Prepare to navigate the complex waters of the 2024 elections with us . We're tackling the factors that are shaping the presidential race, including age, legal woes, persistent (though improved) inflation, and a booming stock market. Our discussion zeroes in on the curious case of third-party candidate Robert Kennedy, who might just tip the scales in this election. Peeling back the layers, we examine historical instances where third-party candidates have left a mark on election outcomes, analyze how vaccine skepticism could affect voter turnout, and speculate on the potential repercussions of voter apathy. This episode promises to equip you with a fresh perspective on the upcoming electoral showdown.
Amidst the anticipation of a Kennedy once again gracing the political stage, we dissect the mountainous challenges that independent candidates like Robert Kennedy must surmount within the rigid framework of the U.S. electoral system. Signature gathering hurdles loom large, but the strategic selection of a vice-presidential candidate with either political acumen or media allure could be a game-changer for his bid. Join us as we debate the resilience of the two-party system, the undercurrents within major parties, and how a robust third-party performance could reshape the political terrain. This episode isn't just about predictions; it's a panoramic view of the political landscape, capturing the spectrum of public sentiment from fervent expectation to weary indifference.
Prepare to navigate the complex waters of the 2024 elections with us . We're tackling the factors that are shaping the presidential race, including age, legal woes, persistent (though improved) inflation, and a booming stock market. Our discussion zeroes in on the curious case of third-party candidate Robert Kennedy, who might just tip the scales in this election. Peeling back the layers, we examine historical instances where third-party candidates have left a mark on election outcomes, analyze how vaccine skepticism could affect voter turnout, and speculate on the potential repercussions of voter apathy. This episode promises to equip you with a fresh perspective on the upcoming electoral showdown.
Amidst the anticipation of a Kennedy once again gracing the political stage, we dissect the mountainous challenges that independent candidates like Robert Kennedy must surmount within the rigid framework of the U.S. electoral system. Signature gathering hurdles loom large, but the strategic selection of a vice-presidential candidate with either political acumen or media allure could be a game-changer for his bid. Join us as we debate the resilience of the two-party system, the undercurrents within major parties, and how a robust third-party performance could reshape the political terrain. This episode isn't just about predictions; it's a panoramic view of the political landscape, capturing the spectrum of public sentiment from fervent expectation to weary indifference.
Straight Talk for All - Nonsense for None
Please check out our other podcasts:
https://skepticsguidetoinvesting.buzzsprout.com
Clem Miller:
Welcome everybody to Skeptics Guide to Investing with Steve Davenport and Clem Miller. Today we're going to talk about probably the first of many episodes we'll be doing about the 2024 elections and so, jumping right in, it looks like, just as of yesterday, both major candidates President Biden and former President Trump have clinched their respective nominations in terms of vote totals and, of course, they've been starting to lay out the details of their policy programs. And you know there's obviously a lot of issues that are out there, both personal issues about the candidates as well as policy issues. So, if you think about the personal issues, obviously one issue that's out there is the age, the advanced age, of really both candidates. You have the various lawsuits and legal actions involving former President Trump. You've got the economy, which is improving, but inflation still remains somewhat high and there's this sort of lagged impression that some of the higher levels of inflation are sort of persistent and, of course, some interest rates are still high as well. Now, on the flip side of that, you've got an improving stock market, which helps some segments of the voter population.
Clem Miller:
Another issue that's out there, obviously, is what's going on. Foreign policy issue is what's going on with Israel and Gaza, and you could add to that the various perceptions around the Ukraine and Russia. So I would say those are some of the major issues that the candidates have to face, and a real question for you, Steve, is which do you think among those issues, or any others, are the most important and will help decide the winner of the election in November?
Steve Davenport:
I would say NONE of it, Clem.
Steve Davenport:
I would say the biggest thing that I would say is what's happening with this third party candidate, Robert Kennedy. I think that his possibly choosing Jesse Ventura, the governor of Minneapolis, the former wrestler, or Aaron Rodgers, the quarterback for the Jets, is probably what people should be focused on, because, when we look at history, history tells us that these third party candidates don't really have a chance to win, but they do have a big chance to influence the election. When we look at Ross Perot, who was able to get on the ballot in all 50 states, his non descript election involvement really hurt Bush and allowed Clinton to win with 42% of the vote. And so, when you think about these elections, Ralph Nader was usually the candidate for the Green Party and he would influence elections and votes away from , democratic candidates who would be not far enough left for him. There were people who would show up, who could have influenced the election by picking one or the other, a third party candidate in an election that was as close as some of the last elections have been A hundred thousand in this state, fifty thousand in that state.
Steve Davenport:
Those votes going to somebody who is really a protest candidate or somebody who doesn't really fit the mainstream, allow people who don't feel comfortable with either party to have an outlet, and I think it's one of those things that while everybody's looking at the economy, everybody's looking at the Fed, everybody's looking at the things that you've mentioned in your introduction, and what I'm trying to say is maybe it's not what is in our headlights, that's the real problem.
Steve Davenport:
It's around the corner. There's going to be a deer that jumps out on the road, causes the accident, and you don't know. When you go through this process, and what I'm trying to do is determine is it real? Is his candidacy going to be dropped in three or four or five, six months? Is he being put there and supported there by people from one side, on the left or the right? I can't at this point determine who he really hurts, although I kind of get the feeling that, since the Kennedy name is very much associated with the Democrats, that he's going to pull votes from Biden, and so that, to me, makes him much more impactful, because I feel that that's something that Biden's situation right now, with the questions about his age and questions about his document handling this may matter. I don't like what's happening, but I also think there are many people out there who are unhappy with the two choices.
Clem Miller:
Yeah, you know, I agree with you on that, Steve. The only thing I would say is I think he's going to pull some votes away from Trump as well. And the reason I say that is because you know Trump has been making a big deal out of the fact that you know well the fact, the supposition that he solved the whole pandemic issue through the warp speed efforts to bring about the vaccines. He makes a big deal out of it and whenever he talks about that, his supporters come down hard and say how can you say that? How can you say that the vaccines were worse than the, than COVID itself, and so on and so forth. So there's a huge number of his supporters who actually oppose any notion that the vaccines were helpful. And those folks would be naturally attracted to Robert Kennedy Jr, especially if he were to keep talking about vaccines.
Clem Miller:
I know he's trying to play it down a little bit, but if he goes back to talking about it, I do think there will be some percentage of the MAGA supporters who will go in the direction of Robert Kennedy. That's not to take away from your point, but you know about, you know Democrats wanting to look for somebody. You know new, but you know, outside their party. But I think it's not as clear as what Perot did.
Steve Davenport:
I think the other thing that I come back to with what happened when Trump got elected is that Bernie Sanders had run a big campaign. He had really done a good job, and when you look at those Bernie Sanders votes, we're talking about the people who vote and winning the majority of those votes, but what about the people who stay home? My question is is does do people stay home from one side or the other and not like any of the candidates, and then leave it up to those ardent supporters? So I think that the biggest risk for Kennedy is getting on all the ballots. I was reading and there's some information about how hard it is in places like Texas and California. In Texas, you need to over 200,000 signatures from people who didn't vote in either primary, which is a very complex way to say hey, this person is an independent candidate and the people who didn't approach either or approve of either of the candidates have chosen him. And then in California, you need over 300,000. And it's.
Steve Davenport:
There's some very strict rules about whether the document has been notarized properly, whether the document is consistent, whether the document and the voters have, you know, identified their address and their voting address versus another address, and there's just a lot of legal and other hurdles before Kennedy can really get where he needs to to have an impact in this. So I'm calling this out as an early you know flash. There's something on the horizon that you should look at. Is it going to get bigger? Is it going to get smaller? Are there people on either side that are going to make it clear that he's not the right person? Sure, I think that not being a part of the debates will be the next hurdle. If he gets the signatures and he can't be at the debate stage, does that, you know, make him irrelevant? My point is in any election where it could be decided by 10,000, 20,000 or 50,000 votes in a given state, those 50,000 votes could be, you know, the protest of picking Robert Kennedy.
Clem Miller:
So you mentioned Jesse Ventura, Aaron Rodgers as potential VP candidates. I mean, historically, vp candidates really haven't mattered too much. They might matter because of the age of Biden and Trump, but, you know, will it really matter in the case of Robert Kennedy?
Steve Davenport:
I think it's one of the strangest choices. If I were looking at this from his perspective, I would think I want to pick somebody who has political experience and somebody who has, you know, an ability to show dependability and stability for a ticket that's from the third party. But then I look at it and say what age are we in? We're in the age of short videos and personalities, and in that case I'd say that we are. We really have to think about wow, personality matters, right? We all made fun of Ronald Reagan as being the actor and then by the time people had finished making fun of him, he had already won.
Steve Davenport:
So I think that picking some personalities is a unique way to go about this. Not necessarily what I would say is normal, but do we think this is normal times or do we think this is kind of extraordinary times? I would say that being good on TV, being good in front of a camera, being able to raise people's excitement level, is, I'm not sure. This is the not the Mike Pence vice president choice, and I think there's a reason why people are doing it and because they want that personality. And I think that we can disagree about the personalities and we can say we don't agree, but we're not probably the people who they're trying to attract. Who they're trying to attract are the people who are on the fringes or uncertain. Probably might not vote anyway. But if they wanna send a message to the two major parties, they'll be able to send a message.
Clem Miller:
Steve. So two questions why is Kennedy doing this, and would Kennedy have a shot at all if his name weren't Kennedy?
Steve Davenport:
I think that the one of the things that I find interesting is that the democracy in America is a two-party system. Everywhere else in the world where there are democracies, it's a multi-party system. There's a labor party, there's a far left party, there's a conservative party. The democratic side gets divided into two or three different groups, even a pro-communism party in some countries. So there's all of these different choices and they're much more driven by consensus management than they are party management.
Steve Davenport:
And here in the United States, it's felt to me that there is this third rail or this third voice that's just not being heard. So I really don't think Kennedy has any chance of winning. The system is built against third parties, but what it does to me is it raises the question why don't we have someone or somewhere you can feel heard? I really thought Bloomberg was gonna get into the race the last time, the last two times, and he has the money, he has the resources. And I look at Kennedy and say he's raised $50 million. It'll take $15 million to get on all the ballots. Maybe it inspires someone in the future. I don't feel like he's really gonna make a difference in terms of winning this election, but the question is, does it lead us to a difference in terms of how we look at going forward.
Clem Miller:
Yeah, honestly, I would disagree with this notion that we really only have two parties in the US. I think we have multiple parties, but they come under umbrellas of the Democratic and Republican parties. We've got the MAGA Republican party, the right wing of the Republicans, which obviously is gradually taking over that party.
Steve Davenport:
Yeah, I think there's a religious right that I'm not sure where they fit.
Clem Miller:
Yeah, the religious right fits in there. Those who are more economic, I mean economic populace, you know, exist in both parties right, I think there's libertarian.
Steve Davenport:
I mean, I've always thought that it's the messy middle. Yeah, and the messy middle really doesn't fit into the category of I'm socially liberal but I'm fiscally conservative, and you know one. You mentioned those.
Clem Miller:
You mentioned those countries that have multiple parties. I think one difference between the US and some of the European parliamentary democracies is the fact that you know, really we're more top-down, so we elect a president and you know the president, if he's a very popular president, gets a large amount of vote. Usually Congress There'll be on the the Congress front, there will be more of his party elected. So the president pulls the party. In the parliamentary democracies you have the parties elected and then they choose their prime minister. So it's a different, different format. I mean, the only country in Europe that resembles the US to some degree and which kind of goes to your, to your third party point is, is France, and in France you had a circumstance where Macron came out of the blue with his own party, which really was just his own personality actually, and he built a party around that once he became president. So you know that. You know that creates something of a Of an analog for a third party Run in the US, I think personality.
Steve Davenport:
Politics has been a part of this, and that's I. I really don't know if Kennedy has the personality to really Inspire people. I think it's. You know, obviously, his father and his grandfather, you know His family has inspired people in the past. But I guess I just wonder, you know, when are we going to evolve our system? I agree it's a top-down system.
Steve Davenport:
I think we both agree that it has problems and implementation, and I'm not saying that having more parties would necessarily, you know, I look at Italy and some of the you know the, the governments there that are put together with and the Greece. I think there are, there are strengths and weaknesses of both, and my reason for mainly bringing this up is that I just believe we are a very disjointed right now and it's in it's in chaos that things change. And I think that if we have a chaotic collection, people might Feel like, well, we've got to do something about, you know, registering these third parties or setting them up, and and it could just leave people or inspire people to do something different. And that's, you know, my Whether it's idealistic or not, my belief is that something could change because of this and I I think that it's, it's worth talking about, thinking about, because, as Politics will lead to more chaos or uncertainty. It leads to chaos or uncertainty in our markets because people don't know you know when one or the other is is going to be benefited.
Clem Miller:
So yeah, certainly a. You know, a two-party System is a more stable configuration than a three-party system or a four-party system.
Steve Davenport:
Correct? I think it is, but it also just ignores those people in the middle, doesn't it?
Clem Miller:
Yeah, it does, because they tend to pull to different poles and to different personalities Than what you're used to. So I mean a third party candidate, or let's just say a third candidate, if they've got a strong personality, you know, certainly could pull some votes and I think you know Perot, I think, was one of those candidates. I don't think, honestly, I don't think Robert Kennedy is. If it weren't for the name, I think it wouldn't matter at all in my mind. If it weren't for the name and if it weren't for the, the anti-vaccine positions which I think pull more from Trump than from Biden, I think he wouldn't. You know, wouldn't matter, right, whether he's in there or not.
Steve Davenport:
But it depends on the state, it depends on the electoral college. Remember some of those votes that are going to go to the electoral college? What, states are proportional? Right, I think that's a good point, right if he wins. f he makes a difference in a few districts and that state is not a winner, take all state, then those votes that go towards one candidate and the other, or even a winner, take all state In a winner, take all state. If he provides 100,000 votes that don't go to the person who you think should win, and he takes 80 from Trump and 20 from Biden, maybe that's the difference. And so I'm just saying that our system is very complicated and adding a third party makes it more complicated, and so, therefore, I don't think complexity necessarily leads to more stability. Right, that's my point. It's really not about the candidate claim, as much as it is a process in the election and how that might lead to people's portfolios having a little more uncertainty.
Clem Miller:
Right, I think you and I can both agree on the fact that it's still really early to be able to make some predictions.
Steve Davenport:
Sure, I'm not predicting he's going to be successful. I'm just saying something on my radar that says no, it's too early to predict any future outcomes.
Clem Miller:
I know that there's a lot of polling out there and a lot of the polling right now says Trump. There's been some other polling that says Biden. It's really all over the place this polling, and it's just too early. It really is too early to and really the polling.
Steve Davenport:
Let's be honest, the polling is also not really indicative because the electoral college works the way the electoral college works. Yeah, so I have yet to see a pollster say here's the summation of every state and applied the electoral college rules to those states' delegates. Yeah, here's the total of delegates for each candidate. That's really what we need to do, right, Clem? Yeah, exactly, and you're right, I haven't seen. If you're 43%, 41%, you want to determine the winner right.
Clem Miller:
Yeah, I've seen some individual state polls, but I haven't seen what you're talking about, which is an aggregation and applying the framework of the electoral college.
Steve Davenport:
Correct, and that's why I think that polls are nice, but they're not what you're going to wake up with on the day after the election. You're going to wake up with do you want this state and that state? And this poll was wrong in this state and this state and that led to. I mean, biden was going to win Florida and all of a sudden he didn't Right.
Clem Miller:
So the polls said Hillary Clinton. I remember I was actually in London on the day of Brexit referendum and I remember waking up the next morning and thinking, holy cow, how did this actually happen? Because the polls indicated that Brexit would be defeated by 2% and it wasn't. And the polls, even the day before the polls, were just wrong.
Steve Davenport:
Right, I think it's a sample. I mean, you know, from data statistics. I mean a sample analysis. It's going to have a plus or minus. So all we're seeing is people think about how these other issues are out there and, we'll have other chances to talk about the politics and the polls as we go forward. But I guess I'd just say it's an interesting time we live in and you might say you like the idea of a Kennedy or you don't like the idea, or you're just so sick of the two parties you're going to sit home. But this just gives another you know bit of of intrigue to what 2024 is going to be, which is a very interesting year. So thanks for watching, thanks for listening and I appreciate all the support on the podcast.