<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<!--Generated by Squarespace Site Server v4.1.2 (http://www.squarespace.com/) on Sat, 17 May 2008 08:50:37 GMT--><feed xmlns="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom" xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"><title>Dissecting the Vital Center</title><subtitle>Dissecting the Vital Center</subtitle><id>http://hprsite.squarespace.com/dissecting-the-vital-042008/</id><link rel="alternate" type="application/xhtml+xml" href="http://hprsite.squarespace.com/dissecting-the-vital-042008/"/><link rel="self" type="application/atom+xml" href="http://hprsite.squarespace.com/dissecting-the-vital-042008/atom.xml"/><updated>2008-05-01T02:03:43Z</updated><generator uri="http://www.squarespace.com/" version="Squarespace Site Server v4.1.2 (http://www.squarespace.com/)">Squarespace</generator><entry><title>Dissecting the Vital Center</title><id>http://hprsite.squarespace.com/dissecting-the-vital-042008/2008/4/30/dissecting-the-vital-center.html</id><link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="http://hprsite.squarespace.com/dissecting-the-vital-042008/2008/4/30/dissecting-the-vital-center.html"/><author><name>HPR</name></author><published>2008-04-30T16:22:55Z</published><updated>2008-04-30T16:22:55Z</updated><content type="html" xml:lang="en-US"><![CDATA[<em>A new study examines the swing voter </em>

<br>BY ALETHIA WILLIAMS<p>
<p><em>The Swing Voter in American Politics</em>

<br>William G. Mayer, Editor

<br>$18.95 

    <p>  “There is always the possibility that swing voters could make a critical difference in the next election,” according to James E. Campbell, a contributing author to <em>The Swing Voter In American Politics</em>, “but if history is a guide, the odds are that they will not decide the election.” Yet the American media seems to herald undecided moderate voters as the critical voice in every election. 

    <p>  In this collection of analytical essays, this strange discrepancy between media expectations and the actual impact of swing voters, and the nature of that impact, are examined in great detail. Studying elections is more of an art than a science, but in this book a picture of swing voters emerges that demonstrates that they play a more significant role in local and primary elections. In national elections, they shape campaign messages more than they actually decide the outcome. 
<p><strong>Defining the Swing Voter</strong>

    <br>  William Mayer, the editor of the collection, defines a swing voter as “a voter who could go either way: a voter who is not so solidly committed to one candidate or the other as to make all efforts at persuasion futile.” People in this category tend to be more politically moderate but not necessarily independent. Swing voters may be party loyalists disillusioned with the progression of an election. They may also be too apathetic to be actively interested in voting.
<p> Because more research must be done on this subject, political scientists are still unsure of what causes voters to become swing voters. Daron R. Shaw, another contributing author, posed a key problem: “Swing voting is determined… by the interaction of [voters’ characteristics] with the nature of the information that arises in a particular race.” Voters who become disillusioned with a candidate or the nature of a smear campaign will naturally be difficult to predict. 

<p><strong>The Local Level</strong>

   <br>   While the voters themselves may be easy to identify by simple polling, their general voting pattern is not. To help campaigns focus their efforts, several polls have been devised to track initial decisions in comparison with actual choices on Election Day. The American National Election Studies poll collects answers to questions on candidate favorability. The Gallup poll questions the degree to which voters are committed to their candidate of choice. And in 2004, the Pew Research Center tracked voting choices and changes in the electorate, charting how minds were influenced over the course of a campaign.

    <p>  For local elections, the results were significant. In local elections, there is greater personal contact with voters. Nominees and their campaigners can use tactics like door-to-door communication and telephone calls. For the undecided, this personalized attention can be enough to gain their approval. Primary elections, too, often involve more energy at the local level. As a result, swing voters can be more easily influenced and may therefore exert a greater impact on the results. The recent primaries, especially the Democratic Party primaries, are a good example of the power of swing voting on a local level. Early polls suggested a strong lead for Senator Hillary Clinton in the majority of the states, but intense local campaigning changed several predicted outcomes on the day of the state primaries or caucuses.  

<p><strong>Swing Voters and Presidential Politics</strong>

    <br>  The swing vote in national elections, however, is not nearly as significant. Especially in close elections, voters tend to be split evenly. Voters with any sort of preconceived idea about their potential choice usually end up casting their vote for that candidate in the end. Also, in the presidential election, voters typically are not as split. As Campbell argues, in the primaries, there is more variety and choice, but nationally, party affiliation can sometimes outweigh personal preferences.

    <p>  National campaigns still target swing voters, however. The nominee does not have to address the party loyalists, whose votes are ensured. However, non-loyalists’ affinity must be secured and maintained through active persuasion. If a candidate appeals to political independents and can persuade them to support him or her, then their arguments are usually strong enough to sustain the support from the rest of the party voters. Even if swing voters do not play a significant role in deciding the election, they are still the primary targets in the media, for they give focus and shape to the national campaign.]]></content></entry></feed>