T: Clode's Right Political Dictionary
“Think Tank” Think tanks are organisations which analyse, research, collate, discuss and publish well-researched policy ideas. Since the 1970s, these intellectual institutions have become of increasing value to the free market parties of the world, as an alternative source of ideas to universities. Some think tanks are associated with a university, but, after many universities were swamped by socialist ideologues during the Cold War, the most innovative and thoughtful think tanks have tended to operate in the private sector. Some political parties have think tanks attached to them, others commission research from non-partisan institutes (which are funded from a range of private sector donations). Government policies affect us all on a daily basis. By studying important social and economic issues and recommending imaginative solutions, think tanks are an instrumental resource for political parties which wish to improve the world we live in. Centre-right think tanks propose workable solutions to policy problems, based around values like liberty or traditional institutions like the family. Think tank websites often contain online policy papers, as well as information on discussion forums, lectures, journals and publications available for purchase. Such policy institutes often have extensive libraries including publications from around the world. Their books and journals are usually not available for loan, but some will approve limited in-house reading by their sponsors or by like-minded individuals. Their offices are also the main headquarters for most of their researchers, who are sometimes with details of their research areas and interests. If you want to discuss policy ideas, try contacting your nearest centre-right think tank to arrange a good time to come in and see them, or just send an email.
“Third party” In many countries, particularly those which use first-past-the-post voting, there has been the development of two opposing major political parties which, between themselves, gain the majority of all votes cast. Any political party that is not one of these two dominant parties is called a “third party” to indicate that they have little prospect of election, and little influence (other than in electorates where the major parties are close and may seek to obtain their support).
“Ticket splitting” This phenomena only occurs where each voter can cast more than one vote on a single election day (for instance where there are two houses of parliament, or where state and national elections fall on the same day). Ticket splitting involves a voter casting their votes for candidates of different political parties on the same election day. Because ticket splitters do not vote for only one party’s candidates, they are said to “split” their votes. Such voters tend to be “swinging voters”, or have sometimes been alienated against a single candidate who is standing for their preferred party. (See the “Coattails Effect” – the opposite phenomena)
“TPP” See “Two Party Preferred”.
“Town meeting” These meetings are gatherings which enable an officeholder or a party candidate to meet with a group of people in their local community. Such meetings allow voters to meet the candidates who seek their support, hear their appeals and, in many meetings, audience members can ask questions directly to the speaker or speakers. During an election campaign, town meetings will often be hosted by an independent organisation and the leading opponents will both be invited to speak. When there is no election afoot, a sitting politician will often organise small town meetings to stay in touch with each neighbourhood within their electorate. Often such meetings are called “townhall meetings” in reference to the city council hall in which many of these meetings traditionally occur. Before the advent of television, campaigns were almost entirely conducted by townhall meetings or street-corner speeches.
“Tracking survey” This type of public-opinion poll allows parties to follow changes in voters’ sentiments over the course of an election campaign (hence changes in opinion are “tracked”). For the initial survey, the pollster interviews the same number of voters on several consecutive nights — for example, 400 voters a night over three nights, for a total sample of 1,200 people. On the fourth night, the pollster interviews 400 more voters, adds their responses to the poll data, and drops the responses from the first night. Continuing in this way, the sample “rolls” along at a constant 1,200 responses drawn from the previous three nights. The sample in each three day period is known as a “rolling sample”. Over time, the campaign can analyse the data from the entire survey and observe the effect of certain events on voters’ attitudes.
“Trickle Down Economics” “Trickle Down Economics” This expression alludes to the belief that the poor will benefit from free market economic policies which create national prosperity. The expression is most commonly used by the political left as a term of abuse against free market supporters. This was devised as a term of abuse because the cliché implies that the wealthy benefit from free market policies before the poor benefit. Furthermore, the term implies that the wealthy gain the greater spoils of free market growth, while the poor get only the crumbs. By contrast, the actual view of the free marketeer is that market economics will allow all members of society to benefit together (in the words of one politician “a rising tide lifts all boats”). This term of abuse is based on flawed Marxist assumptions. The concept of “trickle down” is based upon the left wing fallacy that society is comprised of rigid classes, therefore lefties argue that wealth can only pass between classes rather than between individuals. By contrast, capitalists understand that wealth transfer is a dynamic process of market transactions which occur at the individual level. Capitalists understand that classes mainly exist in people’s minds. The statistical evidence supports the capitalist position, showing that free economies are replete with both upward and downward mobility, where the industrious prosper regardless of how impoverished they may have been at the beginning of their lives.
“Trouble Shooter” This is a senior and experienced political figure who specialises in damage control within their party. More importantly, a trouble shooter tries to anticipate and prevent problems before they arise. This requires considerable consultation with a wide network of party colleagues. The people with the main responsibility for trouble-shooting are the party leaders (including the Parliamentary Leader and the Party President). Often, in a parliamentary caucus, this role will be designated to the Whip and his assistants. Other times the job may rest with a senior and experienced Minister. (See “Damage Control” and “Whip”)
“Two Party Preferred” This is an opinion poll measure of the overall support for one major party or coalition, versus one major opponent party or coalition. It can also test the strength of one candidate versus another single candidate. Normal opinion polls test how people would vote if presented with the choice of all the available parties. However an opinion poll question which tests the Two Party Preferred factor will only present the voter with two options: party A versus party B (or candidate A versus candidate B). Thus a TPP question will reveal which major party is preferred by an overall majority of the population. This question can be important as an indication of what coalitions voters would prefer to see forming a government. However this question has little practical use in an electoral system that is based on either proportional voting, or first-past-the-post voting. The question is only of practical significance where there is a majoritarian electoral system such as preferential voting, or a run-off system (as is commonly used in some Presidential elections).