The subject of my new post at 538 is whether retail politics—that is, presidential candidate travel to and appearances in crucial states—matters. I also discuss whether local political outlets are inherently more favorable to candidates than national media. Coincidentally, Jeff Zeleny’s new piece in the NY Times discusses the decline in certain kinds of retail politics such as drop-by’s in local restaurants and living rooms.
Jeremy Peters discusses the GOP’s ad campaign against Obama, which is well underway. I find this reporting necessary and valuable, but Peters misses an opportunity here:
But going negative so early also carries substantial risks. One is that many voters are not yet paying much attention to the campaign and will not do so until much closer to next November, meaning the advertising expenditures could be largely wasted. And negative messages now could alienate moderate and independent voters who blame excessive partisanship for Washington’s troubles in addressing the nation’s big problems.
The ten Fortune 100 companies that lobbied on 50 or more bills since 2008 paid an average effective tax rate of 17.1 percent in 2010; the ten companies that lobbied on between 25 and 49 bills paid an average effective tax rate of 18.0 percent; the remaining publicly-traded companies paid an average effective tax rate of 26.0 percent. The companies that lobbied on the most tax bills also have seen their tax rates decline the most since 2007. Moreover, we estimate that for the average company, each additional tax bill a company lobbied on since 2008 is associated with a lower 2010 tax rate of between 0.13 and 0.36 percentage points…