This post does not talk about strength of preferences so this seems a bit off topic. Nevertheless I think this misses some important considerations. You say:
the probability that one would actually go ahead and vote in a race does correlate with the strength of one’s preferences. So, perhaps, this is indeed working as intended.
This doesn’t take into account voter suppression. Take for example Texas; from 2012 to 2018, 542 polling places were closed in counties with significant increases in African-American and Latino populations, while counties with fewer minority increases saw only 34 closures. They also placed restrictions on absentee ballots and limits on drop-off locations. For example; Harris County, which had only one drop-off location for 2.4 million voters. It’s not so much the strength of preferences that determines who votes, as much as who is systematically discouraged from voting.
It’s not so much the strength of preferences that determines who votes, as much as who is systematically discouraged from voting.
The strength of preferences does play a significant part in voter turnout. Politically radical groups are more likely to vote and encourage people with similar but more moderate political views to vote.
The voter turnout of minority groups depend on the strength of their views, as any restrictions made to discourage them from voting complicate the voting process but don’t make it impossible for most. Therefore, the strength of political views determines voter turnout for all electorate.
Beware trivial inconveniences. Where do the preferences come from? If someone puts a jumpable lava-moat between me (+all other blond people) and the voting booth, I have a “revealed preference” to no longer go out and vote. When the classical liberals then point at the data showing that blond people have a lower preference for voting they’re not wrong, but they are misleading.
This post does not talk about strength of preferences so this seems a bit off topic. Nevertheless I think this misses some important considerations. You say:
This doesn’t take into account voter suppression. Take for example Texas; from 2012 to 2018, 542 polling places were closed in counties with significant increases in African-American and Latino populations, while counties with fewer minority increases saw only 34 closures.
They also placed restrictions on absentee ballots and limits on drop-off locations. For example; Harris County, which had only one drop-off location for 2.4 million voters.
It’s not so much the strength of preferences that determines who votes, as much as who is systematically discouraged from voting.
The strength of preferences does play a significant part in voter turnout. Politically radical groups are more likely to vote and encourage people with similar but more moderate political views to vote.
The voter turnout of minority groups depend on the strength of their views, as any restrictions made to discourage them from voting complicate the voting process but don’t make it impossible for most. Therefore, the strength of political views determines voter turnout for all electorate.
Beware trivial inconveniences. Where do the preferences come from? If someone puts a jumpable lava-moat between me (+all other blond people) and the voting booth, I have a “revealed preference” to no longer go out and vote. When the classical liberals then point at the data showing that blond people have a lower preference for voting they’re not wrong, but they are misleading.