How will the undecided voters react? That is a popular question for the Wolf Blitzers and Tim Russerts of the world to pose to their roundtable of political analysts during primetime news hours. But predicting the behavior of undecided voters is a daunting task, even for the most politically-astute minds. Undecided voters often make cryptic and confusing decisions, sometimes even frustrating or stupid ones. Undecided voters are often less informed and politically engaged voters, according to mass communication Professor Regina Lawrence, whose research interests include public opinion. Perhaps that is the underlying reason their behavior is so hard to predict. How do you relay a political message to a group of politically apathetic people? Some political strategists think they have found an answer. Karl Rove, President Bush’s little Rasputin, uses fear with a high degree of effectiveness. Fear works on the assumption that because undecided voters are not accustomed to receiving political messages, they are less likely able to separate rhetoric and lies from truth. In the 2004 Presidential Election, party identification was split nearly even – 37.1 percent to 38.8 percent in the Democratic Party’s favor. Given the close race, winning the favor of the undecided voters was an important priority. Rove’s strategy was simple: scare the crap out of voters. Sen. John Kerry, D-Mass., was painted as a flip-flopping, terrorist-loving, war criminal. The legitimacy of the Purple Hearts he received while in Vietnam was questioned, and the color-coded terrorist alert system made a comeback – reminding us just how much danger we were in. Well, I suppose even undecided voters know who won that election. But fear alone does not explain the effectiveness of Rove’s tactics. It is not enough to just send out a political message – perhaps most importantly, that message must be received. Because undecided voters are less likely to pay attention to any political messages, the ones they receive become all the more impressionable. This is where the media’s coverage becomes a key factor. The more an event is covered, the more likely an undecided audience will eventually listen – at least partially. Usually, though, the media are part of the problem. In an April 5 post, author and blogger Glenn Greenwald of Salon.com explored, via NEXIS, the number of times various news stories have been mentioned in the “establishment” media for the past 30 days. What he found was saddening – though certainly not surprising. “Yoo and torture” was mentioned 102 times – referring to recently released secret memos from attorney John Yoo to President Bush essentially outlining the legality of torturing random people. The outbreak of violence and civil war in Basra, Iraq was not even on the list. But “Obama and Wright” was mentioned more than 3,000 times. “Obama and patriotism” was mentioned 1,607 times, “Obama and bowling” was mentioned 1,043 times and “Clinton and Lewinsky” was mentioned 1,079 times. So here is what an undecided voter has probably heard a lot of in the past 30 days: “blah blah blah, Obama Black Panther, blah blah, Obama unpatriotic, blah blah blah, Obama crappy bowler, blah blah.” Instead of discussing why the situation in Basra, Iraq undermines Sen. John McCain’s, R-Ariz., central platform of an extended occupation, we have been hearing why Sen. Barack Obama, D-Ill., is an elitist, out-of-touch snob because he bowled a 37 in Pennsylvania. Not all undecided voters are blank slates that can be persuaded by such silly stories. Maybe there are even voters who have paid a lot of attention to the issues and are legitimately undecided as to which direction they would like to see the country turn, but that number is certainly low. So, exactly how important are these undecided voters in elections? Thirty-seven percent of registered voters indicated no affiliation to either party, according to a March 20 Pew Research Poll – not all independent voters are necessarily undecided, but most undecided voters are probably independents. They are a large portion of the electorate, so it seems obvious that they are vastly important. But that same Pew poll also shows the Democrats with a nine point advantage over Republicans in party identification, 36 to 27 percent. That is quite a difference from the much closer 2004 election numbers. And at first glance it would appear that the Democrats have more breathing room in their support – perhaps they can afford to lose a few undecided voters this time around and still win by a substantial margin. Not so fast. “The very fact that the party I.D. number has moved in the Dems’ favor recently shows that for some people, party I.D. is not deeply held,” Professor Lawrence wisely noted. The same voters who shifted once could, presumably, shift just as easily in the other direction. Lawrence also said most movement is due to the number of voters leaving the Republican Party and registering as independents. In fact, the Pew poll indicates that 27 percent is the “lowest percentage of self-identified Republican voters in 16 years of polling by the center.” Again, there is no clear answer. We are all undecided at some point, and we all choose sides at different times. There is certainly no shame in being undecided or ill-informed about the election thus far – our Democratic system allows for it. But if you have not gotten the message yet, get off your ass and decide.
—-Contact Nate Monroe at [email protected]