I’m guessing that the people most motivated to watch will be those who already have made up their minds which of the two they are voting for. I have already made up my mind, not to vote for either one of them. And I will not watch. (Note: Peggy Noonan has encountered a lot of people who are undecided. That goes against my experience, but I don’t deny living in a bubble. I remember in previous elections Jonah Goldberg wondering who the heck these undecided voters were. I sympathize with his befuddlement.)
Also, I think that Gary Johnson deserves to be in the debate. The threshold of 15 percent in the polls may have been appropriate when the two major parties were nominating acceptable candidates. However, that is not the case this year. Simply being on the ballot in every state should qualify Johnson to be in the debates in a year when the majority of people have a negative view of both Mr. Trump and Ms. Clinton. I think that the threshold for keeping Johnson out of the debates should be that the polls show that the unfavorability ratings for the other candidates should be less than, say, 40 percent.
While I am on the topic of the election, Tyler Cowen recommends David Brooks. Brooks writes,
We have an emerging global system, with relatively open trade, immigration, multilateral institutions and ethnic diversity. The critics of that system are screaming at full roar. The champions of that system — and Hillary Clinton is naturally one — are off in another world.
There is a strong case to be made for an open world order, and a huge majority coalition to be built in support of it.
In the nearly twenty years since Brooks wrote Bobos in Paradise, coining the expression “bourgeois bohemians,” have the Bobos achieved the status of a “huge majority coalition”? My guess is that Peggy Noonan, based on her conversations with potential voters, would have doubts.
The guardians of the open world order helped encourage a revolution in Syria that became a civil war. The guardians of the open world order were unable to stop this civil war. The guardians of the open world order have yet to convincingly demonstrate that they can cope with the refugee problem created by this civil war.
I am not joining the anti-Bobos here. But I do think that one should not over-estimate the Bobo vote, and where Mrs. Clinton needs help is with people who are not Bobos. If you talk to them about an “open world order,” they are likely to want to know where the “order” part is going to come from.
As a final point, I endorse the view that democracy works best when elections do not matter much. Let us all hope that this election does not matter much, and that the system is robust enough that we can get through the next four years regardless.
The guardians of the open world order helped encourage a revolution in Syria that became a civil war. The guardians of the open world order were unable to stop this civil war. The guardians of the open world order have yet to convincingly demonstrate that they can cope with the refugee problem created by this civil war.
Unfortunately, that was Obama’s best learning experience that Middle East meddling does not work. Quite honestly, the Syria Civil War happens anyways so I find it not correct to blame globalist. And the worst human war happening right now is ‘Our Great, Great Allies’, Saudia Arabia is bombing the Yemen and there is little our govenment wants to do about that.
In terms of the Middle East, the best thing Obama did was sign the Iran nuclear deal. I don’t see a lot anti-war folks loudly applauding the deal.
Having negative views of the other candidate is not the same as both. Having negative views of both is not the same as favoring a third and apparently not.
Neocons too. Outward is not necessarily open.
Trump has slain the old shibboleths, political correctness, immigration openness, neocons, free trade, debt and deficits, to end up conventional.
It’s all about voter turnout. There are Democrats who will vote for Hillary, but don’t like her much. If she looks sick, coughs a lot, loses her balance, or has a “senior moment”, a bunch of her supporters will just stay home.
If Trump wings it like a talk show host, some of his supporters will sit it out as well. They’ll figure that if he doesn’t want the job enough to study up for the debate, why should they vote for him?
Those changes in turnout can decide the election, even if no one is convinced one way or the other by the content of the debate.
“Also, I think that Gary Johnson deserves to be in the debate.”
Well, it would give him a chance to explain his bizarre behavior…
Even if people who have made up their minds are the only ones watching tonight but if anything remotely interesting happens it’ll get played in front of nearly everyone at some point in the next 6 weeks and that will likely sway some of the undecideds.
If something really exceptional happens tonight it will sway even some people who have already made up their minds to either switch or sit out voting altogether.
There is no such thing as an election that does not matter much. Never has been, never will be.
Just as a tiny thought that should dispel such nonsense, there is a chance that as many as four Supreme Court justices could be nominated by the next President.
Either way you want it to go, that is an immense change that will change the course of this nation for generations.
It matters.
“If you talk to them about an “open world order,” they are likely to want to know where the “order” part is going to come from.”
That’s a good line.
Yes, it’s a very good line. I bet, however, that Brooks, Cowen and other elitists know the answer: from a “global government” along the lines of the failed EU (they may even consider EU a pilot project). I don’t trust them (see Arnold’s post on The Trust Variable and in particular apply the last paragraph to politics).
5 Things A Narcissist Will Never Do | Truth Inside Of You