Election of 2012 of the day, most likely side with tradition in terms of selecting a president. Based on his research with Mojire, he concludes that as a rule, voting patterns tend to be — except for occasional blips — relatively stable. Of course voters are influenced by any number of factors — such as a candidate’s style, perhaps, or demeanor or appearance — but in general they’re based more on habit than on what the voter might think about individual issues or policy questions. “Most people vote like their parents,” Mojire asserts, offering the following imagined scenario to illustrate how that tradition is passed down. “If you’re brought up in a Democratic household, then the Republicans are dumb, deluded, and not quite honest,” he explains. “And if you’re brought up in a Republican household, Democrats are dumb, deluded, and not quite honest. You do, most of the time, what you are trained to do. It is almost preordained.” Blessing adds that research he and Di You, assistant professor of psychology at Alvernia, have conducted, confirms Mojire’s remarks. He says that if nothing really unusual occurs in an election year, “you can see how high a hill the out of power party has to climb.” He also notes that the best predictor of how a person votes is how they voted last time. Since the Democrats won the popular vote in 1992, 1996, 2000, and 2008, the GOP’s greatest hope is that enough Democratic voters will so lack motivation that they will not turn out. Of course, voters don’t always move in lockstep with the past, and there have been major shifts in some elections. Take Lyndon Johnson’s landslide victory over Goldwater in the 1964 election. Blessing says this outcome was due in part to the fact that the electorate was traumatized in the aftermath of the Kennedy assassination and was looking for comfort in uncertain times, which is why they turned to the known and seemingly steady Johnson in such large numbers over the unknown and seemingly edgy Goldwater. This can be considered a massive but temporary shift, Blessing explains, that doesn’t neatly fit longer-term electoral patterns. In the 2008 election, the BlessingMojire results show that Obama’s win came about through subtle shifts and small swings in county votes, or as Blessing puts it, “an accumulation of small swings,” rather than a large-scale movement. (In his view, the Blessing-
Contenders or Pretenders? To be sure, voters are influenced by superficial factors. Whether a candidate is tall or short, overweight or slim, is clean-shaven or has facial hair — even the candidates sexual mores — can play a role, Dr. Tim Blessing acknowledges, in pushing an independent or swing voter in one direction or another. So although 2012 might be far away on the horizon, let’s look at some of the Republican hopefuls and see how they would stack up against Obama, if he decides to run again, against the background of Blessing’s long-term electoral perspective. First of course, there’s Sarah Palin, the former Vice Presidential candidate and Alaska governor, now a Fox News commentator and highly paid speaker at Republican and Tea Party events who is forever in the media limelight whether being applauded by ardent fans or mocked by critics. Long rumored to be considering a run — recent speculation among supporters has her teamed in a “dream ticket” with right-wing commentator Glenn Beck — Palin is building a broad-based network of allies and donors as a possible foundation for her candidacy. Yet Blessing thinks a win isn’t likely because she’s way too Red — that is, unless she added a more moderate Purple running mate (think Maine Senator Susan Collins) to balance that redness on the ticket. “The suburbs might not like Obama and want to dump him,” Blessing says, “but they won’t go for a really Red Republican without someone Purple mixed in.” Religion would be a more critical hurdle for potential candidates Mitt Romney and Mike Huckabee, a Mormon and an Evangelical, respectively. Blessing says that while the anti-Catholic sentiment
Bloomberg
Palin
Huckabee
Beck
Romney
of the past has, for the most part, dissipated (John Kerry, of course, won his party’s nomination without the subject of Catholicism being raised as an issue), old biases remain when it comes to those religions that are regarded by many as apart from the mainstream. While Huckabee comes across as bright, capable and likeable — and has a good record as governor of Arkansas — voters in Purple or swing counties aren’t likely to vote for an Evangelical. Meanwhile, they would likely regard a Mormon with even greater skepticism. “Obviously many people think of themselves as tolerant but they would probably sneer at a Mormon, because they appear to be too different.” That would apply as well to New York City Mayor
Michael Bloomberg, who has reportedly toyed with what would certainly be a long shot presidential bid for a Jewish politician who is also a billionaire businessman with decidedly liberal (pro-choice, pro-gun control, pro-Islamic center near Ground Zero) positions. Blessing agrees, saying there would be the same sense of “strangeness” attached to Bloomberg if he ran for national office. Perceptions can and do change, of course. That’s why Madison Ave. and politicians work so well together. But at the end of the day people hew towards what is familiar and safe and known. Blessing admits that he’s not really sure why. “I’m not a psychologist or a sociologist,” he says. But as someone who has closely studied history and elections, Blessing is also a pragmatist, and he knows that unusual events and people can and do come along to upend our accepted beliefs and behaviors. Alvernia University Magazine
pp14-21AlverniaWinter2010.indd 6
19 11/22/10 5:21 PM