The travel issue is largely a tangential issue & distraction. Maybe suboptimal judgement (in hindsight!), but far from salient relative to all of the real causes and problems.
Media & politicians outside LA fueling misinformation is a bigger problem than whether Bass should’ve taken a trip.
Media & politicians outside LA fueling misinformation is a bigger problem than whether Bass should’ve taken a trip.
Comments
Our point is the effects of information (good or bad) revealed due to disasters is included in estimates from regressions of electoral fortunes on disasters and shouldn't be expected to average to zero.
I'm open to the possibility the fires are revealing that the leaders of LA and CA did a good job, I don't know.
Our point is about political science and the current disaster is illustrative.
But your opening line: “The fires are revealing how good elected officials are at their jobs.”
That’s not true if by “how good” we mean any objective evaluation of policymaking or public administration. Fires haven’t done that.
For instance, I don't think it is for you or me to tell voters that they should or shouldn't care whether the mayor broke a campaign promise. That's up to them.
That is, even if on average information is average, it has an effect on average.
The result doesn't depend on most info being bad.
Campaign promise to reduce foreign travel has got to be one of the least important aspects of the disaster. Interesting WaPost, NYT and commentators outside SoCal are making issue of that instead of….
Climate change.
Just not in your role as a social scientist.
Anyway, I think we agree on the conceptual matter.
I hope you and yours are safe.