The Second Pandemic Election

The takesabout this election, hot and otherwise, are already coming fast and furious and I expect they will continue with tedious regularity for some time to come. I’m guilty of it myself jabbering away on podcasts and radio shows yesterday on no sleep and too much adrenaline. I’ll share some of those thoughts here as I get my head straight over the next little while.

But I have been reading a lot of instant reaction pieces and I must say that more than anything I persuaded by the anti-incumbency analysis which I posted about yesterday. Here’s another argument laying that out from Derek Thompson in the Atlantic:

A better, more comprehensive way to explain the outcome is to conceptualize 2024 as the second pandemic election. Trump’s victory is a reverberation of trends set in motion in 2020. In politics, as in nature, the largest tsunami generated by an earthquake is often not the first wave but the next one.

The pandemic was a health emergency, followed by an economic emergency. Both trends were global. But only the former was widely seen as international and directly caused by the pandemic. Although Americans understood that millions of people were dying in Europe and Asia and South America, they did not have an equally clear sense that supply-chain disruptions, combined with an increase in spending, sent prices surging around the world. As I reported earlier this year, inflation at its peak exceeded 6 percent in France, 7 percent in Canada, 8 percent in Germany, 9 percent in the United Kingdom, 10 percent in Italy, and 20 percent in Argentina, Turkey, and Ethiopia.

Inflation proved as contagious as a coronavirus. Many voters didn’t directly blame their leaders for a biological nemesis that seemed like an act of god, but they did blame their leaders for an economic nemesis that seemed all too human in its origin. And the global rise in prices has created a nightmare for incumbent parties around the world. The ruling parties of several major countries, including the U.K., Germany, and South Africa, suffered historic defeats this year. Even strongmen, such as Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi, lost ground in an election that many experts assumed would be a rousing coronation.

This has been a year of global anti-incumbency within a century of American anti-incumbency. Since 2000, every midterm and presidential election has seen a change in control of the House, Senate, or White House except for 2004 (when George W. Bush eked out a win) and 2012 (when Barack Obama won reelection while Republicans held the House). The U.S. appears to be in an age of unusually close elections that swing back and forth, in which every sitting president spends the majority of his term with an underwater approval rating.

There will be a rush to blame Kamala Harris—the candidate, her campaign, and her messaging. But there is no escaping the circumstances that Harris herself could never outrun. She is the vice president of a profoundly unpopular president, whose approval was laid low by the same factors—such as inflation and anti-incumbency bias—that have waylaid ruling parties everywhere. An analysis by the political scientist John Sides predicted that a sitting president with Biden’s approval rating should be expected to win no more than 48 percent of the two-party vote. As of Wednesday afternoon, Kamala Harris is currently projected to win about 47.5 percent of the popular vote. Her result does not scream underperformance. In context, it seems more like a normal performance.

[…]

If there is cold comfort for Democrats, it is this: We are in an age of politics when every victory is Pyrrhic, because to gain office is to become the very thing—the establishment, the incumbent—that a part of your citizenry will inevitably want to replace. Democrats have been temporarily banished to the wilderness by a counterrevolution, but if the trends of the 21st century hold, then the very anti-incumbent mechanisms that brought them defeat this year will eventually bring them back to power.

This election is so inexplicable to me that the idea of a national trauma driving people to vote irrationally makes some sense to me. There’s something bigger behind this than normal politics and the fact that it’s a global phenomenon lends credence to this idea.

That’s not to say we don’t have agency. But it does mean that might be able to more clearly analyze the situation and plan accordingly. The sad part is that the out party in our case is led by a pathological narcissistic imbecile so the risk of letting the other side take over is enormous. But that’s where we are and it would probably be good to study this phenomenon to see how we might mitigate that risk and plan for the future.

Update —

A thread by politics professor Rob Ford with some back-up data:

Decided to go through this systematically. Incumbent government performance in wealthy democracies since March 2022, when Ukraine invasion really spiked things upwards:

South Korea President (March 22) – incumbent term limited, incumbent party lost
Malta (March 22) – incumbent Labour party re-elected, gains seats
Hungary (April 22) – incumbent Orban govt re-elected with larger majority
Serbia (April 22) – incumbent Pres re-elected but loses Parliamentary majority 

France (April/June 22) – incumbent Pres re-elected with reduced share, loses majority in Nat Assembly
Slovenia (Apr 22) – incumbent govt defeated
Australia (May 22) – incumbent right wing govt defeated
Sweden (Sept 22) – incumbent left wing govt defeated 

Italy (Sept 22) – far right coalition led by Meloni sweeps aside previous governing parties LN and M5S
Bulgaria (Oct 22) – largest party in governing coalition falls sharply, change of govt
Denmark (Nov 22) – centre-left govt re-elected, PM party gains seats 

Israel (Nov 22) – messy result, but sees incumbent PM replaced and Netanyahu return
Estonia (Mar 23) – messy result, party which topped poll previous time falls, party of PM Kallas (who took over mid term) gains
Bulgaria (Apr 23) – messy, far right and populists make most gains 

Finland (Apr 23) – centre-left govt coalition defeated, right and radical right opposition parties make strong gains
Greece (May/June 23) – centre-right govt re-elected
Spain (July 23) – centre-left govt clings on despite big gains for centre-right oppo, rad rt falls sharply 

Slovakia (Sep 23) – incumbent govt defeated by populist opposition
New Zealand (Oct 23) – centre-left incumbent defeated by centre-right opposition
Poland (Oct 23) – rad rt incumbent defeated by centre-right opposition 

Switzerland (Oct 23) – rad rt gain seats, greens and liberals lose seats
Netherlands (Nov 23) – governing coalition parties fall sharply, rad rt tops the poll
Portugal (Mar 24) – centre left govt defeated by centre right oppo 

Croatia (Apr 24) – incumbent coalition re-elected, greens gain most seats
European Parliament (Jun 24) – Greens, Liberals and centre left lost ground, radicals of left and right gain ground
Belgium (June 24) – PM’s party loses most of its seats. Belgian govts are messy 

France (June/July 24) – incumbent President’s party gets a pasting, far right and far left make gains
UK (July 24) – incumbent centre-right govt wiped out in a landslide, but with big vote gains for Greens, rad rt and rad left independents 

Austria (Sep 24) – big losses for gov coalition of centre-right and greens, big gains for rad rt
Lithuania (Oct 24) – big losses for largest party in govt coalition
Japan (Oct 24) – LDP, near permanent party of govt, defeated
US (Nov 24) – centre-left incumbent Dems defeated 

We’ve also had a bunch of bad to historically bad results in poorer democracies too, including ANC losing majority in S Africa, BJP losing majority in India, governing party defeated for the first time ever in Botswana, incumbent Pres defeated in Brasil, etc. Tough time to be an incumbent! 

Three big lessons here IMHO – (1) voters have been punishing incumbents everywhere, regardless of political orientation, length in office etc (2) Voters have been switching to all kinds of opposition, regardless of political orientation but…(3) radical anti-system parties (of right and left) have done well in many places, again regardless of who’s in govt 

Trump benefitted from all three trends – he’s running against the incumbent, as leader of the only opposition, and he’s seen as radical/anti-system