CEOs Worry About Populist Campaign Themes

Newly enfranchised felons in Virginia could help the Democrats.

Add to Briefcase
Ally Mutnick
April 25, 2016, 9:45 a.m.

“Chief ex­ec­ut­ives at big Amer­ic­an com­pan­ies are in­creas­ingly frus­trated by the pop­u­list tone of the pres­id­en­tial cam­paign, and con­cerns are mount­ing in board­rooms and corner of­fices that an­ti­busi­ness rhet­or­ic may so­lid­i­fy even after the Novem­ber elec­tion.” 

“[E]xec­ut­ives worry that for now, the rhet­or­ic of the elec­tion dis­cus­sion could weigh on con­sumer con­fid­ence, thwart any im­mig­ra­tion over­haul and de­rail a sweep­ing 12-na­tion trade pact, the Trans-Pa­cific Part­ner­ship, that the U.S. struck last year and that many busi­nesses sup­port.” (Wall Street Journ­al)

A GROW­ING ELECT­OR­ATE. Gov. Terry McAul­iffe (D) re-en­fran­chised 200,000 former felons in Vir­gin­ia on Fri­day. “The state will be one of the cent­ral battle­grounds this Novem­ber, and it is widely be­lieved that ex-felons will vote heav­ily for Demo­crats. … And the big num­ber of newly en­fran­chised voters is ac­tu­ally lar­ger than Mr. Obama’s 149,298-vote mar­gin of vic­tory there in 2012.”

“But the elect­or­al ef­fect of felon re-en­fran­chise­ment is likely to be mod­est. The best-case scen­ario for Demo­crats might be that they im­prove their pop­u­lar vote mar­gin by a half-point. That’s a big deal, but only in a close elec­tion. The reas­on is de­cept­ively straight­for­ward. Ex-felons are less likely to vote than non­felons, even when ex-felons are eli­gible to vote.” (New York Times)


Welcome to National Journal!

You are currently accessing National Journal from IP access. Please login to access this feature. If you have any questions, please contact your Dedicated Advisor.