I’ve always read about the incumbent advantage, but I don’t understand why that would exist. Wouldn’t an incumbent have to demonstrate what s/he has accomplished in office versus a newcomer who could make any claim since the burden of proof won’t be on them?
In: Other
Most humans are risk averse. Imagine I allow you to select one of two boxes. I open the first box to show you it has $20 inside. The second box remains closed. But I tell you that it either has $1000, or a thousand angry wasps. Which would you pick? If I assign percentages, how low does the wasp percent have to be to make it a reasonable choice for you?
The selection of someone to pass laws for or administer your nation/community is a big deal. Even if the current officeholder is mediocre, you might prefer mediocre to the risk of wasps.
Latest Answers