America's mid-term elections
美國中期選舉
The silent centre
沉寂的中間地帶
If moderates don't vote next week, extremists will thrive
如果中立人士于下周不進行選舉,極端主義者將會茁壯發展
ALL political campaigns involve a certain amount of looking voters straight in the eye and lying to them. But America's mid-term election campaign has involved more flim-flam than most. The Republicans, if you believe Democratic attack ads, oppose equal pay for women, want to ban contraception and just love it when big corporations ship American jobs overseas. The Democrats, according to Republicans, have stood idly by as Islamic State terrorists—possibly carrying Ebola—prepare to cross the southern border. And they, too, are delighted to see American jobs shipped overseas.
所有的政治活動都包含了一定數量的撒謊現象,但是美國中期的選舉活動已經包含了比大多情況下更多的欺騙。如果你相信民主黨發出的具有攻擊性的廣告所說的:共和黨們反對婦女同工同酬,想要廢止避孕法,并且大企業將美國的工作機會擴展到海外。據共和黨反映,民主黨派對可能對帶有伊波拉病毒企圖跨越美國南部邊境的伊斯蘭國家恐怖分子置之不理。同時,和共和黨一樣,他們也同樣希望看到美國的工作機會流往海外。

Only a blinkered partisan would believe any of these charges. Alas, partisans are far more likely than anyone else to vote, especially in elections like this one, where the presidency is not up for grabs.
只有狹隘的黨派會相信任何這些控告。哎,這些黨派相比其他人更愿意行使投票的權利,尤其是類似于總統選舉這樣的選舉活動,其中總統的職位并不是待價而沽的。
A survey by the Pew Research Centre finds that 73% of “consistently conservative” Americans are likely to cast a ballot on November 4th, along with 58% of consistent liberals. Among those with “mixed” views, however, only 25% are likely to bother. That, in a nutshell, is why both parties are pandering to the extremes. Their strategy relies less on wooing swing voters than on firing up their own side to get out and vote. Often, this involves telling them scare stories about the other lot. The same Pew poll finds that dislike of the other party is one of the strongest incentives to vote. Republicans with a “very unfavourable” view of Democrats are far more likely to turn out, as are Democrats who loathe Republicans. With Barack Obama in the White House Republicans are angrier than Democrats, and that is one reason why they are expected to win. Most polls say they will capture the Senate and hold onto the House of Representatives.
一項由皮尤組織(一個美國無黨派人士組建的組織。它提供一些客觀的美國乃至世界范圍內的公眾信息。 民意調查,社會科學調查。 它會回饋一些相關新聞,并解讀調查中包含的重要數據信息。但是它沒有任何的政治地位,也就是說非官方的。)發起的調查報告發現“一貫保守”的美國人中有73%的民眾更愿意在11月4日投上自己寶貴的一票,而一貫的自由者也愿意在這一天投上自己的選票。在這些民眾中帶有綜合觀點的民眾,僅僅只有25%的民眾愿意行使投票的權利。簡而言之,這也就是兩大政黨迎合極端主義的緣由。相比拉攏搖擺不定的選民,政黨們更愿意拉動傾向于自己的民眾為本政黨投票。往往,這就包括給這些民眾們講講自己對立黨派恐怖的故事。同樣一個皮尤組織的民意測驗記錄表明,不喜歡另外一個黨派可以成為民眾投票的最強動機。共和黨擁有民主黨所述的很不利的一方面,到最后會使得討厭共和黨的人選擇民主黨。屬于民主黨的美國現總統奧巴馬使得共和黨比民主黨更加憤懣,這也是為什么共和黨更加期待于贏得總統的選舉。大部分的民意測驗表明共和黨將努力獲取參議院和眾議院的支持。
America's cycle of polarisation and alienation is self-reinforcing. As the debate grows shriller, moderates tune out. Politicians come to rely more and more on the votes of die-hard partisans, so they say and do more extreme things, alienating yet more moderates. Most members of Congress are more frightened of being tossed out by their own party's primary voters—typically for the heresy of compromise—than they are of losing an election to the other party.
極端化和疏遠的美國系統圈正呈增強趨勢。正如辯論變得更為尖銳,溫和派選擇退出。政客們越來越傾向于游擊隊似的選票,所以他們說出和作出更為極端的事情,以至于疏遠了更多的溫和派。大部分議會的成員更加害怕被本黨的基層選民拋擲出局—尤其出現妥協的異端—這比他們輸給了另一黨派的選票更令人恐懼。
America's electoral system needs reform. It is too late to change the rules before this election, however, so it is up to moderates to walk to a polling booth and be counted. To those who grumble that there is no point voting because they don't like any of the candidates, we offer two counter-arguments.
美國的競選系統需要進行改革。現在更改競選規則已經為時過晚,然而,這就更加地依賴于溫和派前往投票點進行投票并參與票數的記錄。對于因為不喜歡任何一位候選人而怪罪于沒有投票點可以投票的人們,我們提供兩個反駁的觀點。
Speak now, or be ignored
為自己發聲,或是選擇被忽視
First, these elections matter. Control of the United States Congress—the body that writes the laws and holds the purse strings of the most important nation on Earth—is at stake. (So are 36 out of 50 state governorships and thousands of local offices—see article.) Individually, it may be rational not to vote: one ballot is unlikely to affect the outcome. But when whole groups stay at home—centrists, young people and non-whites spring to mind—their interests will be ignored.
首先,這些選舉意義重大。掌握了美國國會—這一制定法律并且掌管地球上最為重要的國家財政大權的國會—是十分關鍵的。(50個州長以及千萬個當地辦事處所選出的36個議員同樣也十分關鍵—見文章。)單獨來看,這可能是不夠理性的投票:一張選票并不會影響選舉的結果。但當中間派、年輕人以及非白人種族都選擇放棄選舉,那么他們的利益將會被忽略。
Explore our map and guide to the 2014 mid-term senate races
查詢我們的地圖,并且參看2014中期參議院選舉
Second, politicians are more sophisticated than they appear on the stump. Many are secretly embarrassed by the flame-grilled drivel they have to serve up to partisan audiences. Plenty hanker for the days when divided government meant that the centrists in both parties hammered out reforms together and ignored the frothing fringes. But all of them can count votes—very accurately, these days. And all tend to reward their supporters: to “dance with the ones that brung them”, as the saying goes. So if moderate Americans want to influence how their government taxes, spends, regulates and wages war, they should tick a box next week.
第二點是,政客們比他們從事政治演說更為老練。很多政客私下為自己那些準備兜售給強硬支持的觀眾們天花亂墜的言論感到尷尬。大家對于當年分裂的政府準備將黨派中的中間分子集合起來共同商定改革事宜而忽略其存在的空隙和差距的日子充滿了渴望。但是所有的人都可以計入到投票數里—很精確的是這些天的投票都會計入到投票數中。所有的政客傾向于報答自己的支持者:正如俗話說的“和帶你來的人一起共舞”。所以如果中間派的美國人想要對自己國家的稅收、花費存在影響,規范美國對外戰爭,那他們就得下個星期去投票了。譯者:肖登怡