In Congressional Elections, A Landslide Loss Can Be Better than a Marginal Loss
The Paradox of Matt Gaetz and the Funding of the Ukraine War
The Telegraph was happy to see a narrow Republican victory rather than a large one though it was clear they were pushing for a Democrat win, thinking that a narrow majority would guarantee funding for the Ukraine war. However, the Telegraph’s analysis was fundamentally flawed and seems to have relied on intuitions established around parliamentary coalitions that don’t generalize to the US system: A larger Republican majority would have actually given less power to the anti-Ukraine contingent; the majority of Republican politicians favor funding the war, but a small majority gives more power to a fringe defector.
If the Republicans had an extra 10 seats, Gaetz would not be able to engage in these stunts. If 5% of Republicans are strongly against the war, it is clear that if the Republicans had, let’s say, 58% of the seats this 5% would only represent 2.5% of the total votes in the House. But if Republicans have 51%, this 2% can make or break their majority. In short, a slim majority can give a lot of power to a radical fringe. In short, a landslide victory can give moderates an absolute majority while a marginal victory only creates a majority for the coalition of moderates and radicals. The opposition party would, in fact, be better off with their opponents having a much larger majority, ensuring that the moderates don’t have to accommodate radical holdouts.
Of course, the Democrats are not free from blame here: They could put an end to Gaetz’s stunts with a few strategic defections. Democrats who are planning to vote in favor of vacating the speaker’s position are playing into Gaetz’s hands: Ironically, by participating in partisan strife, they are giving Gaetz more power.
Democrats must be aware of this fact: But they are bound by the signalling problem presented by low-information voters. Voters will not intrinsically understand how cooperating with more moderate Republicans could help undermine the influence of radicals like Gaetz. “You voted red. You are traitors.” The truth is that both parties are filled with voters who do not understand US politics; the majority of voters rely on heuristics to judge candidates and these heuristics cause strategy to deviate from its game theoretical ideals.
That said, I think Democrats in safe seats should consider approaching McCarthy about voting with the Republicans on a more moderate package.
I am not totally unsympathetic to what Gaetz is trying to achieve: There is a crisis at the border and our immigration laws need to be enforced. But his decision to play fast and loose with the US’s long-term geopolitical interests is beyond the pale. Despite the slim majority in the House, I am hoping that Gaetz is ejected from the House for disciplinary reasons. Despite his intelligence and energy, he is simply too dangerous and disruptive. In some way or another, he must be placed in check.