Voter anger a media creation?

From a POLITICO article by SEUNG MIN KIM, use the above link to read the entire article, "Political pundits and Democratic politicians scoffed Wednesday at the notion of an anti-incumbent wave hitting campaigns this midterm season, blaming the media for spreading the story line that they insist is not real."

Larry Sabato, a political scientist at the University of Virginia, pointed out that factoring for current primaries' incumbent losses translated into a 98.3 percent win rate for incumbents so far in 2010. These statistics are about "normal on a 40-year average,” Sabato said, arguing that the idea of an anti-incumbency wave is a “press-manufactured phenomenon.”

If you read the voters comments for these types of articles, they want to "Throw Out the Bums". At last nights New York City Charter Revision Commission, it was discussed that even though the voters were mad about the change in term limits by the mayor and city council, most were reelected.

But this misses the point. You have to give the voters better choices to make a change. This was one of our major reasons for nonpartisan elections or Top Too. Not only would it turn out more voters but give more people the opportunity to run.

The other reason for the primary results is the growth of groups like the Tea Party. These types of far left and right groups is splitting the anti-incumbent and anti-establishment voters.

What do you think is the reason incumbents are still winning?

Michael H. Drucker
Technorati Tag in Del.icio.us