Who actually falls for attack ads?

[Reverend_Smitty]

This is a question I've been asking myself for some time now. Politicians have been coming out with these over the top and deliberately misleading ads for a long time and I know they are aimed at the "undecided center voter". Well I guess my question is, who the hell are these people?!? Running up to the 2004 election I met two kinds of people...those who made up their mind and nothing short of their candidate getting caught on live TV touching little boys would get them to change their minds and those who didn't give a damn about politics and wouldn't vote anyway.

So where was this great undecided group that needed all of these ads shoved down their throats everyday? It seems to me that the 30% of Americans that actually take the time to vote would know enough about about the candidates so that the campaigns would not have to pander to the lowest common denominator...but who knows, I could be wrong. I personally don't know a single person who was swayed by an ad like that and made up their mind (to vote or not) long before election day. Does anyone here personally know anyone in the supposed "vast undecided middle" because I would really like to learn more about these people.

[RedStateShame]

1. The elderly

[Love Bug]

2. Bush's base?

I have no other explanation.

[Reverend_Smitty]

4. But if they are his base...

wouldn't they be voting for him anyway? They just don't make sense to me. The only other explanation I can come up with is that they lower political discourse so much that it turns people off from the system entirely so that the base has more pull in the polls

[Love Bug]

16. Aw, I was just being a smart-ass

However, I think attack ads work because most voters don't know enough about candidates to make informed decisions in the voting booth. All they "know" about the candidates are the images they've been fed and will vote for whomever they think will protect their wallet and their safety.

That's why attack ads work and that's why we've been plagued with them since John Adams ran against Thomas Jefferson.

[Ravenseye]

3. Often times they're not about helping you make up your mind to vote

They're about keeping other voters away from the polls.

They don't want to convince the undecided voters to vote for their guy, they want to convince the opponents supporters to not be as enthusiastic about him, and therefore stay away from the polls out of apathy. They're doing it now in Pennsylvania. Santorum knows he's not going to win over Casey supporters, but the numbers play out that his attacking Casey will sap support away from Casey into the 'probably not going to vote' column.

Now the question is, who would support a democratic nominee, and then watch a republican attack ad and have it affect them? I don't know. Why would anyone in their right mind watch Fox News? People are stupid, and crazy, and sometimes both, but rarely neither.

[ComerPerro]

5. Sometimes, the only thing attack ads really need to do

is disgust some people enough to not make them want to vote.

"Well, I don't support the Republican, but I've heard some bad things about the Democrat".

many times, that's enough.

Attacks worked very well for George H W Bush in 1988

[Virginia Dare]

6. People who don't take the time to educate themselves..

about issues that are (or should be) important to them.

[0007]

7. The same assholes that love the very word of Bill O'Reilly

[warrens]

8. They work on everyone, to an extent

Even if you support the subject, attack ads are often cleverly constructed to deliver psychological cues that promote distress, distrust and increase irritation. You transfer those feelings to the subject, to a greater or lesser extent. When the ad turns to the creator of the ad, the colors, background music, etc. all change to positive reinforcers.

It's only partly the actual content. These people know what they are doing, and they are highly effective.

[bluemarkers]

9. when I was 18, back when we voted with chisels

on stone tablets. you know the 1970's.

It was not really an attack ad like you see today, but it inferred something that was not true.

It was a good lesson, because I have always tried to see both sides of an issue since then. I hate getting fooled, and so far it has only happened once - politically anyway. :) Didn't Mr smooth talker try to explain the concept? haha

[BuyingThyme]

10. Folks just can't seem to remember the good things.

And aren't likely to believe people who have good things to say about themselves.

[sandnsea]

11. Who is likely to second-guess their view?

Gee, isn't the answer to that pretty obvious? Not the right wing, that's for sure. If the right can get the left and center to question their support, or feel embarrassed about who they support, it squelches the herd affect. That 2-3% that sways election are largely herd voters, they vote for who they think is the popular candidate.

[napi21]

12. I don't think it's much of a political group as it is motivating some

voters to go to the polls.

Voters have gotten so lazy, it seems most of them just say, "hey, whatever happens, it doesn't matter if I vote, I'll listen later to find out what happened." The attack ads motivate at least SOME of those folks to get angry enough to get off their lazy A** andvote AGAINST someone!

I'm just HOPING that Dems are motivated by what has happened to them in the past 5+ years and get their behinds out the darn door and to the polls in Nov.

[ContraBass Black]

13. More people than listen to positive ads.

[quiet.american]

14. In some of my experience, it's women in awe of their husband's politics

I know three or four women who don't want to keep up with politics, and so they simply adapt their husband's views. These women tend to be in awe of their husbands (for whatever reason) and accept anything at face value that backs up their husband's opinions. If their husband approves of a candidate, so do they. If their husband says it's Clinton's fault, so do they. If their husband thinks an attack ad is fact-based and actually doesn't go far enough, so do they.

[Greyhound]

15. Take a walk through your local mall, or better yet, take a seat

inside the main entrance and just watch and listen to the "average amerikans" coming and going. They are the folks you're looking for, completely brainwashed with no defense against any message they come across from any "media" source. Without any conscious though whatsoever, they will take any action that they are told to, believe what they are told to believe, buy what they are told to buy, all without question, simply because a disembodied voice, or talking head says it.

They are the product of 40 years of conditioning to uncritically accept whatever the person with a microphone tells them. :eyes:

[izzybeans]

17. I'm still waiting for Mondale to allow the next Nuclear holocaust.

Or was it Dukakis? Or Clinton? Gore? I know it was Kerry? He's soft on defense. Right?

;)

I think they play the same commercial every election cycle with a different name and some updated graphics.