This phrase seems to come up alot when I read things like yahoo message board, a very strong anti-washington, anti-incumbent feeling. I don’t necessarily agree with it (I don’t care for the concept of the average joe as some super genius who could fix things in politics, which seems to come up alot) but there is a lot of disappointment in this country.
But that is what people did in 2006, 2008 and 2010. In 2006 and 2008 the GOP was the incumbent party. In 2010 it was the dems. It is just pointless back and forth. Hate the GOP, vote dem. Hate the dems, vote GOP. Hate the GOP, vote dems. repeat.
So what happens in 2012 if people vote anti-incumbent? Will the GOP win the white house and senate, but the democrats win the house? What will that prove or achieve?
Then what happens in 2014, another round of anti-incumbency fever where the dems retake the senate and the GOP retakes the house? This all seems very dysfunctional, and sounds like a kid whose parents split custody but he hates both of them and keeps switching from one to the other.
What happens to all the resentment? Does it get channelled into third parties? Does it get channeled into ideological purity in the 2 parties (this already happened in the GOP, but I’m guessing will happen more in the dems). Does apathy pick up? Do people channel it into non-political movements or political movements not tied to political parties (unions, evangelical movements, progressive movements, etc)? Do people lose interest in national politics and focus on state and local politics instead?
I think a lot of dems who vote in 2008 did so both because they disliked the GOP and liked the dems. A lot of GOPers who voted in 2010 seemed to have voted for the opposite reason (like the GOP, dislike the dems). Now it seems more and more people are disappointed with both. But what happens to the resentment if there are no constructive channels?
Anti-incumbent elections every 2 years seems pointless and dysfunctional. But fundamentally it seems more and more people are just voting ‘against’ something rather than for something. And that can’t keep up forever.
“Vote the bums out” is all just talk, and never really makes it to the ballot box. There’s not really any such thing, historically, as an anti-incumbent election. If the incumbents in one party do unusually poorly one year, it’s because their party is doing poorly, and the other side’s incumbents do well.
2006, 2008 and 2010 weren’t about voting the bums out. Large enthusiasm gaps between the parties are what caused those results. Democrats win when republicans are unhappy and stay home, republicans win when democrats are unhappy and stay home. I predict record low turnouts and a close election in 2012 because neither side is going to be happy.
I suspect that American politics would be a lot different if voting was obligatory. As it is, there’s just so much pandering to those constituencies that can be counted on to come out and vote, which usually means the extremists on any issue.
Is there evidence that voters really do “vote the bums out” in the U.S.? As far as I can see, there are greater advantages to incumbency in the U.S. than there are in comparable democracies, and that incumbents are less likely to be voted out in the U.S. I’d like to see some statistical evidence here.
The only major democracy that I’m familiar with and which has compulsory voting is Australia. I don’t see much evidence of less informed voters choosing to vote on “whose name they like better”: voting is pretty strongly on party lines – mostly based on the preferred party of the voter, and occasionally based on punishing a particular party.
Since WW2 ,90 percent of incumbents won. Last election, 88 percent in the senate, 96 percent in the house. There is no real ,toss the bums out , movement.
What happened in 2008 is that the people woke up. If Obama did nothing elese of value (probably not) he galvanized the sleepy conservatives into action. I belive that what happened was not so much a vote against incumbents, as a vote against policies that conservatives see as destroying our country.
My Rep is strongly conservative, and he won handily, as did other known (or maybe perceived) conservatives did. It was a liability to be viewed as a liberal in 2008, and unless we have gone back to sleep, will be in 2012.
