American Political Issues #3 - “Core supporters stuck with their candidates” 4/23/08

With the progress of the primary election, much of the media – in print, electronic, radio, and television broadcasts – is devoted solely and consistently to the election.  With the coming and passing of each subsequent primary election day, the media focuses on predictions and surveys to determine the winner.  Those who still claim to be undecided come voting day are questioned to no end, because those who have long ago committed to or at least recently decided upon a particular candidate, such rash indecision is difficult to understand. 

It is the other group, those early and continued supporters of various candidates whom they rely on to join together to garner further support on the grassroots level in their communities across the country.  Intuition may lead us to believe that for those who become more involved with the campaigns of their candidate, individuals might be more exposed to competing arguments, and their loyalty may waver.  Social psychological studies, however, disprove our intuition with a concept called group polarization.  Research says that the longer we are exposed to, and involved with other individuals who hold more extreme opinions of the same side as our own, the more steadfast we hold our own convictions.  Group polarization is when a group discussion encourages people to go with the decision they were predisposed to.  In fact, their opinions oftentimes become more extreme.  So we often think that debating amongst the candidates and their supporters is effective at revealing all sides of the arguments, such that some may reconsider their positions.  Nevertheless, this is proven to be a tired and wasted effort because it, more often, achieves the opposite affect.  This principle, or reality, whatever you want to call it, is important because it sheds light on how people who are working on presidential, and even high school elections, can better target and allocate their efforts.