Politics with Paul

We often hear the term “wave election” whenever one political party makes significant gains in government. But what is the threshold for being a wave election? And what should we take away from them?With the 2026 election results mostly in the books, today’s episode of Politics with Paul explores these wave elections. We dive into what makes a wave election, how to interpret them, whether 2026 qualifies as one, and what the 2026 results mean going forward.0:00 What is a “Wave” Election?6:46 Interpreting Wave Elections and Why They Happen11:23 Biggest Wave Elections in US History18:21 Was 2026 a Blue Wave?21:58 Was the 2026 Election a “Tsunami”?24:14 The Implications of the 2026 Election28:09 What 2026 Means for 2028 and Beyond31:25 Final Thoughts and ClosingOther WorksFREE 5-day educational email course on how to fight polarization: https://detoxifyamericanpolitics.com/Buy my book about political independents: https://www.amazon.com/Why-Independents-Rarely-Win-Elections-ebook/dp/B09K8PYM5J/Medium articles on elections and political science: https://paulrader-42650.medium.com/MediaLinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/in/paulrader352/My website: https://paulrader.org/Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/PaulRaderWritesEmail: [email protected]

Something that gets lost in the election noise is that a lot of contests are foregone conclusions. Many of the results and the way many voters behave can be seen from a mile away. But have you wondered why so many elections are easily predictable?Today's episode of Politics with Paul explores what is predictable in elections and the implications. Listen in to see which aspects of politics and voter behavior are easily foreseeable and which are harder to forecast, where the fluctuations are that lead to unexpected results, and most importantly why this level of predictability poses trouble for democracy and holding government accountable.0:00 The Predictability of Elections1:33 Predicting Individuals vs. Groups7:46 Common Data Points Used to Forecast Elections16:26 Other Election Aspects That are Predictable24:57 Outside Factors That Can Impact an Election’s Predictability30:48 Predictability Poses Problems for Accountability, Democracy36:36 ClosingOther WorksFREE 5-day educational email course on how to fight polarization: https://detoxifyamericanpolitics.com/Buy my book about political independents: https://www.amazon.com/Why-Independents-Rarely-Win-Elections-ebook/dp/B09K8PYM5J/Medium articles on elections and political science: https://paulrader-42650.medium.com/MediaLinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/in/paulrader352/My website: https://paulrader.org/Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/PaulRaderWritesEmail: [email protected]

You often hear election winners claim they have a voter "mandate" - because they won, the public has entrusted that candidate to implement all their policy views. But does the idea of the voter mandate really hold up to scrutiny?Today's episode dives into the logic (or lack thereof) of the voter mandate, its implications, and why it's so often claimed by winning candidates. While it may not sound like a big deal to some observers, the mindset can have some important ramifications for government accountability, how well elected officials represent us, and whether we have sufficient choices in elections.0:00 The Voter "Mandate" Myth and Why it Matters2:01 The Faulty Logic of the Voter "Mandate"10:17 When the Voter Mandate Runs Into Reality15:03 Voter Mandates and Representation of the People20:04 Voter Mandates and Whether We Have Sufficient Choices23:38 Voter Mandates and Whether We Hold Officials Accountable31:15 What's the Big Deal About Claiming a "Voter Mandate"?34:09 Final Thoughts: Words, Actions Matter More as Elected OfficialsOther Works* FREE 5-day educational email course on how to fight polarization: https://detoxifyamericanpolitics.com/* Buy my book about political independents: https://www.amazon.com/Why-Independents-Rarely-Win-Elections-ebook/dp/B09K8PYM5J/* Medium articles on elections and political science: https://paulrader-42650.medium.com/Media* LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/in/paulrader352/* My website: https://paulrader.org/* Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/PaulRaderWrites* Email: [email protected]

Informed voting is about more than mulling over who the “right” candidates are or how you should vote on ballot measures. It’s about understanding fundamentals of American governance and well-rounded decision-making.Whether you are a regular election participant, a first-time voter, or anything in between, this episode of Politics with Paul seeks to provide advice on how to make your vote decision-making easier and clearer, with 6 principles you may or may not have considered previously. Before you vote, I ask that you think these ideas over, including how to evaluate candidates, weighing how much a candidate might keep their promises, and how often (if ever) you should vote AGAINST somebody rather for another.0:00 Navigating Election Season: An Introduction2:14 Do Not Vote Rashly or Immediately6:20 Campaigns are Trying to Influence Your Vote, Not Inform You12:28 The Reality of Candidate Promises17:48 How Much Should Candidates Do Exactly What Voters Want?21:26 Heuristics: What Candidate Aspects Should Impact Your Vote?29:22 Should You Ever Vote Against Someone Instead of for Another?36:18 Deciding What to Vote On: The Ballot Breakdown40:50 Closing Thoughts and My Other MediaOther WorksFREE 5-day educational email course on how to fight polarization: https://detoxifyamericanpolitics.com/Buy my book about political independents: https://www.amazon.com/Why-Independents-Rarely-Win-Elections-ebook/dp/B09K8PYM5J/Medium articles on elections and political science: https://paulrader-42650.medium.com/MediaLinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/in/paulrader352/My website: https://paulrader.org/Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/PaulRaderWritesEmail: [email protected]

Negativity reigns in political ads — from assailing of candidate records to personal attacks. Despite candidate pledges to be positive and voters’ insistence that they hate negative campaigning, combative and adversarial ads become only more ubiquitous in the final weeks before an election.With the harmful impacts to democracy and dialogue that negative ads can bring, there are some questions we need to ask ourselves as voters, candidates, and political observers. Is negative campaigning really that effective? Do we truly hate negative campaigning like we say we do? Can it still sometimes serve a good purpose? And lastly, what can we do about it? Today’s episode of Politics with Paul explores these questions and more.0:00 What We Should Ask Ourselves About Negative Campaigning1:35 What is "Negative" Campaigning?6:26 The Blurred Line Between "Informative" and "Misleading"9:21 Why Negative Campaign Ads are So Common14:46 Do We Truly Hate Negative Campaigning?19:06 How Effective is Negative Campaigning?26:41 Why it's Hard to Legally Limit Negative Campaign Ads30:52 How We Can Push Back Against Excessive Negative Campaigning38:06 Closing and My Other LinksOther WorksFREE 5-day educational email course on how to fight polarization: https://detoxifyamericanpolitics.com/Buy my book about political independents: https://www.amazon.com/Why-Independents-Rarely-Win-Elections-ebook/dp/B09K8PYM5J/Medium articles on elections and political science: https://paulrader-42650.medium.com/MediaLinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/in/paulrader352/My website: https://paulrader.org/Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/PaulRaderWritesEmail: [email protected]

Voting is often treated as a simple civic duty, but the reasons people vote are more varied than that. In this episode of Politics with Paul, we look at why we vote in the first place, whether voting can be considered rational, and five common motives that shape turnout. The discussion evaluates those motives and explores the blurry lines between altruism and self-interest, as well as between duty, belonging, and social approval. It closes by asking why understanding our motives for voting matters at all.

Voting is often treated as a straightforward act of reason, but the reality is more complicated. In this episode of Politics with Paul, we examine what it means to vote rationally, how heuristics shape political choices, and 4 major models of voting behavior: rational vote theory, party-line voting, retrospective voting, and prospective voting. The discussion also looks at what influences our ballots beyond pure reasoning and asks a central question: how rational are we, really, when we vote?

In elections, many voters worry about "wasting" votes on perceived uncompetitive candidates - but is there such a thing as a wasted vote? Or perhaps this is the better question: Is the logic behind "not wasting votes" flawed? Today's episode of Politics with Paul dives into this common thought process that affects countless votes - and therefore, countless election results. The discussion cuts to the heart of some of the most important questions in politics: why we even vote in the first place, how logical voters' thinking is, and whether we are truly holding politicians, interest groups, and media accountable.

Growing up and even as adults, we're often told that we should avoid talking politics because it is too divisive. That's understandable given how toxic the subject is, but that's not always good advice. Yet how do we know when we should and shouldn't discuss it? There's a time and place for everything, and today's episode of Politics with Paul explores when and where that is for elections and policy talk. Included in the discussion are the factors that influence the appropriateness of talking politics, why it's not just about when and where we discuss it, and whether that old advice to avoid political conversation may be contributing to today's divisiveness and polarization.

The US Senate often finds itself in the middle of controversy and as the subject of scorn. But does this mean we should eliminate it completely? Is it outdated ... or still a necessary part of American government? In today's episode of Politics with Paul, we tackle this question. While it's not a popular view, at its core are some of the most essential questions about how our government should work. The episode also covers why we need to know why the US Senate was created, the question of whether it is an extreme position, and potential changes to the US Senate including a lower threshold to override filibusters or slight changes to the number of Senators per state.