Explore BrainMass
Share

Non-Voters & Social Class

This content was STOLEN from BrainMass.com - View the original, and get the already-completed solution here!

Are non-voters often less educated? Do they often have less money? Do you believe this contributes as to why most nonvoters do not vote?

© BrainMass Inc. brainmass.com October 25, 2018, 3:02 am ad1c9bdddf
https://brainmass.com/history/north-american-history/non-voters-social-class-324756

Solution Preview

Hello and welcome to Brainmass!

You may want to take a look at the article at http://archive.newsmax.com/archives/articles/2002/11/6/71744.shtml

Here is what they have to say about changing voter patterns: "Generational change accounts for a lot of the decline, The high participatory generations from the Great Depression and World War II era are being replaced by the X and Y generations, which are the least politically interested and informed generations in the history of polling. Turnout among Americans between 18 and 30 years of age was nearly 50 percent in 1972. It was barely above 30 percent in 2000. College-educated Americans vote at about the same rate today as they did 20 or 30 years ago. Less educated Americans, however, vote at much lower rates today. As the political agenda shifted away from the bread-and-butter issues of ...

Solution Summary

The solution provides advice and a discussion of the topic of non-voters in relation to their social standing/social class and if elements of their social status (i.e. less access to opportunities) have any bearing on their non-voting.

$2.19
See Also This Related BrainMass Solution

The marketing of Barack Obama

Read the article and let me know what your thoughts are as far as marketing

I thought that we would consider the marketing of Barack Obama. It does not matter who voted for whom, I just thought is entire campaign was a beautiful piece of marketing. Read this article and let me know what you think?
When the book is written on this election, it should not be titled "The Making of a President," but "The Marketing of a President." Barack Obama's campaign is a case study in marketing excellence.

True, it was always going to be a Democratic year. An unpopular war, an incumbent Republican president with rock bottom approval ratings, and many Republican incumbents retiring from Congress as a result all meant that change was in the air. Add to that the economic meltdown that decimated millions of 401K retirement plans and undercut any Republican claim to be the better steward of the economy.

But, even so, for an inexperienced single term African-American senator tagged with the most liberal voting record to defeat the heir apparent in his own party and then go on to hold off the much-vaunted Republican machine is a truly remarkable achievement. Much of it has to do with Obama's instinct for marketing.

First, Obama's personal charisma, his listening and public speaking skills, his consistently positive and unruffled demeanor and his compelling biography attracted the attention and empathy of voters.

Second, Obama converted this empathy into tangible support. More citizens volunteered time and money to help the Obama campaign than any previous presidential candidate. Indeed, he attracted more donors than the entire Democratic or Republican party nationwide. Almost half of Obama's unprecedented $639 million in funds raised from individuals came from small donors giving $300 or less.

Third, his fundraising prowess was aided by his appreciation and use of all communications media , notably the Internet, to engage voters. Obama picked up where Howard Dean left off. He leveraged his website, the blogosphere, and even user-generated content (remember Obama Girl) and video games to engage not just donors and volunteers but all citizens. From the imaginative campaign logo to the thirty minute infomercial, Obama's communications were professional without being slick, attention-getting without being in-your-face.

Fourth, Obama reached out to all citizens. He targeted his message beyond previous or likely voters. He built a coalition that energized young, first-time voters and registered thousands of previous non-voters. His organization encouraged early voting by Democrats to build well-publicized poll leads and to reduce the chances of supporters being discouraged from voting by long lines at polling places on election day. This policy of inclusion meant that voting records were set in the general election and the primaries.

Fifth, his advertising messages and his tone and demeanor throughout the campaign consistently communicated his upbeat themes of hope and "change you can believe in." The emotional appeal was buttressed with solid and specific policy details. The ability to combine emotional with functional benefits and the discipline to be consistent in positioning and message delivery are core to all successful branding campaigns. Ads that dealt with specific policy issues, even ads criticizing McCain, all continued to communicate the core themes.

Sixth, he anticipated and outsmarted the competition. Throughout, he showed respect for Clinton and then McCain, even as he successfully tagged a McCain administration as Bush's third term. But he and his advisers managed the political chess board brilliantly. Early on, he anticipated and defused negative criticisms by admitting to past indiscretions his autobiography. His campaign rebutted the criticisms in a hostile biography point-by-point before they gained traction. Negative advertising by his opponents was countered quickly, not only in ads but on the internet as well.

Seventh, he fought the ground war as brilliantly as the air war. Building on Howard Dean's 50 state strategy, he built his primary delegate count by investing time in Democratic caucuses in red states; the organizations he built for the primaries in these states set him up to win several of them in the general. In the closing weeks, he put McCain on defense in multiple red states, making it tough for the Republican to focus his efforts. Having relied on public funding, McCain ended up having to make some tough trade-offs regarding where to go and where to spend his money. Obama did not.

Finally, Obama chose an excellent marketing and campaign team, and managed them well. From start to finish, there was no public dissension. He chose a non-controversial, experienced Senator as his running mate who complemented his lack of foreign policy skills. McCain only assembled a smooth-running campaign team late in the day. And the maverick made a surprise choice of an unknown running mate that, in the final analysis, undercut his ability to tag Obama as inexperienced and called his judgment into question.

Like any great brand, Obama has built up a bond of trust with the American people. His election has also given the US the opportunity to reestablish its moral leadership around the world. But like any brand, he has to deliver now on his promises, both actual and perceived. In the current economy, that will not be easy.

View Full Posting Details