Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
December 11, 2019, 04:59:59 pm
News: 2019 Gubernatorial Endorsements Close today at noon

  Atlas Forum
  Presidential Elections - Analysis and Discussion
  U.S. Presidential Election Results
  2012 U.S. Presidential Election Results (Moderators: Torie, Senator ON Progressive)
  What if Johnson and Stein had as much media attention in 2012 as they got in 2016?
« previous next »
Pages: [1] Print
Author Topic: What if Johnson and Stein had as much media attention in 2012 as they got in 2016?  (Read 1610 times)
Mr. Morden
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 40,341
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« on: December 04, 2016, 01:30:41 pm »
« edited: January 09, 2017, 10:33:07 am by Mr. Morden »

Both Johnson and Stein ran in both í12 and í16, and both did markedly better in the latter election than the former one (but still just a few %).  How much of that was due to the unpopularity of Clinton and Trump, and how much was due to the fact that they got more media coverage in 2016?  Itís not that they were being covered every day, but Johnson was getting ~65% name recognition in polls by the end of the 2016 race, which is way higher than he had in 2012.  And thatís because he was getting some media attention, and both Johnson and Stein were actually being included in most of the horserace polls.

So what if Johnson and Stein had been covered as much in 2012 as they were in 2016, and included in most of the 2012 polls?  What would the 2012 result then have been?
Logged
❤️❤️❤️
omegascarlet
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 4,656


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #1 on: December 16, 2016, 02:57:10 pm »

You typo'd the title.
Logged
Oh Jeremy Corbyn!
unempprof
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 3,635


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #2 on: December 28, 2016, 12:09:08 am »

They didn't get that much attention in 2016 either, but to answer your question, the reason they got SOME attention (not a lot like you say) was because people were actually looking for alternatives.  That wasn't the case in 2012 obviously.
Logged
Mr. Morden
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 40,341
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #3 on: January 09, 2017, 10:33:24 am »


Fixed. Smiley
Logged
Mr. Morden
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 40,341
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #4 on: January 09, 2017, 10:36:37 am »

They didn't get that much attention in 2016 either, but to answer your question, the reason they got SOME attention (not a lot like you say) was because people were actually looking for alternatives.  That wasn't the case in 2012 obviously.

Well yes, I know what the reasons are.  But like I said, I think much of it is self-reinforcing.  When people don't know who the third party candidates are, they don't think about voting for them.  But when they actually get enough coverage to be included in polls, then people are willing to entertain the possibility of voting for them.  They got enough coverage in 2016 to be included in virtually every poll from ~May onwards, so the media was talking about them, at least a little.
Logged
Pages: [1] Print 
« previous next »
Jump to:  


Login with username, password and session length
Logout

Terms of Service - DMCA Agent and Policy - Privacy Policy and Cookies

Powered by SMF 1.1.21 | SMF © 2015, Simple Machines

© Dave Leip's Atlas of U.S. Elections, LLC