I had a conversation with an undecided truck driver who was despondent because he had just hit a woman's car after having worked a week straight. He didn't think the accident was his fault and he was angry about being sued. "There's too many lawsuits these days," he told me. I was set to have to rebut a "tort reform" argument, but it never came. Even though there was a ready-made connection between what was happening in his life and a campaign issue, he never made the leap. I asked him about the company he worked for and whether it would cover his legal expenses; he said he didn't think so. I asked him if he was unionized and he said no. "The last job was unionized," he said. "They would have covered my expenses." I tried to steer him towards a political discussion about how Kerry would stand up for workers' rights and protect unions, but it never got anywhere. He didn't seem to think there was any connection between politics and whether his company would cover his legal costs. Had he made a connection between his predicament and the issue of tort reform, it might have benefited Bush; had he made a connection between his predicament and the issue of labor rights, it might have benefited Kerry. He made neither, and remained undecided.
Saturday, January 5, 2008
Christopher Hayes' 2004 profile of undecided voters is awfully entertaining and a trifle scary at times. Though far from scientific, the findings are actually consistent with a good deal of literature on voting behavior. I particularly enjoyed this section, in which Hayes notes that the undecided actually do think about politics, but seem unable to link politics to events in their own lives:
Posted by Seth Masket at 1/05/2008 10:45:00 PM
Subscribe to: Post Comments (Atom)
Post a Comment