Is The Logic For Your Vote, Logical?

The 2022 Midterms are almost here. The run-up to the elections has exhibited the normal dearth of actual information from any campaign that is presented by any politician or from either of the two political parties. This is not to say that there is a paucity of campaign advertising. Rather it is that the tsunami of political campaign ads follow what passes for ‘informational’ material that the public has come to expect or believe is informative about any issue, especially the one (or ones) that is viewed as “the” issue(s) for any given voter. Each side picks those issues which they have determined energize their base and hopefully garner sufficient voters who are among the determining “swing” voters that decide elections in some contests.

The purpose of the campaign ads appears to mostly be to ‘blame’ the other side’s candidate for those issues that rank high in the polling data. The voters are thus being inundated with ads that essentially contain the following informational value: My opponent is to blame for “X” and I will make “X” go away so that you can be happy again. [Note: “X” is whatever issue(s) you are upset about.]

If this seems like a simple-minded strategy for a politician or political party to use, you would be right unless it works. In which case, it is a pragmatic strategy that requires a candidate/party to do little more than know what issue(s) evoke the most emotional response and repeat it as often and loudly as possible. But does this strategy serve the voters or the nation? It is clear that it serves the politicians and the parties; however, the supposed purpose of election campaigns is to ‘inform’ and convince the voters about what makes their positions and policies better than those of their opponents. Even for one-issue voters this would be better for the nation than just appealing to the answer that the voter already wants. If the logic that supports reaching the answer provides some substance than there is at least a basis for the decision beyond an ‘act of faith’. That determinative substance should standup against the substance of the information that the opposing side presents. It doesn’t preclude some voters from voting for the party’s candidate regardless of substance, but it requires each candidate to persuade non-partisan voters to weigh each candidate’s substance to that of the other.

If you think that that is what the debates are for, sadly today’s debates are little more than less polished versions of the ads and often contain less than the non-information in the campaign ads.

How can the public/voters tell if they are reacting to the ‘blame them, trust me’ campaign ads strategy or are they being given something that requires you to think about the reasoning behind a position or policy? This is a good question for a test.

The following test will not make sense to partisan voters because they don’t question the position of their parties’ candidates. They vote along party lines, since that is how you know what the right positions and policies are. For those voters, the test is pretty easy as no matter the logic and reasoning that would be appropriate, their confirmation bias will adequately guarantee that their answer is obviously the right one.

Question 1: Did you know what party’s candidate(s) you were going to vote for in the midterms in February of 2020? A. Yes B. No

Question 2: Is Inflation a determining reason that you chose the candidate you are voting for? A. Yes B. No C. I haven’t chosen the candidate I am voting for yet but inflation is a key factor. D. There was a more important issue that determined my vote.

Question 3: If your candidate(s) is elected, will they ‘fix’ inflation? A. Yes B. No C. It doesn’t matter.

Question 4: How far back does the cause(s) of inflation go in years? A. One year B. Two to Three years C. Four to six years D. More than six years

Question 5: Given there is inflation throughout the globe, what is its source? A. The US’s inflation is originating from within the US. B. The US’s inflation comes from outside the US from sources all around the world. C. The US’s inflation comes from both internal and external sources.

Question 6: What can politicians do in terms of impacting inflation? A. Politicians can stop inflation without causing pain to the public if they act correctly. B. Politicians can not stop inflation. C. Politicians can cause inflation but not stop it. D. Politicians could stop inflation but are unwilling to act as required as it will upset voters. E. Politicians can let the Fed manage inflation.

Answer to Question 1: For those who answered Yes. If you already knew the party, then your logic is fundamentally one of ‘belief’ not rational judgement. It’s ok, there are always a portion of the public that votes party regardless of the consequences. It is not unique to just one party, there are ample individuals who will do so for both. Your answer to the rest of the test are irrelevant since no judgement, reasoning, or integrity is required. For those who answered No. Do not fear, you may still fail the citizenship test, but at least you will fail for some other inane reason. And of course, there may be those among you who will not fail.

Answer to Question 2: The answers here basically put you into a categorical sub-population group that is key to the nature of logic and reasoning that you may be using. The A. Yes would suggest that your judgement is attributing one or more connections between inflation and each party/politician differently.

The B. No would suggest that you are ignoring a particularly important issue for the nation, and presumably yourself in making a decision about whom you are supporting.

The C. response indicates that there is another issue that is causing some conflict with or resistance to you decision which is of perhaps greater import.

The D. answer would seem to put you into a category which cannot be assessed here since only you know what it is, why it is important to you, and how it help determine which party/candidate you will vote for. Of course, the rationale behind the issue may provide an equivalent understanding of whether you are a party-first voter or a patriot.

Answer to Question 3: This answer only applies if inflation is/was a primary reason for your vote. If you answered Yes, I suggest that you are foolish to believe that politicians will solve inflation, but people are allowed to believe what they will.

If your answer was No, then there is a severe logic problem. Inflation was the reason you decided on your vote, but it wasn’t because you expected them to ‘fix’ it. Similarly, if it didn’t matter there is another logic problem.

Answer to Question 4: This is a simple one. The answer is more than six years. You may not understand why this is the case, but perhaps the party and politicians that you support have failed to explain it or they themselves don’t know.

Answer to Question 5: The answer to this question is quite fun. Some of the US’s inflation originates in the US, but most of the inflation is of an external origin that once it tipped the balance the inflation drivers in the US took off. The external sources are many and diverse; and beyond the control and influence of the US. This makes choosing a party or politician to solve inflation are rather odd expectation.

Answer to Question 6: As this is a special question, it comes at a price. You are not likely to want to pay the price, but it is pretty consistent with how most voters deal with national issues. Let’s not deal with the reality of the problem and turn it into a ‘blame’ game. Answer A. Politicians can’t stop inflation without causing pain because embedded in the causes of inflation are events and circumstances which are inherently painful. To get out of inflation, the price includes the pain. Answer B. There is some truth to this answer. Politicians are mostly ill-equipped to deal with inflation and when they try, they usually increase the pain that the public will pay. Answer C. There is truth in this answer also. But the likely presumption about who is to “blame” is most likely to be attributed on a partisan basis. I would refer you to A. Lincoln’s observation about politics and the public. Answer D. More truth. This one includes a relationship responsibility between the voters/public and inflation that it would benefit the nation from understanding better. Answer E. This is often the case. The politicians will rely upon the Fed to handle it. This gives them cover and also lets them blame the Fed and others while offering them with a ‘promise’ that they know what to do if you just vote for them.

So, what is the logic that you use?

The answer to this question is the one that you could perhaps learn the most from. However, there is no answer that this test can provide you as it only comes from self-awareness and patriotic honesty.