Edit: The source for the donations data is opensecrets.org; the source for the personal income data is the BEA.
About Pileus
What is a Pileus?
Meet The Authors
Our Published Work
Archives
- July 2017
- June 2017
- April 2017
- March 2017
- February 2017
- December 2016
- November 2016
- July 2016
- March 2016
- November 2015
- September 2015
- August 2015
- July 2015
- June 2015
- May 2015
- April 2015
- March 2015
- February 2015
- January 2015
- December 2014
- November 2014
- October 2014
- September 2014
- August 2014
- July 2014
- June 2014
- May 2014
- April 2014
- March 2014
- February 2014
- January 2014
- December 2013
- November 2013
- October 2013
- September 2013
- August 2013
- July 2013
- June 2013
- May 2013
- April 2013
- March 2013
- February 2013
- January 2013
- December 2012
- November 2012
- October 2012
- September 2012
- August 2012
- July 2012
- June 2012
- May 2012
- April 2012
- March 2012
- February 2012
- January 2012
- December 2011
- November 2011
- October 2011
- September 2011
- August 2011
- July 2011
- June 2011
- May 2011
- April 2011
- March 2011
- February 2011
- January 2011
- December 2010
- November 2010
- October 2010
- September 2010
- August 2010
- July 2010
- June 2010
- May 2010
- April 2010
Post Categories
- 2010 Elections (15)
- 2012 election (64)
- 2016 election (3)
- Book Recommendations (16)
- British politics (13)
- Budget Deficit (75)
- bureaucracy (3)
- Canadian politics (2)
- capitalism (17)
- Chart of the Day (4)
- Civil Liberties (57)
- civil war (8)
- collective goods (3)
- Comparative culture (5)
- Congress (21)
- corporate welfare (14)
- courts (3)
- crime (5)
- democratization (2)
- development (4)
- drugs (10)
- Economic geography (5)
- Economic recovery (37)
- Economics (80)
- Education (27)
- elections (7)
- electoral behavior (6)
- electoral systems (6)
- employment (9)
- Energy Policy (2)
- Enlightened Self-Interest (8)
- Entitlement Reform (17)
- Environment (9)
- Ethics (41)
- European Union (1)
- Eurozone (2)
- executive branch (2)
- federalism (35)
- finance (11)
- fiscal policies (28)
- foreign policy (51)
- freedom (19)
- Germany (1)
- Greece (1)
- growth (14)
- Guest Post (9)
- Guns (5)
- Hayek (2)
- health care (41)
- Hero of the Week (1)
- History (19)
- History of Political Philosophy (2)
- ideologies (9)
- immigration (5)
- Immigration policy (8)
- inequality (15)
- institutions (33)
- insurance (2)
- international law (1)
- international political economy (5)
- international relations (11)
- interstate conflict (5)
- IPE (4)
- judiciary (3)
- justice (4)
- labor (3)
- Law (32)
- left-libertarianism (6)
- libertarianism (19)
- libertarianism (10)
- Locke (4)
- Markets and Morality (5)
- Marriage (5)
- marriage law (4)
- Metaphysics (1)
- methodology (4)
- monetary policy (1)
- National defense (10)
- Nozick (7)
- paternalism (3)
- political philosophy (33)
- Political Science (50)
- politics (58)
- Post-Soviet politics (1)
- Property Rights (1)
- psychology (9)
- public finance (4)
- Public Opinion (20)
- race and ethnicity (3)
- Rants and Raves (22)
- Rawls (5)
- redistribution (5)
- Regulation (45)
- religion (3)
- rent-seeking (10)
- representation (9)
- resource curse (2)
- secession (35)
- secession (24)
- social justice (2)
- Social psychology (4)
- socialism (6)
- Sociology and Anthropology (5)
- Spain (9)
- state politics (43)
- state politics (19)
- taxes (7)
- trade (12)
- Turkey (1)
- U.S. presidential elections (24)
- Uncategorized (1,568)
- welfare policy (12)
So New Mexico has a surge because of Johnson, obviously. A slight bump in Vermont, North Dakota, and Maine. Everything else pretty close to trend?
New Hampshire really keeps jumping out in these surveys. I don’t know about locally, but nationally I’m not seeing any major impact of the Free State Project so far in its congressional politics. I wonder why.
I see a bit of a surge in Mississippi too, although it’s way down there. As you say, with New Mexico it’s the Gary Johnson effect; he’s raised almost as much money as Ron Paul there, compared to about 15 times less than Paul nationally.
New Hampshire’s top-line political makeup is still characterized on the left-right dimension as slightly left of center. The FSP hasn’t changed that, and it would take a few thousand more Free Staters, at minimum, to have an observable effect on that. But the main point of the FSP isn’t influencing federal politics in any case. The FSP is effective at the state and local level because left-right ideology matters less than name recognition and work ethic. As far as the state house goes, the parties are always scrambling for candidates and grateful for whomever they can get. If you put a couple thousand dollars and a good bit of shoe leather into your race, you can win whatever your ideology may be. (However, it has been harder so far to do this as a Democrat than as a Republican. Only one Free Stater has been successful as a Democrat.)
I see Mississippi too, I wonder if there’s something behind that. Given the small money haul of Gary Johnson I can imagine that one particularly wealthy individual/family can skew things a lot.
Is there any measurement at the state and local level that could measure the impact of the FSP, even if the top-line is still left of center?
See here: https://pileusblog.wordpress.com/2010/07/13/statistical-estimates-of-the-future-impact-of-the-free-state-project/
But that’s a bit speculative and requires some assumptions about correlations implying causation. The trouble is we have a single case, and it’s hard to get valid inferences from a single case.