Are Voters Just Rooting for Clothes?

A few days ago Brendan Nyhan – a professor of political science at Dartmouth — was interviewed on NPR’s Morning Edition (discussing a paper Brendan wrote with Jason Reifler). This interview noted the following:

When pollsters ask Republicans and Democrats whether the president can do anything about high gas prices, the answers reflect the usual partisan divisions in the country. About two-thirds of Republicans say the president can do something about high gas prices, and about two-thirds of Democrats say he can’t.

But six years ago, with a Republican president in the White House, the numbers were reversed: Three-fourths of Democrats said President Bush could do something about high gas prices, while the majority of Republicans said gas prices were clearly outside the president’s control.

The flipped perceptions on gas prices isn’t an aberration, said Dartmouth College political scientist Brendan Nyhan. On a range of issues, partisans seem partial to their political loyalties over the facts. When those loyalties demand changing their views of the facts, he said, partisans seem willing to throw even consistency overboard.

The NPR story doesn’t provide “a range of issues”. But it isn’t hard to come up with such a list. For example, consider these two issues:

The national debt seems to always trouble the party that isn’t in the White House. When Bush was President (pick your Bush), Democrats were very troubled by the rising national debt. Republicans, though, were relatively quiet. Now that Obama is President, Republicans are extremely worried about the national debt. However, Democrats don’t seem as alarmed.
What about health care? Mitt Romney implemented a plan from the Heritage Foundation while governor of Massachusetts. Barack Obama backed a very similar plan. Somehow, though, many Republicans are very troubled by Obama’s health care plan (even Mitt Romney!). But many of these same Republicans (even Mitt Romney!) were not troubled by Romney’s health care plan.

One might think that in sports fans are rooting for players. But in reality, many fans are just rooting for clothes. Likewise, we might think that voters are interested in issues. But the above examples suggest that many voters are just rooting for parties. The actual issues each party says they care about don’t seem to be very important. What is important is that the party the voter follows actually wins the elections.

If this is true, then “reaching across the aisle” may be pointless. Fans of the opposite party are not against the President because he doesn’t agree with them on the issue. They are against the President because he plays for the “wrong” team. And unless he is willing to change teams (i.e. change clothes), he can try to “reach across the aisle” all day and he will never make the other team’s fans happy.

Quote from ASG : Now that Obama is President, Republicans are extremely worried about the national debt.

If this were really true, they wouldn't be backing the Ryan budget plan which increases the debt by $6T over ten years: [factcheck.org]

Quote : Ryan says his plan would not increase the debt. In fact, under his plan the public debt would increase from $10 trillion in 2011 to $16 trillion in 2021, by his own figures. That’s a slower increase than under President Barack Obama’s budget, but the debt would still rise substantially.

Their real priority/selling point is promising to cut taxes as usual.

Quote from 124nic8 : If this were really true, they wouldn't be backing the Ryan budget plan which increases the debt by $6T over ten years: [factcheck.org]

You are looking at the actions rather than their words. If you go by their words, the Republicans are worried about the debt

Quote from 124nic8 : If this were really true, they wouldn't be backing the Ryan budget plan which increases the debt by $6T over ten years: [factcheck.org]

as opposed to Obama's which increases debt by $10T over the same period, yes, Ryan's is better....but then i wouldnt expect you to present facts in the proper context.

Quote from Radeck : as opposed to Obama's which increases debt by $10T over the same period, yes, Ryan's is better....but then i wouldnt expect you to present facts in the proper context.

The proper context is that they're still more concerned with cutting taxes than the debt.

If debt were the top priority, they wouldn't be planning huge tax cuts.

Quote from Radeck : but then i wouldnt expect you to present facts in the proper context.

Project much?

the article is partially true, but there is more to consider. especially when it comes to the wars. going to and starting a new war is a big deal which will upset a lot of people. be at war for a decade and people get used to it. yes i realize polls show people are overwhelmingly against the war and want to end it, but that's only when prompted by a question. besides that, it's not really on the public's conscience. i realize this article is more about views on the debt, but this is applicable as well.