The Cellar - View Single Post

Undertoad · 11-07-2002, 04:19 PM

After thinking about it for a long time, I have come to the conclusion that Tob is right about the voters, and Syc is right to encourage everyone to vote. (See the thread in Syc's area for where this is coming from)

Y'know everyone is saying that the Ds just didn't formulate and communicate a strong message this year, and damn if on Wednesday morning that seems so cryingly obvious. Of course - the Ds didn't give people any reason to vote FOR them.

That's why people CAN be influenced by someone being nice to them at the polling place, because they really have nothing specific to vote FOR. I can't tell the difference between Smith and Jones. You're for Smith and you're nice. OK, I'm for Smith.

This year, the number and urgency of the political ads got to the point for me where they were all just a big muss. Every negative ad has a problem: it has to deliver name recognition for two names instead of one, and has to deliver a particularly complex message for 30 second advertising. During commercial breaks, at the end, you might see three such ads; that's six names, three complex messages.

The head spins enough when the messages are "Mazda cars go zoomzoom" and "Verizon wireless you can hear me now good". When it's "Mayor Quimby is a fraud so vote for Chief Wiggum", the brain has a lot more to process. Especially if Quimby and Wiggum are pols I didn't remember before.

It doesn't help that my TV market covers three states and numerous municipalities. Ow.

So nobody got much message through, IMO. So to bring it back to Tob and Syc's points --

If people can be influenced at the polls by a random act of kindness, then they aren't really voting that hard to begin with. If you think you could lose your house, or your job, that act isn't going to get your vote.

If people aren't voting hard, that means they're pretty content. Which is the *real* reason why people don't vote as much. If you need help getting benefits, that's meaningful to your life, and Tob's act of kindness doesn't influence Syc or Rho to change their vote. We're lucky that fewer people these days have issues that are so meaningful.

The Greens and Libertarians have issues that they feel are extremely important - life-n-death issues, to their "base", because they have drank the kool-ade and are True Believers. But if they can't convince the masses that their issues truly are life-n-death, they do not deserve or receive electoral success.

And all they have to do is to convince people hard enough that a friendly umbrella won't sway their vote.

11-07-2002, 04:19 PM	#1
Undertoad Radical Centrist Join Date: Jan 2001 Location: Cottage of Prussia Posts: 31,423	The election After thinking about it for a long time, I have come to the conclusion that Tob is right about the voters, and Syc is right to encourage everyone to vote. (See the thread in Syc's area for where this is coming from) Y'know everyone is saying that the Ds just didn't formulate and communicate a strong message this year, and damn if on Wednesday morning that seems so cryingly obvious. Of course - the Ds didn't give people any reason to vote FOR them. That's why people CAN be influenced by someone being nice to them at the polling place, because they really have nothing specific to vote FOR. I can't tell the difference between Smith and Jones. You're for Smith and you're nice. OK, I'm for Smith. This year, the number and urgency of the political ads got to the point for me where they were all just a big muss. Every negative ad has a problem: it has to deliver name recognition for two names instead of one, and has to deliver a particularly complex message for 30 second advertising. During commercial breaks, at the end, you might see three such ads; that's six names, three complex messages. The head spins enough when the messages are "Mazda cars go zoomzoom" and "Verizon wireless you can hear me now good". When it's "Mayor Quimby is a fraud so vote for Chief Wiggum", the brain has a lot more to process. Especially if Quimby and Wiggum are pols I didn't remember before. It doesn't help that my TV market covers three states and numerous municipalities. Ow. So nobody got much message through, IMO. So to bring it back to Tob and Syc's points -- If people can be influenced at the polls by a random act of kindness, then they aren't really voting that hard to begin with. If you think you could lose your house, or your job, that act isn't going to get your vote. If people aren't voting hard, that means they're pretty content. Which is the real reason why people don't vote as much. If you need help getting benefits, that's meaningful to your life, and Tob's act of kindness doesn't influence Syc or Rho to change their vote. We're lucky that fewer people these days have issues that are so meaningful. The Greens and Libertarians have issues that they feel are extremely important - life-n-death issues, to their "base", because they have drank the kool-ade and are True Believers. But if they can't convince the masses that their issues truly are life-n-death, they do not deserve or receive electoral success. And all they have to do is to convince people hard enough that a friendly umbrella won't sway their vote.