There has been a trend towards political pundits using the term “low information voters”; however, I am growing greatly concerned with the misuse of this term.
Low Information Voter
Low information voters, also known as LIVs or misinformation voters, are people who may vote, but who are generally poorly informed about politics. (Wikipedia)
I have heard this term used by many of talk show hosts, and frankly, they are misusing it or they don’t understand it.
This misuse of this term is going to have profound long-term and strategic down stream effects, if we don’t change course.
What is wrong with the term ‘Low Information Voter’? Simply, the misuse of the term promotes a wrong archetype of a voter.
This term creates a archetype of a ‘low information voter’ bumping around in the wilderness, stupid, and uneducated. This voter, if only educated with facts and figures, will suddenly wake up from their slumber, see the light, and become engaged voters.
This image, stereotype or archetype could not be further from the truth.
Rationally Ignorant Voters
I prefer the term Rationally Ignorant Voters (Downs) because I think this is a much better archetype. Only by understanding the ‘Rationally Ignorant Voter’ archetype can we develop proper communication strategies.
The difference? Rationally Ignorant Voters have made a decision either consciously or unconsciously not to invest their time and energy in politics. When weighed against everything else going on in their lives, politics is not worthy of the investment of increasing their political knowledge.
These voters are choosing to spend time elsewhere in places they find more valuable.
The archetype is NOT someone bumping along aimlessly lost in a forest. This voter can be a highly educated person, civic minded, grounded in principles and values, but for whatever personal reasons, just doesn’t care that much about politics. Or if they care, it is 28th on the list of things they care about.
The ‘Rationally Ignorant Voter’ is my beautiful, loving, and incredible wife.
Before the negative emails begin, I love my wife and she is far from ‘ignorant’; however, she is what I would consider a Rationally Ignorant Voter. I could also use my mother, my friends, or even the CEO of a start up I know, but I like living dangerously.
A few notes about my loving, beautiful, awesome wife: She has a graduate degree, works full time. She is an incredible mother of a 10 year old son and a 7 year old daughter. She is an fantastic wife to a man that acts like he is a teenager a lot of the time. She keeps one helluva clean house, coordinates schedules to get kids to Tae Kwon Do and ballet, etc. She has managed to harness chaos and have energy left over. She is the modern woman.
She is very interested in certain topics that are in the political world – mental health issues, child protection. However, past those issues, she is making a decision NOT to invest any additional time in politics. She thinks the rest of us are nuts.
Now, I live, breathe, eat politics and this practice blows my mind. However, when she starts talking to me about esoteric new treatment plans for x mental disorder, I suddenly understand. With everything going on in my life, I just can’t put that much energy into the DSM-IV.
What to do?
Understanding the difference in the two archetypes is essential to understanding how to communicate with these voters.
What the ‘Low Information Voter’ crowd is getting wrong is they think education with facts, figures, and stats are suddenly going to make a light go off.
WRONG.
You can throw all the education at my love wife you like, but just because you care about something doesn’t mean she will.
When you understand the Rationally Ignorant Voter archetype, you understand it is not facts and figures, it is caring.
It is NOT the rational side of the brain you have to activate.
It is the emotional side of the brain one must activate to get the attention of these voters.
Remember, they have made a decision NOT to invest time and energy in politics because it is a low priority in their everyday lives, and until you make them want to invest more time by triggering the emotional center of their brains , you will not break through.
To communicate with these voters, you must understand the values of my wife and communicate with her through these.
That is not done with boring “education”, it is done with contrast & conflict but that is another post.
But before that, please don’t believe that the simplistic “Low Information Voters” label is correct. It is wrong, misleading, and much more complicated.
I am in a mood, so buckle up, but we need to talk.
We need to talk about data
We need to talk about data.
I am putting out a warning: the next time a candidate walks into or calls the Ozean office asking for “big data”, a web, or a social media presence ‘like President Obama’s’, they are going to get slapped. HARD!
If all of this is Greek to you, then you can’t possibly imagine the cost, time, and talent it takes to assemble just the network infrastructure – let alone the people to run the damn thing.
And the network infrastructure was the easier part!
So just STOP it with the big data!
Dirty secret About Big Data
Here is the dirty little secret, if you are running for state house, state senate, congress or even US Senate in some states, you can’t afford big data.
Let’s be honest – most likely, your campaign can’t afford true big data (yet) unless you are operating at a presidential or party level. If we continue to be honest, in most gerrymandered districts, the successful use of big data would be negligible.
Big Data
Here is another dirty secret, Big Data is used to shave the margins.
In a presidential campaign or a large campaign where the winning margins are slim AND THE BUDGET ALLOWS, big data can be extremely useful.
HOWEVER,
If you talk to anyone seriously involved in predictive analysis they will tell you that their work is on the margins.
So think about it, if you are in a district that averages 60% of the vote (like most districts) for one party is it wise to pay for ‘big data’ to push it to 63%?
Next, if you are in a district that is competitive (within 10%), you have to ask yourself: “Are you willing or able to pay for BIG DATA?”
I have been involved in enough of these campaigns – even at the Congressional level – to know that candidates complain about paying for one more mail piece or 100 GRPs on TV, let alone BIG DATA.
BIG DATA & Fieldwork
But, here is the REAL unspoken part – Big Data doesn’t work without robust field work.
I am a numbers GEEK. I love them. I love data. I love multivariate regression, etc. I love SPSS. However, the real benefits of big data are NOT just a one time purchase of data.
Big Data or “Obama data” – ONLY works when you have robust field operations feeding real time data BACK into a system creating a closed feedback loop.
Big Data is NOT a one time purchase of credit card company data and calling it “big data”
The true genius of the Obama campaign was:
having initial data —>
purchasing data to augment the initial data set —->
having real time field intelligence —>
creating hypothesis —>
creating predictive models —->
having real time field intelligence feed into data set—->
running experiments against predictive models —->
comparing results to hypothesis —>
refining predictive models —->
repeat over and over again until its over.
The Obama campaign had on staff PhD level data analysts, a robust field operation, a unmatched Internet infrastructure, and the money to finance it all.
You most likely don’t.
The Saving Grace
There is a saving grace in all of this. There are only two real numbers your campaign should care about.
1) What is the likelihood the voter will vote?
2) What is the likelihood the voter will vote for you or your campaign?
Those two numbers for 95% of the campaigns in American are fairly easy to compute for any political consultant worth their weight in salt. They are not easy to perfect, but they are easy to compute. (if they cant understand that sentence, please contact Ozeans’ Political Consultants)
The Value of Experimentation
The most interesting take away for me in this BIG DATA debate is the value of experimentation in campaigns.
If you look at big data in campaigns- big data is using large data sets to test hypothesis in order to create and refine predictive models.
However, here is the kicker – ONLY by testing hypothesis, can a campaign refine their models.
The issue is that testing means FAILURE and FAILURE means a ‘waste’ of resources, right?
We must embrace experimentation
BS – You should value the political consultant that says, “I have read the most recent literature, but you know what? I don’t know. Let’s test that hypothesis by running an experiment.”
The problem is, you don’t read the press articles on the experiments that the Obama or Romney campaign ran that failed (okay, there was orca), and I will bet you my entire net worth there were many, many, many failed disasters. But the campaign learned from these failures.
The Big Data Truth
In most all cases, your campaign can’t possibly afford true BIG DATA.
If your campaign budget won’t allow you to fund small scale experiments, your campaign can not develop nor afford BIG DATA.
SO STOP ASKING FOR BIG DATA!
What your campaign should strive for is building models that are good, embracing experimentation, and developing a robust field operation that refines your data.
Commit to that and your campaign will be better off.
The calls are starting – first time candidates and incumbents are starting to call in order to explore potential campaigns in 2014.
Awhile ago, I wrote a check list for first time candidates, and while I still stand by this simple checklist, I have something additional to add to the list.
You need a political consultant.
Why? Let’s explore, because its Science Friday.
Why you need a political consultant
Setting aside hindsight bias, let’s begin with that fact that after 30 years in political consulting and political campaigns, I don’t know many things for certain, but I know the following to be absolutely true:
Our brains are designed to take shortcuts and often unwillingly and sometimes even willingly deceive us.
Our brains deceive & fail us
Let’s be honest, if you…or ‘someone you know’…is exploring a run for office, you most likely have a healthy ego. It is this healthy ego that allows you…or your friend… to feel like you have something to offer the public that they should “buy.”
Great.
The moment you verbalize your intention to possibly consider a run for office, people & your own brain begin to lie to you – even more than normal.
Why People Lie
Your friends lie because they like you and don’t want to have a candid conversation.
Your friends are not intentionally lying, but they will say thinks like “I think you would be great.”, “We need good people like you to run.”, “You would be leaps and bound better than the nit-wits we have now.”, and various other pleasant things.
People who do business with the office you seek lie because you may win.
They are looking out for the own self interest and they will be very nice to you, especially in the early stages of exploration.
Your friends and people lie to you because they don’t know better.
Your friends & others may give you an honest opinion that you may make a fantastic public official, but don’t know the first thing about political realities, political campaigns, or the campaign process.
Why Your Own Brain Lies to You
This entire Science Friday will be dedicated to the study of irrationality, heuristics and fallacies.
Let’s just state two things as facts as a summary of the entire field of research & literature:
Our brain has two parts, an emotional part and a rational part. These parts must work together and are often in conflict.
Our brains take shortcuts (heuristics) in order to make order of the world and to survive.
If one does not have a meta experience and take the time to think about thinking, you are helpless to fight the shortcuts your brain is conditioned to take.
Even if you have a meta-experience, if you do not build deliberate systems to force yourself to fight your brain, you are helpless.
This is exactly why intelligence analysts who are dealing with far more complex issues other than “should I run for office?” build these critical thinking processes into their workflow.
Bottom line: our hunches, our guts, our thoughts are often just dead wrong.
Let’s explore some common issues:
Confabulation
As humans, we are often completely ignorant of why we make the decisions we do (like run for office). We make the decision, then perform mental gymnastics to rationalize the decision. It happens lighting quick, unconsciously and then we rationalize our decision by filling in our memories and just making stuff up. We do this so often we are blissfully unaware that our brains are doing it. We simply must rationalize the decisions we make.
Fun fact: If you are asking about running for office, you want to run for office. Most likely, you are asking around seeking a rational explanation to justify your decision.
The Dunning-Kruger Effect
I don’t want to insult you, but all humans (even great political consultants) fall subject to the Dunning-Kruger effect.
This effect tells us that most of us are extremely poor at estimating our own competences and the difficulty of the complex tasks in front of us. True, the effect is more pronounced among unskilled labor, but this makes the trap even more dangerous for aspiring politicians.
As David McRaney tells us, “The less you know about a subject, the less you believe there is to know in total. Only once you have some experience do you start to recognize the breadth and depth you have yet to plunder.”
“In the modern world the stupid are cocksure while the intelligent are full of doubt.” – Russell
Political campaigns are complex operations that unless you have participated in them before, you can’t possibly know what it is like to be a candidate.
Here is another issue, just because you have participated in a campaign as a volunteer/manager/staffer, you can’t possibly know what it is like to be a candidate.
Side note: This especially holds true when it comes to the area of raising money. Remember there is a major difference between raising money for your favorite charity/business and raising money for your own political campaign. I routinely take the amount a first time candidate tells me they can raise, cut it in half and cut it in half again. More than likely, this is the amount they will raise.
Subjective Validation
Remember those encouraging words your friends tell you? You are falling subject to subjective validation.
The subjective validation tells us that people are prone to believing vague statements and predictions are true, especially if they are positive and address you personally.
The point
These are just the tip of the iceberg
These are just three of the cognitive traps that we as humans fall into. Worse? We fall prey to them all the time without noticing, and these are just the TIP of the iceberg. (To see a more comprehensive list – look to Wikipedia or look at the additional reading listed at the bottom of this post.)
The Solution
Lucky for you and your brain, there is a solution: hire a great political consultant.
Any great political consultant must study brain function. It is our job to understand the decision making process so that we can understand how voters make decisions, how political decisions are made, and how we can affect these processes.
Our job is not only to help you navigate to victory, but also to have the experience and courage to be the check against your brain.
At Ozean, we receive feedback after every campaign cycle that the number one thing our clients appreciate most is our ability to cut through the “fog of a campaign” and be candid – even when it hurts.
Ozean does this by building into our processes the systems to combat not only your cognitive biases but our own cognitive biases. This takes effort, skill, and it takes an understanding of how our brains naturally deceive us.
We are continuously floored by the number of political consultants that are operating on their guts, their rules of thumb, and their own flawed thinking.
In closing, your friends lie to you & your brains lie to you. You need a political consultant to help you navigate these waters, and you better make damn sure your consultant won’t tell you only what you want to hear.
If you would like to discuss your potential and use our critical thinking processes, please do not hesitate to contact Ozean.
Scandals were categorized on the nature of scandal (abuse of office, financial, sex) to see if there were differences.
The results reveal that those senators seeking reelection while confronting a scandal suffered a six percent decrease from their expected vote. They also attracted higher quality challengers who spent more money against them
Scandals involving immoral behavior hurt incumbents the most, while financial improprieties hurt them the least.
Another KEY quote from the paper is as follows:
For a scandal to have any impact on an election, potential voters have to know about it and care about it. The former is the job of the press. Voters rely on journalists to provide vital information about candidates, so that informed decisions can be made at the ballot box. Though the sources for that information are changing, the valuable role that the press plays in providing it is not (Graber 2009; Iyengar and McGrady 2006).
The study is also worth reading for the review of the literature on the subject. It covers party switching, voter turnout, campaign finance violations, corruption charges, and partisan differences.
Conclusions about Political Scandal
How much is a political scandal worth?
“The coefficients are basically the same. Incumbents committing financial improprieties suffered the smallest decline (4.3%), while those displaying behavior seen as immoral suffered the largest decline (6.5%). This leads one to conclude that voters do not necessarily care about the nature of the transgression, but only that a transgression has occurred.”
“While there was essentially no difference in the number of Democrats or Republicans involved in scandals, the results reveal that voters did punish Republicans slightly more than Democrats. The results also show that incumbents, regardless of party, suffered most from objectionable behavior related to matters of morality, such as sexual indiscretions. The vast majority of incumbents were inclined to seek reelection, even in a hostile environment, rather than abandon their Senate careers. The evidence proves that, in fact, two-thirds were victorious in November. So while scandals blunt the incumbency advantage, they do not eradicate it.”
Gotta love science.
My hypothesis is that candidates not having the advantage of incumbency suffer much greater.
I say interesting because of the calls we received since the release of the study.
These calls generally fall into two categories:
1) Politicians who want to improve their social media outreach, but have political consultants who are not or can not help them with the project.
-or-
2) Fellow Political Consultants calling under the guise of “Hey man, interesting research….I disagree with….” but then guiding the discussion to ask about improving their clients’ social media outreach.
Frankly, we were expecting calls from the press NOT calls from politicians or other political consultants.
I guess the number one thing we discuss during these calls is that a robust social media outreach is not easy, free, or able to be put in the hands of the intern. Digital Media needs a spot at the table with its own goals, measurements, budget, and strategy.
On these calls, we talk about the different kinds of digital outreach: video, social, websites, micro-sites photos, fundraising, email outreach, newsletters and how each one of these should match the politicians branding archetype. We talk about conceptually how a social media program could be worked into a communications calendar. We talk about data list building activities. How these digital communications differ from communication channels they are more comfortable with. For example, is a messaged photo on facebook the equivalent to digital direct mail?
At some point, in my excitement, I realize I have lost many of them. They know in their gut they should be doing more digital, but I think they honestly had NO idea that a robust digital program would be so much work or this labor intensive. I mean one should just be able to snap their fingers and create a web video that “will go viral”, RIGHT?
So in this discussion just about the time when all is lost, Ozean receives “Boy, Ozean really understands this stuff, thanks for the information. Can I call you in the future?”
It has happened so much in the past months that I am considering re-positioning Ozean Media to:
Ozean Media: The digital agency other political consultants and politicians call when they don’t understand digital.
What do you think? Yeah you are right, needs to be shortened up a little.
I was having lunch with a client this past week, and I was told in no uncertain terms of a mutual acquaintance that does not like me personally.
In fact, it was expressed to me that this person hates the living daylights out of my guts. Let’s set aside the fact that he and I have never had a conversation and have most likely have said ‘hello’ to each other twice in passing. (Let’s also set aside that I am a extremely lovable & loyal guy.)
It was explained to me that he hates my guts because he doesn’t like that “Alex Patton engages in negative campaigning.”
This conversation was running through my head as I went home and re-read a classic book by Al Ries and Jack Trout, “Positioning: The Battle for your Mind”.
I last read the book about 5 years ago, but you could tell from my scribbles in the margins and markup, I liked the book.
I think my favorite line from the book:
“culture and refinement may be admirable qualities, but not in advertising.”
Positioning: The Battle for your Mind, pg 69
I often think about that quote and the book when working with political clients.
Here is another quote from the book that seems appropriate:
“to climb on his or her product ladder, you must relate your brand to the brands already in the prospect’s mind.”
Positioning: The Battle for your Mind, pg 69
This is especially true when a candidate is challenging an incumbent.
Let’s relate a campaign to a business endeavor, since so many business people think they have the political answers.
The situation is you are a challenger to an incumbent or brand leader. You, the challenger, are now going after market share in the voters mind. A space that we can assume the incumbent is the market leader with at some point receiving at least 50% plus 1 market share.
What to do?
I have seen way too many candidates make the childish, amateurish mistake of challenging the brand leader for market share and attempt do it without mentioning the brand leader.
A candidate can not write a campaign speech not mentioning the incumbent and not comparing yourself directly to the incumbent. It is a recipe for a complete disaster. After all, if a challenger is no different, then the consumer will remain with the market leader.
If a candidate is challenging the incumbent,”you must relate your brand already in the prospect’s mind” otherwise a candidate best be prepared to spend ungodly amounts of money in an endeavor still likely to have a low probability chance of dislodging the market leader.
If a candidate does not have the confidence to position him/her self against the brand leader and explain how he/she is different, the challenger will never break through the clutter and noise of a campaign. A challenger will say a lot, yet at the same time say absolutely nothing.
A challenger will campaign and most likely run a campaign that he/she finds to be “cultured and refined”. Congratulations, you just got your butt kicked. Please, enjoy the opera.
Let’s be clear, I do not take joy in negative campaigning nor do I use it in every campaign. However, when the situation calls for it, we will not hesitate to perform our duties for our clients to help them navigate to victory.
And you know what? I am okay with that.
PS. And to prove that I am such a lovable guy, I will be sending a copy of the book to some of my ‘favorite’ unsuccessful candidates, maybe they can read it and re-tool for their next run.
We use cookies on our website to give you the most relevant experience by remembering your preferences and repeat visits. By clicking “Accept”, you consent to the use of ALL the cookies.
This website uses cookies to improve your experience while you navigate through the website. Out of these, the cookies that are categorized as necessary are stored on your browser as they are essential for the working of basic functionalities of the website. We also use third-party cookies that help us analyze and understand how you use this website. These cookies will be stored in your browser only with your consent. You also have the option to opt-out of these cookies. But opting out of some of these cookies may affect your browsing experience.
Necessary cookies are absolutely essential for the website to function properly. These cookies ensure basic functionalities and security features of the website, anonymously.
Cookie
Duration
Description
cookielawinfo-checkbox-analytics
11 months
This cookie is set by GDPR Cookie Consent plugin. The cookie is used to store the user consent for the cookies in the category "Analytics".
cookielawinfo-checkbox-functional
11 months
The cookie is set by GDPR cookie consent to record the user consent for the cookies in the category "Functional".
cookielawinfo-checkbox-necessary
11 months
This cookie is set by GDPR Cookie Consent plugin. The cookies is used to store the user consent for the cookies in the category "Necessary".
cookielawinfo-checkbox-others
11 months
This cookie is set by GDPR Cookie Consent plugin. The cookie is used to store the user consent for the cookies in the category "Other.
cookielawinfo-checkbox-performance
11 months
This cookie is set by GDPR Cookie Consent plugin. The cookie is used to store the user consent for the cookies in the category "Performance".
viewed_cookie_policy
11 months
The cookie is set by the GDPR Cookie Consent plugin and is used to store whether or not user has consented to the use of cookies. It does not store any personal data.
Functional cookies help to perform certain functionalities like sharing the content of the website on social media platforms, collect feedbacks, and other third-party features.
Performance cookies are used to understand and analyze the key performance indexes of the website which helps in delivering a better user experience for the visitors.
Analytical cookies are used to understand how visitors interact with the website. These cookies help provide information on metrics the number of visitors, bounce rate, traffic source, etc.
Advertisement cookies are used to provide visitors with relevant ads and marketing campaigns. These cookies track visitors across websites and collect information to provide customized ads.
