the opposition — Jeff Greenfield, Slate Magazine
• Video: Mexicans and Machines — Drew Carey, Reason TV
• Just because a movie is conservative doesn’t make it any good — Sonny Bunch, Doublethink Online
• A Better Way Than Cap and Trade – Bjorn Lomborg, Washington Post
• A Modest Proposal: Teach the Gangbangers Respect — John Nova Lomax, Houstoned Blog, Houston Press
• Texas mayors call better education vital — Mary Flood, Houston Chronicle
• Mommy, I’m Home! – Chris Schonberger, Forbes Magazine
• ‘Wall-E’ Is a Masterpiece for the Ages — David Edelstein’s Movie Blog, New York Magazine
• Obama and the Electoral College Math — Eleanor Clift, Newsweek Magazine
• Pretzel Logic – Howard Kurtz, Washington Post
• Got A Plan for Zimbabwe? I Don’t – Robert Dreyfuss, The Nation
• The Master and Medvedev — Jeffery Tayler, The Atlantic
• The Last Hero of Tiananmen — Philip Pan, The New Republic
• Our Leaders Are Not War Criminals — Stuart Taylor, National Journal
• How Sally Quinn made me a better Catholic — Melinda Henneberger, Slate Magazine
• The Celeb Factor in Politics — Courtney Martin, The American Prospect
• McCain, Obama, & the Catholic Vote – Ryan Anderson, The Weekly Standard
• Extra Crispy at Russo’s New York Coal-Fired Pizzeria — Robb Walsh, Houston Press

Why a lefty will win in November…

A left-hander, that is…

Obama or McCain as a left-handed President would not be all that unique. Several recent Presidents have shared Obama and McCain’s leftward leanings. Since 1974, Presidents Ford, Reagan, George H.W. Bush, and Clinton have all favored their left hands, while President Carter and the current President Bush are righties. 

Here, then, is a little gallery of all Presidential left-handers:

From left to right: James Garfield, Herbert Hoover, Harry Truman, Gerald Ford, Ronald Reagan, George H.W. Bush, and Bill Clinton…

Explaining the wild differences in the polls… maybe.

CQ’s Andrew Satter provides a good discussion about all of the volatility in recently released polls:

If you’ve been watching Presidential preference polls over the past week, you might feel a bit whipsawed.

For the second straight day, Gallup’s daily tracking poll Thursday has John McCain and Barack Obama tied. Both candidates dropped a point from yesterday’s tracking poll, down to 44 percent. The margin of error is +/- 2 percentage points.

The Rasmussen daily tracking poll in the same period of time has shown a 3-7 point gap between the two candidates.

Neither of the daily tracking polls square with two polls from that show Barack Obama holding a stunning double-digit lead. ALos Angeles Times/Bloomberg poll showed Obama with a 12 point lead over McCain, and a Newsweek poll had Obama leading by 15 points, if Ralph Nader and Bob Barr were included in the mix.

Why the difference? Were the Newsweek and L.A. Times biased in favor of Obama? Do the Rasmussen and Gallup pollsters favor McCain? Or maybe the public is wildly changing its views, daily.

All unlikely, says Richard Morin, a senior editor at the Pew Research Center. In an interview with CQ Politics, he said the discrepancy is probably a result of the Newsweek and L.A. Times/Bloomberg polls over-representing Democrats.

“When I look at those results, I know something is going on,” said Morin.

“The first place that I look when I see these discrepancies, I look for the percentage of Republicans, Democrats and Independents in the sample. We know that the best predictor of how someone is going to vote is their party ID.

“Both the L.A. Times/Bloomberg and the Newsweek polls have (too) large percentage of Democrats and a (too) small percentage of Republicans.”

While there are indeed more people who identify themselves as Democrats than Republicans in the country, Morin says the other polls, including Gallup, are more in line with the actual disparity than the Bloomberg or Newsweek polls.

“Interestingly enough,” Morin said, “if you do the math and apply the proper percentages to the L.A. Times/Bloomberg and the Newsweek findings, you find that their results change dramatically.”

In fact, Morin says, if the two polls that show Obama winning by a large margin were to modify their findings using the same percentage of Democrats and Republicans as other polls, Obama’s lead would come down to somewhere between a toss-up and a small, single digit lead for Obama.

The Wild Differences in The Polls, Explained

Morin cautioned that neither organization oversampled Democrats intentionally. It’s a tricky business, getting exactly the right mix that mirrors the entire population.

“Embedded in the operations of polling are subtle differences that result in skews — and they can be either Republican skews or Democratic skews.”

Andrew Romano writes in his Newsweek blog, ‘Stumper:’ “The problem here is that unlike race, age and gender, party ID is fluid–and even extreme swings might reflect actual changes in the mood of the electorate. ‘This is a canard,’ says NEWSWEEK polling maestro Larry Hugick when asked about the McCain memo [which charged that the party ratios were wrong]. ‘Both parties do it. But ID isn’t a fixed property. In fact, it’s associated with the candidates. It’s been proven that as a candidate goes up in the polls, so does his party. Same when a candidate goes down.’”

As the season wears on, there are likely to be plenty of differences among the slew of surveys. Pollsters commonly caution that each poll is “just a snapshot in time.” And the focus has to be just right.

As the season wears on, there are likely to be plenty of differences among the slew of surveys. Pollsters commonly caution that each poll is “just a snapshot in time.” And the focus has to be just right.

Video: Pew Research Center editor Richard Morin explains discrepancies in different presidential polls

Related: Party ID Wars by Mark Blumenthal in National Journal.

Solar Economics: The Sun shines on Texas…

Yet more stuff from McKinsey Consulting today.  This time, it’s on solar power.

The graph above predicts when solar power will reach price parity with fossil-fueled electricity in certain parts of the world. Italy, for example, is just about at parity. According to McKinsey’s estimates, Texas should reach price parity with fossil-fueled electricity within ten years or so (around 2020), assuming, of course, that there is no technological breakthrough between now and then. 

So should we go out and buy some solar panels for our various ol’ homesteads soon? Hell no. Given how our various neighborhood associations have acted when some of us have put up a satellite TV dish, we can only imagine what they’d say about solar panels on the roof…

Hat tips to Andrew Sullivan at The Atlantic and Wick Allison at D Magazine.