<![CDATA[Grist - Comment Feed for Romney takes Michigan]]> Grist Comment Feed en Comment #1 by wesrolley http://www.grist.org/article/romney-takes-michigan/ Tue, 15 Jan 2008 12:11:29 -0800 http://www.grist.org/article/romney-takes-michigan/1 Irrantional voters

Is this a good time to invoke Bryan Caplan's latest book, the Myth of the Rational Voter?

It seems as if his major point, that votes are an expression of preferences over beliefs, seems to be true.  People would rather vote for the Comfortable Lie than to acknowledge the Inconvenient Truth.

Wes Rolley CoChair - EcoAction Committee Green Party US

]]> Irrantional voters

Is this a good time to invoke Bryan Caplan's latest book, the Myth of the Rational Voter?

It seems as if his major point, that votes are an expression of preferences over beliefs, seems to be true.  People would rather vote for the Comfortable Lie than to acknowledge the Inconvenient Truth.

Wes Rolley CoChair - EcoAction Committee Green Party US

]]> Comment #2 by inkabinkaboo182 http://www.grist.org/article/romney-takes-michigan/ Wed, 16 Jan 2008 05:52:41 -0800 http://www.grist.org/article/romney-takes-michigan/2 Agreed.

People tend to vote on "the cult of personality" more than the reality of the candidate's positions, or whether the candidate really has their best interest in mind.

Take, for example, Barack Obama.  He and Hillary have pretty much the same opinion on every issue.  They are both deeply indebted to corporate interests.  And yet I see more progressives supporting Obama than Hillary.  Why?  Because Obama is so much more appealing.  He is very charismatic and has a message of "hope" and "change."  Hope for what?  Change for what?  That doesn't seem to matter.

]]> Agreed.

People tend to vote on "the cult of personality" more than the reality of the candidate's positions, or whether the candidate really has their best interest in mind.

Take, for example, Barack Obama.  He and Hillary have pretty much the same opinion on every issue.  They are both deeply indebted to corporate interests.  And yet I see more progressives supporting Obama than Hillary.  Why?  Because Obama is so much more appealing.  He is very charismatic and has a message of "hope" and "change."  Hope for what?  Change for what?  That doesn't seem to matter.

]]>