Political Communication 6794
Eli F. Bleich
Journal Entries 10-3 – 10-16

Information feedback, leads to the influence of information.

It says to people that “It’s OK to ‘think’ that way.” Showing people polling results, tells them where they need to be, to be a part of the mainstream. It also tells them that they will not be there alone.

Pundits tend to analyze an event like a debate (actually pretty well… especially if they are not simply working for one of the campaigns), which should influence (lead) what people think… but…

Expert interpretation doesn’t seem to be influencing focus groups (Is it because focus groups have been polled BEFORE they hear what pundits have to say?)

Then, once the Pundits hear what the people have said, they start discussing those results and begin to analyze the results, instead of the contest. They fall behind the curve, and begin to follow the people (it’s a reverse influence), and start telling the audience why they agree with them.

Two arenas for discussion. Viewers… Pundits.

Debates reinforce perceptions of people already decided. Little effect on others (just don’t loose)

The Swift Boat effect

The campaign is never better than the candidate, but in this case, the candidate is actually better than the campaign.

The campaign of distraction and negative message really doesn’t fit McCain. He got stuck with it when he capitulated to the republican mainstream. Even in 2004, when he caved to the party and agreed to wait his turn as a loyal member (This is in keeping with his not leaving Vietnam before those ahead of him).

Attacks (so far) don’t seem to be working (not because people are not as susceptible as usual), but perhaps because it has been properly ‘framed’ by the Obama campaign this time.

McCain interrupted Obama several times (appeared rude… wouldn’t let him finish)
Went on too long (say what you think and stop).

If tone continues dominating the race. Obama wins

It has been the campaign strategy to raise fear and doubt, but McCain (personally) just can’t do it! When McCain refuted the people who talked about Obama as dangerous… or Muslim… he gained stature. I give him credit for that, and think many watching did too.

The Bradley effect dealt with exit polls of undecided voters, not committed voters. There was a very large number of them. What it shows, if anything, is where the racist vote parks itself. Undecideds generally break the same as the rest of the population, however in the case of hidden factors (like race) they generally break 2 or 3:1 against the hidden factor.

In this election, the undecided vote has shrunk to less than 6% in most key states.

Top number counts.

Take the top number, subtract ½ %, then add 30% of the undecided vote = winner. (If Obama goes into the election with 48.7 % or more, he will win.) Obama now stands at roughly 50% with little time (and no major events scheduled) to change that number.

However, life always has a way of interfering with the future.

If Obama can take New Hampshire and Colorado, he wins.

Virginia, Ohio, etc, don’t matter. If Obama wins those states, it will be because the entire country has ‘trended there’ in other words, his overall support will spill over. But if you want to concentrate on the states that are truly important, those two are where all their effort should be focused.

If he wins, he will either win with 273 electoral votes, or overwhelmingly. Nothing in between.

People always talk about how much is spent in a campaign, but no voter ever cares. It’s the message that they receive as a result of the spending that counts. Period.

Question: Why do people end up voting for the “wrong” person… the candidate not in their own best interest?