What motivates the modern voter? Is it personality? The Issues? The proverbial pocketbook? Ever since Nixon was outed as a scoundrel in the 70s, America's sponsored media have pushed hard on identifying the problems with America as not being the result of a system in decay but rather the result of aberrant personality types and have refocused public attention to individuals rather than on the systemic source of the problems themselves. One look at the preoccupation of the public with celebrities gives you an idea of how far this obsession's been carried to consensus. Reviling Bush and Cheney only serves to divert attention from the systemic process these men only lead and refocus attention onto a cavalcade of personalities we call elections.
But not all people respond to this kind of distraction. What then does motivate the modern voter?
In my experience, there are 4 types of voters out there: About 30% of the public responds to what is commonly called "charismatic authority." This is when people respond to personality types regardless of what their position is.
Another 30% responds to what might be called "administrative authority." These are people that respond to the bureaucratic authority of the society's rule keepers, people likely to want law and order.
A third group of another 30% constitutes "the authority of self-interest." You know the type; the ones who ask "What's in it for me?" This group is exemplified by salespeople and their penchant for a 10% cut for anything to happen.
The 10% balance are those of us who believe that we are motivated by logic and reason, a small number compared to the 3 great motivators at work. Whether this is true or we all simply fooling ourselves remains to be seen.
Now, a good leader has to learn how to manage all 4 constituencies to effectively run any kind of organization. But a politician only needs a simple majority to win. In this way, it is easy to see how Ronald Reagan can gather in the charismatics and the bureaucrats and still preside over a crappy economy that wasn't in anyone's interest, and still fool the country into thinking he was a great president. It's also easy to see how Bill Clinton was able to win over many of the same charismatics while appealing to the self-interest crowd and ignoring the rule-keepers entirely. After all, he was our nation's rule-breaker-in-chief, wasn't he?
As for Senator Obama: He seems to have the ability to attract supporters from all 4 constituencies, attesting to his brilliance as both a politician and a manager making him a true leader. Hence, moving forward, as we continue discussing electoral choices with voters, our approach depends on what each voter's motivators are. As a result, as we approach the general voting public, it is probably wise for the campaign as a whole and each of us as individuals to grasp these archetypes, understand each audience's needs (and hot buttons) and then proceed with each accordingly. Make sense?
Comments are closed for this post.
