Do People Choose Candidates Based on Advertisements?

Post Reply New Topic

Every election cycle I wonder if people pick who they vote for because they saw/liked the candidate's ad. On the one hand, I imagine they wouldn't keep pouring money into ads if they didn't work, but on the other hand when I watch them I am always instantly skeptical of everything they say and often find them ridiculous/over-the-top.

My husband suggested that it may be intended to prompt viewers to do research on the candidate (perhaps intentionally leading them to find information to support assertions made in the ad), but I'm not sure that the majority of people research the choices, at least not indepth and unbiasedly. I'm curious to hear about how others make their decision.

EDIT: Added clarification that my husband's train of thought was that ads are meant to prompt the viewer to look up their claims, with the intention that they do so on the candidate's website which may contain false or misleading information.

a shorthand for me is their electability, and membership in the democratic party, as that in a nutshell guarantees that they won't be opposed to universal health care in some form, and that they will keep their noses out of my bedroom as well.

Do you tend to prefer when there are many different candidates to choose from, or when it's been narrowed down? Like I've noticed that some people wait until after the primaries to learn about the candidate's, whereas others are actively seeking a good fit for themselves when there are many options to choose from. It makes me wonder if people prefer to have options within their party, or if they just want to wait for the party to choose someone. I can see the merits of both.

i pay attention from the beginning of the race. i would have loved to be able to vote for andrew yang as he was the best of the lot. but biden is what was selected, so i have to go for him if i want my vote to realistically count.*

IOW i vote AGAINST the GOP and not necessarily FOR the democrats, if i voted 3rd party that would dilute the power of my one vote against the GOP.

I think it would be interesting to see how the elections would play out if voters could rank their top 5 candidates in order of preference in the primaries. Though I think to get truly valuable data all primaries would have to occur in the same week (before a lot of them drop out).

your idea is the optimal, i wish it could be so.

If ad's didn't work I don't think candidates would spend millions on them.

we need to do what the civilized nations do, and restrict our election seasons to weeks rather than years.

For me it's based on ideology (if I can) and electability (if I have to).
If I see an interesting claim in an ad, I will verify it elsewhere before I buy into it.

I have had people tell me that they vote for who they think is going to win because they don't want to vote for a loser.

In the words of the great philosopher Phil Connors (Groundhog Day), "People are morons".

That would be preferable. I can't imagine many people enjoy hearing about elections for two years during every four year cycle.

That's interesting. It reminds me of a reason I heard about why people put politician's signs in their from yard. The person making the claim said it is based on the idea that if people see enough yards with a candidate's sign, they'll think that's the winning team. Which according to the claimant, is desirable.

It's a foreign, yet curious perspective to me.

That's a good practice