195
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
this post was submitted on 21 Oct 2024
195 points (98.0% liked)
politics
19082 readers
3524 users here now
Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!
Rules:
- Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.
Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.
Example:
- Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
- Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
- No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive.
- Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
- No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning
We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.
All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.
That's all the rules!
Civic Links
• Congressional Awards Program
• Library of Congress Legislative Resources
• U.S. House of Representatives
Partnered Communities:
• News
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
FWIW, studies have shown that voters are more likely to vote for a candidate they perceive as winning than one they perceive as losing.
I'd love nothing more than to be wrong, so if there are studies saying I am then that's great. I'm curious what it does to their likelihood to vote at all vs who they vote for.
It feels like what it should drive is complacency to me (along with energizing the R voters) but I'm super happy for my feeling to be wrong.
People who feel discouraged and demoralized are less likely to put in the effort to vote. The perception that your side is losing tends to demoralize, while the perception that your side is winning tends to be encouraging. And even among undecided voters, the bandwagon effect tends to nudge them towards the side they view as in the lead and more popular. This is why push polls have been around for ages, to influence people by convincing them that your side has more support than it really does.
The idea that people will get complacent is something that I think is largely inspired by the 2016 election, when turnout was relatively low and Hillary lost. But Hillary was also a deeply unpopular candidate with a lot of baggage that voters found hard to ignore. Harris isn't universally loved, but she's a lot more popular than Hillary was. And the stakes in 2016 weren't quite as obvious and stark as they are now.
Those are good points!