Election organizers and political observers have long believed that the weather can interchange election outcomes , and scientific studieshave supportedthis mind . A fresh newspaper publisher propose that , while this is reliable , the reasons are not what everyone thinks . Besides keeping hoi polloi from the polls , rain and Charles Percy Snow may also dissemble which campaigner they prefer .
In the United States , Democrats reverence bad weather . Turnout drops when it rain down – particularly if there are queue – and this hits the profane team harder . Several discipline have indorse this up . In 2007,Dr Brad Gomez , then at the University of Georgia , foundreductions in both votes hurtle and Democrat share in counties where it rained heavy on presidential election days .
However , Dr Woo Chang Kangof the Australian National University and Dartmouth College’sProfessor Yusaku Horiuchinoticed something odd in Gomez ’s data . The Republican ploughshare increase in intemperately rained - on counties more than could be explained by the low-spirited turnout . In fact , Republicans actually got more votes in absolute terms , not just per centum , when it rained .
InAmerican Politics Research , Kang reports that from 1948 to 2000 , pelting conduct to Republicans winning 1 percentage more of the electorate , while Democrats get 2.1 per centum less , and 1.1 percent more stay home .
The observation is so unexpected it ’s natural to assume Kang has made some mistake , and it ’s always potential a actuary will find out an error . Certainly it ’s hard to believe Republican jockstrap really prefer voting in the rain .
Kang has an substitute explanation . He points toextensive evidencethat spoiled weather can exchange moods and make people more risk averse . combine this withother researchthat show people prefer correct - extension candidates when in an nervous body politic of mind , he purport the increased Republican suffrage come from real fair - weather Democrats . Perhaps some of those who are committed to doing their civic obligation – determined to vote without having made up their mind who to vote for – shift depending on the mean solar day ’s weather .
It seems extraordinary this would apply to at least one person in 100 , particularly in America where so many people never vote , but Kang applied robustness checks to the data point and the final result stand up .
Kang notice to IFLScience that plenty of questions rest . For example , he ’s not aware of any studies regard temperature rather than haste . Today , insensate weather might damp concerns about global warming , increase Republican keep . However , this can barely have been a broker in Eisenhower ’s victories , for example . Kang note that “ masses finger more comfortable with incumbents , ” but admitted he had not try if this meant Chief Executive are more likely to be re - elected when it rain .
increase number of people voting prior to polling day may have blunted polling solar day core in recent years , but Kang reckon plenty more to explore .
