A final comment on this year's Presidential election:
There seems to be a larger credibility gap between the two major party candidates than I can ever recall. The Republican candidate's words have been taken to their literal extreme, no matter their context, whereas the Democratic candidate's words are universally dismissed as campaign puffery, regardless of their significance.
This presents an interesting psychological question about the American electorate: Do we prefer being lied to? Unlike commercial advertising, which focuses on product attributes and brand identification, this year's political campaign is almost utterly devoid of debate about the relative benefits of competing proposals. Instead, it has focused on vague threats about what might happen if the opposition candidate is elected.
Are we going to exercise our individual evaluations in this election, or are we going to surrender our votes to those who profess to know better?
There seems to be a larger credibility gap between the two major party candidates than I can ever recall. The Republican candidate's words have been taken to their literal extreme, no matter their context, whereas the Democratic candidate's words are universally dismissed as campaign puffery, regardless of their significance.
This presents an interesting psychological question about the American electorate: Do we prefer being lied to? Unlike commercial advertising, which focuses on product attributes and brand identification, this year's political campaign is almost utterly devoid of debate about the relative benefits of competing proposals. Instead, it has focused on vague threats about what might happen if the opposition candidate is elected.
Are we going to exercise our individual evaluations in this election, or are we going to surrender our votes to those who profess to know better?
