Letters to the Editor: Disillusion with voting is exactly what the far right wants
The Daily Republic (Dec. 24) recently covered a study by a political science professor at the University of California-Davis (University of California) that concluded voting isn’t a good indicator of who a person will vote for in the future.
The study, which was sponsored by the libertarian think tank Cato at the time it was released, also concluded that the “far right” was more likely to win elections than the democratic left, even though the left had a greater amount of political power in the United States during the late 1700’s. The study also found that people who voted for conservative candidates (rather than liberal ones) did not vote for the right-wing candidates in the future, which the study defined as those who supported traditional candidates and not those who favored policies such as open borders or abolishing private health insurance.
The Daily Republic (Dec. 15) reported that the author of the study, Dr. Daniel A. Abella, was “comfortable with his findings,” but was surprised by how many people told him that they “thought it was wrong to suggest that the right vote for the right candidate didn’t matter in the end.”
Dr. Abella said that he believes in liberty, but the study he conducted goes “against my values,” and he is troubled by the amount of skepticism he has heard from conservatives.
In Dr. Abella’s view, the study is part of a larger trend of progressive-left thinking that assumes that people who vote conservative are the same people who will vote liberal in the future. He told us that the right-wing is very upset that the study was conducted, and its findings have made many conservatives believe that voting for the right candidates will only help win elections, not help them when they are elected in the future.
“The most basic problem is that it’s a false