The ongoing study, which began at the University of Michigan in 1952, has been funded for the last 30 years by the National Science Foundation. Results from that larger study are available to scholars across the country, and it is on that body of work that the researchers base their conclusions about why we bothered to vote at all during the years from 1972 through 1996. The bottom line, Krosnick says, is we approach politicians the same way we approach other people and issues, like who we want to marry and which breakfast cereal we prefer. We want to give the other guy the benefit of the doubt, but if we feel betrayed, we want to throw the rascal out. As an old political pol once told me, issues don't decide elections.
Personalities decide who wins and who loses.
Never mind the future of social security. The winning candidate needs to know how to smile convincingly. We've got to like the person more than agree with how he or she stands on the issues. Perhaps the most surprising result of the study is how we regard emerging politicians about whom we know very little. The study shows that most people approach a politician they don't know the same way they approach anybody else.