Fear and Hope in election campaigns

Emotions, particularly those that generate positive feelings, substantially influence the political determinations of the people, for among other things help to give context to the demands of being deep. If our emotional system perfected over millions of years it was to approach the well and away from pain, because, without distinguishing the sound of speech issues, political messages aimed at strengthening the feeling of well survive and impress our system significantly.

"The motivation and the persuasive power of advertising for a political campaign depends largely on whether an ad appeals to fear or enthusiasm" [1]. Resource use fear (war, permanent threat, hidden enemy, inflation, etc..) In the campaign of the Republicans in the United States in 2004 was crucial, says, because did not abuse its use. Fear paralyzes the extreme tension and have allowed much of the electorate could stop to think he would have removed much of the effect. Best is inclined to think that the impressive information brainwashing campaign issued a hidden message of hope that another Bush administration could overcome the causes of fear. The same occurred with the use of hope in Obama profitable change in 2008.

Passion as a result of the excitement has profound effects on policy, but researchers have recently begun to study how they influence our political thinking. The underestimation of the impact and some academic neglect of many years unfortunately skewed our understanding of political behavior as a product of our emotional system over the rational.

In "The effect of affect. Dynamics of emotion in political thinking and behavior" [2] involving more than thirty scholars, it is suggested that hope is the feeling that affects a person in the definition of preference vote. "When it comes to emotions in politics, attention has focused on fear, anger or anxiety. But hope is a transformation of emotion. Lets go to a better place to advance, and that is why it resonates so strongly with the voters "[3].

For its authors, the hope is the most important emotion in the campaign and is decisive when the oppositional discourse is based on fear, fear of losing status reached a certain stage of prosperity, or fear that the economy out of control, freedom and so on. Because the factor which triggers a candidate hopes will be key if it is closely related to the fear generated by the opposing candidate. In turn, the "voters of hope" and disseminate best built and sustained the negative image of "opponent of fear."

In turn, Drew Westen in "The political brain: The role of emotion in deciding the fate of a nation," explains how our human brain evolved over millions of years to make decisions with our emotions first and only secondarily with our logical faculties. Emotional intelligence controls absolutely every decision taken by the people, and there is no area where it is most note that this is true rather than electoral politics.

Westen's work coincides, in part, to highlight the importance of framing the political discourse in a narrative that gives support to the "central concept of the campaign and what history is telling voters" [4]. Therein lies the importance of using a story or an emotionally engaging and consistent narrative to present to the voting public the values ​​of the party and candidate. Only after those two things have understood is that they decide elections.

A good story will speak directly to voters' emotional brains hit the same time allowing the opponent as if it is a good story, exclude, while allowing the player accumulating accessions. But our leaders are still reluctant to understand and accept that the decisions arising from these stories well told have nothing to do with logic and reason. Westen shows in their study that people rationalize their apparent contradictions favorite political candidates without any problem.

Presentándoseles even objective information change their minds or question their decisions because the emotional system has already taken decisions, and in electoral politics, they are also strengthened by the passion component, even if voters apparently dispassionate policy.

[1] Ted Brader. "Affective Intelligence and Beyond". 2007.

[2] The Affect Effect. Dynamics of Emotion in Political Thinking and Behavior. W. Russell Neuman, George E. Marcus, Michael Macku, and Ann N. Crigler. University of Chicago Press. 2007

[3] Ann N. Crigler. In the book cited, his work was called "Do not abandon hope: Emotions, Candidate, ratings and votes," he is Head of the Department of Political Science at University of Southern California.

[4] Drew Westen. "The Political Brain: The Role of Emotion in Deciding the Fate of the Nation." 2004