Winning the Fickle Vote
According to social scientists and political practitioners, people are less loyal to products and political parties than they were in the past…a trend that is likely to affect the next election.
Think about it…Everyone knows people who have abandoned their religion, been divorced, or changed their political affiliation. Americans today are more likely to make such important changes than ever before.
So how does this affect elections? When running Howard Dean’s campaign in 2004, Joe Trippi witnessed the fickleness of Americans. After coming in third place in the Iowa caucuses, Dean lost his supporters as quickly as he gained them. According to Morris Fiorina, political science professor at Stanford University, “Obama benefited from the looser ties people have today…” (Not a surprise considering the distrust of the Bush administration.) However, “…the flip side is that he cannot count on the depth of support that a winning candidate might have had a generation ago…And, of course, if ties are looser, then change can occur faster than if the ties bind more tightly.”
After all, didn’t we learn not to trust politicians? It may not be fair to say that it’s bad to be fickle and good to be loyal. Of course, fickle isn’t exactly a positive adjective but blind allegiance isn’t something we want either. What do you think? Is it good that Americans aren’t bound to a specific politician or should we be more loyal?
