by msnook, Wed Aug 16, 2006 at 07:06:33 PM EDT
People don't remember political specifics, but they do evaluate them, building a lasting impression of the candidate in question. Later, they might not remember why they do or don't like the candidate, but they might still have a very strong favorable or unfavorable opinion of him.
It's pretty simple. It's pretty obvious. It's also the major finding of the following study: Lodge, Milton, Marco R. Steenbergen, and Shawn Brau. 1995. "The Responsive Voter: Campaign Information and the Dynamics of Candidate Evaluation." American Political Science Review 89:309-326. This explains why process politics is a waste of air-time, and why the politics of contrast is an absolute must for reaching voters who do not actively seek out political knowledge.
by BL Angert, Mon Jun 12, 2006 at 12:41:53 PM EDT
This post was written for the family at My Left Wing. I believe what occurs there is universal. Thus, I think sharing it here is apt. We all struggle to communicate well, to get along with our neighbors. Kos, My DD, Booman, and the Village Blue too are diverse communities of people with similar focuses; yet, at times, our differences are more visible. Therefore, I think people here might be as interested in inviting a dialogue as individuals are elsewhere.
This was intended to be a short statement, a response to a discussion. I was writing a missive on the subject, similar in scope, though not in tone. My intention was to offer a well thought out essay. I was going to present political posturing as evidence for what we as humans do. However, once the comment was complete I concluded the personal might be more effective.