I thought this was interesting. And I think we are susceptible to it as well

[jpgray]

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/10/07/AR2007100701112.html

Evidence, however, has recently emerged to suggest there may be basic differences in how Republican and Democratic voters perceive waffling, and that voters may view inconsistency differently among Republican and Democratic politicians.

In one experiment conducted in Obama's home state by psychologists Cynthia Nordstrom and Susan Thomas of Southern Illinois University in Edwardsville, volunteers were painted a picture of an inconsistent politician.

The psychologists found that while waffling among all candidates was frowned upon, voters were more likely to punish Democrats who waffled. "Moreover," they noted in an article they published this year in the North American Journal of Psychology, "the Democratic candidate was perceived to be more of a waffler and was less likely to be voted for than the Republican candidate."

The rest of the article is kind of worthless, but this study I found very interesting indeed. The author doesn't make the leap that editorial and general news coverage of Democratic waffling is far more critical and receives far more exposure. Bush's constant goalpost-moving on Iraq, not to mention his many justifications for the invasion in the first place, never got any critical traction in the media (except on the flippin' Daily Show). On the flip side, for example, front page stories, however, ran with Bush's interpretation of Kerry's debate comment about passing the "global test" as meaning UN control of American foreign policy. When Kerry said that wasn't what he meant, it was viewed as another waffling, despite the fact that the accusation was totally bogus.

His preface to the "try to do it right, do it so others go along with you" was: "No President, through all of American history, has ever ceded, and nor would I, the right to preempt in any way necessary to protect the United States of America." Thus the interpretation he had to defend himself against was wholly contrary to the facts, and totally distorted the meaning of "global test" by using a soundbite in misleading isolation. It's so easy to generate a media script. When Democrats compromise or change their minds, they're weak and submissive. Always. When the Republicans are forced to back down on stem cells, Social Security, etc., the media coverage maintains this sort of PR "strong leader" image, despite very similar behavior.

We didn't fall into that trap, but it reminds me of a question I've had in my mind after reading some posts here about protest votes in '08--are we more likely to punish Democrats at the ballot box for being enablers than we are to punish Republicans for being war mongers? Note in our crappy two party system, there's no such thing as punishing both. Or is it unfair to see it that way?

[ClassWarrior]

1. "Are we more likely to punish Dems for being enablers than Rape-Publican war mongers?"

Yup. That's another way the Corporate RW press has manipulated us. They've been so blatantly criminal and tone-deaf that we figure they're hopeless - thus we irrationally turn our rage on our own.

Step away from the hostility, people. This fight is too important to lose our heads.

NGU.

[jpgray]

2. When the media sort of create an atmosphere that the GOP is immune to punishment

I wonder if that makes angry voters turn on the party they think -will- feel the punishment? Now don't mistake me--both parties deserve punishment, but unless you're absolute about morality, the GOP deserves to lose way more than the Democrats.

[BlueJazz]

3. I've NEVER been harsh on someone who Waffles (changes their mind)

I mean...I've known a lot people that have had erroneous opinions about a subject and then ....
......um ..Seen the Light.. and say something like: I see now that I was wrong about So an So..

I certainly don't hound them about it...

[Toots]

4. So to you it is a vote to punish someone?

What if I don't want to punish someone. What if I just leave punishment to a higher power? I will indeed vote for something positive but that has been quite lacking of late.

[jpgray]

5. Yes. To me the GOP is definitely worthy of punishment

And refusing to punish them because our fantasies of how politics should work have yet to be realized doesn't seem to me a very principled decision. We don't have instant runoff voting, and the GOP needs to be defeated. To my mind, the millions more lives that would be debased by GOP domination of -any- branch of government makes voting against them as thoroughly as possible the only moral decision. I understand if you see it differently, but that's my view.

[Bitwit1234]

6. That's a true statement

A republican commentator on MSNBC said that the republicans don't believe that Rudi or Rommey are flip flopping when they change their opinions. It is just that the republicans think a person can change his mind, when he is confronted with different set of circumstance supporting another course.

HUH!!!!!!!!! Is that what they believed when they accused John Kerry when he suggested that he would change a stance if he had evidence to support it. All they did was yell flip flop.

[jpgray]

7. Exactly. It's a complete double standard.