Rush not having a good day
William B. White
WHITEWB at JCCW22.CC.SUNYJCC.EDU
Mon Oct 7 11:07:28 MDT 1996
From: NAME: Bill White
TEL: 326/371 <WHITE, BILL AT A1 AT JCCV03>
To: IN%"rushtalk at athena.csdco.com"@MRGATE at JCCW22
>Why would I be kidding when even you have doubts??
You are trying to construe my question about studies on this issues as a
"doubt" - like your doubt. No, I'm afraid your doubts will have to remain
your doubts. You can't give them away that easily.
Actually, I gave you some evidence drawn from the testimony of my experience
and from the campaign rhetoric of liberal Dems, rhetoric that is designed to
affectively influence voters. You ignored these facts in your response.
Furthermore, I believe there are studies that support the contention that
liberals are more inclined to use affective cues to make political decisions.
For example, Rush has been interpreting one such study.
He explains his new term, the "arousal gap," based upon the recent
publication of the Pennsylvania School of Communication study that finds
talk radio listeners (especially to Rush's show) are better informed and more
likely to use reasoned arguments based on factual evidence to make their
political choices, compared to non-listeners. He proposes that since his
listeners (the reasoning, informed ones) support Dole, and since Clinton
supporters are non-listeners (the less-informed ones), the Clinton supporters
must be basing their support on something other than reason and evidence. He
says it must the the "arousal gap." Although I don't have the data readily at
hand, I believe there are "undoubtedly" other studies that support this idea.
More information about the Rushtalk