I'm plenty angry, but not enough to vote for this guy.
Posted on 06/10/2011 11:11:57 AM PDT by Red Badger
Though pundits and candidates suggest there is too much anger in politics, the emotion does have a potential benefit—it significantly motivates citizens to vote, according to a University of Michigan study.
"Anger in politics can play a particularly vital role, motivating some people to participate in ways they might ordinarily not," said Nicholas Valentino, the study's lead author and a professor of communication studies and political science. "We normally think people with a lot of resources and political skills are the ones who participate, but many citizens in this category regularly abstain from politics. Furthermore, many citizens with few resources can be mobilized if they experience strong anger.
"Anger leads citizens to harness existing skills and resources in a given election. Therefore, the process by which emotions are produced in each campaign can powerfully alter electoral outcomes."
Valentino and colleagues used an "emotion-induction task" to heighten specific emotional states in a group of participants who were assigned three conditions: anger, anxiety and enthusiasm. They were asked to recall and write about something that caused them to experience a specific emotion during the last presidential campaign. They were also asked about their political participation based on five actions: wearing a campaign button, volunteering for a campaign, attending a rally, talking to others or donating money.
Anger boosted participation by nearly one third for each of these five behaviors, while anxiety and enthusiasm did not, the study found.
The researchers also looked at respondents' emotions in a national survey conducted during the 2008 presidential campaign. The pre-election study measured 12 emotions, including anger, fear, hope, alarm, sadness, disgust and happiness. Respondents were asked how they felt about the way things were going in the country, rating each emotion. Again, anger was strongly related to participation in the 2008 election.
In another analysis, the researchers looked at emotions and nonvoting participation from elections from 1980 to 2004. Talking to others about voting and wearing a button represented "cheap" forms of participation that require little effort or resources, while "costly" ways of participating involved attending a rally, working for a campaign and donating money. In both cases, anger boosted political participation, especially when skills and resources are factored into the equation.
Wow! What a result! I couldn’t have guessed!
If that is true, the Old Guard in both parties had better watch out.
These old hacks seem incapable of solving the spending crisis now at hand.
Good riddance to most of them in 2012.
Bammy is ska-rood.
This is good news. Any voter who isn’t angry about the road our country is going down has to be brain dead.
In each of us two natures are at war....
“Again, anger was strongly related to participation in the 2008 election.”
Right...but it had nothing to do with 2010...NOTHING I SAY!
*snicker*
Or a communist...............
Mine aren’t at war. They are allies........................
Some, get picked up on a bus, transported and given a list on who to vote for. They aren’t angry. They are lockstep Dems.
Anger in 2008?
What were the first time voters “angry” about?
Not getting enough free sh*t at the expense of someone else?
Unfortunately, those still outnumber the voters angry at DC's malfeasance.
Unfortunately, those still outnumber the voters angry at DC's malfeasance.
I'm plenty angry, but not enough to vote for this guy.
It couldn’t have been the case for 2008. I thought Hope’nChange voters were euphoric?
I kept hearing youthful and energetic vs. us the old time bitter clingers.
Indeed, anger does bring out the votes. But a study wasn’t needed to make such a determination. A quick look at our history makes this premiss more than clear.
I hold that civil war is just another way to vote. It can certainly be an ugly, bloody and regrettable way to vote, but a vote it is.
An historic first vote was cast from a ten-inch mortar at 4:30 A.M., April 12th, 1861. Captain James was a skillful officer, and the firing of the shell was a success. It burst immediately over fort Sumter.
Caution and reflection is advised to those who work so diligently to wreck our country, ignore our constitution, ruin our lives and steal our treasure and Liberty.
Anger can certainly bring out the votes.
Anger can also motivate people to refuse to vote...and refuse to buy.
The Institute for the Study of the Bleedin’ Obvious, at it again...
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.