Perceptional Misalignments

Voting for someone who knows so little about so much is the least likely way to accomplish anything of value

With age comes wisdom. The degree to which this is true, however, varies considerably. Those who are acquisitive and curious will achieve far more wisdom than those who meander through life more or less accepting that whatever they hear and read is true until…maybe…they hear or see conflicting information. Or not. Humans can become quite attached to their perceptions and willingly reject more accurate, more truthful ones if these are discomforting or in conflict with the ones they cherish.

Education is a primary influence, along with intellect and curiosity, regarding how this goes. Enlightenment and awareness are the results of all three, and the more one experiences the process of forming accurate, credible perceptions, the more one seeks these out. But many individuals are intellectually lazy, have a high degree of confirmational bias (preferring that which agrees with their existing beliefs) or are driven by emotion and dismiss facts, data and information that interfere with feelings…particularly anger.

I note all of this because dishonesty and lying are not only continual realities of human existence but also functional epicenters of political belief, opinion and dogma. Idealism magnifies this willingness to accept and even participate in intellectual dishonesty, factual misinformation and disinformation as propaganda. Data, statistical analysis and carefully modeled research are not allowed to contaminate the process of ignoring, dismissing and contradicting truth.

The brazenly obvious dishonesty in this regard of the 2016 Republican presidential candidate, and the conspiracy theory-driven accusations that have been disproved as to veracity or significance but continue to demonize the Democratic candidate, have generated much discussion, analysis and despair regarding the descent of political rhetoric into the realm of unrestrained falsehoods and fabricated assertions. Perceptions are simply unattached to reality because post truth (discussed in previous blog post) is now “reality” for far too many.

There are, of course, endless examples I can point to when it comes to perceptional misalignment, but I want to focus on one that is about topics near and dear to voters: the economy, prosperity and inequity. Traditional perceptions are that Republicans in office improve the economy and related aspects of it far more than when Democrats are in office. On the basis of the political rhetoric of at least the last half-century — which rarely includes data, many voters perceive this to be true. I’ll simply provide some data, and you can decide on the accuracy of the perceptions.

From 1945 until 2016 there have been 35 years of Democratic presidents and 36 years of Republican presidents. Under the former, there were 64 million private sector jobs created, and under the latter, 26 million. Under the two most recent Democratic presidents, 32 million jobs were created (twice as many under Clinton than under Obama, who faced a financial recession in place when he took office); under the two most recent Republicans the number of jobs created was 1 million.

The overall unemployment rate under Democratic presidents fell 7.2 percent, and rose 11.0 percent under Republican ones. There obviously were fluctuations during the 71 years these data represent.

Going back further, starting with 1930, there were 44 years of Democratic presidents and 40 years of Republican presidents. The per capita disposable income under Democrats increased by 271 percent. Under Republicans, it increased 44 percent. The average has been 3.1 percent (after inflation) for the former and 1.0 percent for the latter.

Finally, taking the most recent 15 years, the value of the Dow increased 42 percent under Republicans and 609 percent under Democrats — more than 14 times greater. The average annual Dow value during this period increased 5.11 percent under the former and 14.75 percent under the latter.

Is this information readily available? Actually, with the internet at one’s fingertips, yes. The caveat is that one has to phrase queries so the search results offer links to the data being sought…although…less precise queries are a great way to discover all kinds of facts that one might otherwise never have known. Admittedly, as a very curious pragmatist, I enjoy new data that I didn’t realize existed, a characteristic that is not necessarily shared by a large percentage of the population. My perceptions are, as a result, statistically more likely to be better aligned with reality than for those voters who prefer minimal information and far more political rhetoric that confiirms their beliefs.

Change simply for change is pointless, much like not voting or voting for can’t-win third party candidates only benefits one or the other of the two viable candidates. To solve what is perceived as being “wrong,” one has to know the details of how things actually are and got that way. Problems have contexts, and these are invariably more complicated than they appear — buried in the details, not the perceptions of them. Voting for someone who knows so little about so much is the least likely way to accomplish anything that functionally matters in ways that make a positive difference while also not creating even larger problems. Perceptional alignment is a requirement, not an option.