For local elections and primaries, where I was totally unfamiliar with the candidates I’ve made up my mind based on mailings and voter guides. But for bigger elections either my mind is made up before the campaign really starts or its based mainstream media reports of the campaign.
Look, nobody’s going to say “hey, I voted for this candidate because one time I saw a yard sign in somebody’s lawn.”
But most voters in local elections are low information voters. Most candidates have very little time or resources to get in front of the electorate in order to push their message across. So they settle on the next best thing: name recognition.
No, you’re not going to vote because of a yard sign. But you might vote between two candidates you know nothing about merely because you happen to recognize that person’s name and you happen to recognize it because you’ve seen it up on yard signs everywhere.
For better or worse, the spin doctors create or influence almost every aspect of national political campaigns (which is almost entirely spin), so if you say yes to any of the options, you’re also saying yes about the spin doctors.
I work in advertising, but when it was time to buy our first non-used car, we ignored all the ads and went by which car Consumer Reports said would cost us the least over the long haul (gas and maintenance and repairs). In fact, the winner had the worst ads at the time*.
Same with candidates. Whenever I see a negative campaign ad, I just assume the other side’s lying. “Oh, really, some Obama policy lost us 2 million jobs? I’m betting once I look into it, it added 2 million.” I wish everyone fact-checked campaign ads.
*Anyone remember the white bread Toyota salesmen jumping up and doing a fist-pump yelling “Toyyyyy-ota!”, in a series of vapid commercials? Would’ve turned us off if we’d been basing our decision on that.
For president? None of the above, but only because I didn’t vote in 2004. I had registered Republican, but I thought I had to vote in my hometown instead of my college town and I was not motivated enough to go back home on a Tuesday, nor did I know about early or absentee voting.
But I did see the debates and commercials then, and I thought Bush was a better guy. I saw all the signage. I don’t think social media was a thing, and I never got any spam. I will say the biggest influence, though, was the fact that Republicans approached me, and the Democrats didn’t. I just had this vague sense that, since they were the other team, they were bad. Well, that, and I was still pro-life at the time.
For other offices: I think a few signs did motivate me to vote in 2006 and 2008, but only because I actually recognized the names. Party seems mostly irrelevant for local offices. I’m sure TV ads got me to choose which congressperson I would vote for (thought I was really prepared to vote for people in Missouri since all the local channels come from Springfield.)
In 2010, I voted absentee, and was able to look up each candidate’s positions before voting for them. I can say I’m 100% certain I was not influenced by anything else. And I’m pretty sure that will hold this year. A lot of that is because I refuse to look, however. I refuse to let myself be influenced by that crap.
EDIT: Because I have a bit of perversity in me: Yes, that means, hey, I voted for this candidate because one time I saw a yard sign in somebody’s lawn.
I am mostly impressed with the policies and positions that the speeches by candidates express. I try to research the veracity of their statements, and then choose the candidate that aligns best with my values.
Me, too. Word-of-mouth about particular local candidates about whom I knew little, and the endorsements of local bar organizations or newspapers (when I agreed with their reasoning) have also made a difference.
In Nevada we have had ''None of the above" on the ballot. I have always voted none of the above.