The End of the Era of the Single Issue Voter...

[shoopnyc]

It seems to me that America is at a crossroads with regards to what was known as the "Single Issue Voter". For the 2008 Election, I foresee a much more sophisticated electorate, due to the fact that all candidates, on both sides, do not not fulfill 100% of their respective bases wishes, (which, I believe, to a certain extent, is healthy).

Most recently, this has been most effectively been applied through the abuse of the "wedge issue". This construct became the norm during the rise of the 24/7 news cycle, somewhat holding them together. But the internet has diffused a lot of this, and people have a greater capacity now to look at all sides of any candidate on any side.

My fear is that people that do not follow politics closely will throw their hands up with a "they're all bad" collapse. But I think the situation in Iraq will encourage, shall we say, a more "nuanced" , and complete media coverage of all campaigns. I hope.

Some feedback?

[Old and In the Way]

1. The rise of Republicanism has been tailored towards single issue voters.

Single issue voters seem to be activated by their pet cause. But I think there comes a time when this manipulation no longer works. When things are going well, people can have the luxury of railing on about their pet causes. When everything is going to hell, the single issue just doesn't resonate. When your issues don't get attention, when your party has been in power for 12 years and can't deliver, you begin to lose that motivation to continue wasting that vote....or vote, period.

[shoopnyc]

2. Thank you...

...that was brilliant, and you're spot on with regards to what happens when things are going well and when they're not.

[patrice]

3. Been thinking about that too. In cognitive terms, if we could validly test such a thing . . .

There would be a relatively few voters whose critical thinking skills fully develop into the next higher level.
There would be a relatively few voters whose critical thinking skills stay completely the same.
Most voters critical thinking skills would cluster around the middle combining same and higher.

i.e. the "normal distribution"

A set of scores with a high end that is more high, than another set of scores, results in a higher mean and median, right?

Maybe one reason to draw some hope out of this Hell.

[shoopnyc]

4. hmmmmmmmm...

kind of like instant run off voting...

[zalinda]

5. I don't know who you are aiming this at

but there are people on this site that are single issue voters. I don't know how many, but they are vocal. You read comments all the time that I won't vote for so and so because he voted this way, or she didn't do that.

Try to reason with them, and they go off saying they're voting for Nader or some other loser. You will always have people who can't see the forest for the trees.

zalinda