Jump to content
BrainDen.com - Brain Teasers
  • 0
Sign in to follow this  
Guest

Question

Guest

Here is a dilemma i was thinking about, during a pre-electional period. I don't know if it is a dilemma which consists of equally justifiable parts, but it seems to me that it would be one such.

Α political party x is the ruling party, with party z being the opponent one. For a long time all public polls show a prevalence of x over z, in terms of what people intend to vote for in the elections to be held. But after a time t, after x have failed in applying politics at the interest of the public, all polls show a precedence of z over x. Nevertheless, in any case, either before or after t, there is a steady precedence of x’s leader over z’s leader, in terms of who of the two is considered by people as the most suitable for prime minister.

On these grounds, in view of the forthcoming elections x members, as well as x’s leader, decide that their pre-electiolal campaign must focus on the comparison between x’s and z lead., and not on the comparison between x and z, for they consider that it is at the personal level that z is inferior to x, and thus they hope that it is through such a comparison that the status of x is strengthened. Such an argument seems quite justifiable.

On the other hand,though, someone would claim that the comparison at the personal level isn’t at x’s interest, on the basis of the following argument

Given that in any case all public polls show a precedence of x’s lead. over z’s lead, and reversely of z over x, to focus on the comparison between x’s and z’s lead. adds nothing to the common knowledge, besides the fact that it confirmates x’s lead. prevalence. On the contrary, if during the pre-electional campaign x’s lead, and all members of x, argue solely for the advantages of voting for x, and for the disadvantages of voting for z, -deciding to focus on the comparison between x and z, and not between x’s and z’s lead-, in case their arguments are convincing enough and also are imposed over people's attention to who of the two leaders is the most suitable, it is possible that they help x to take precedence over z, as to which party people intend to vote for in the elections to be held.

Which tactic seems to be the most justifiable onein theoretical terms? Or, to put it in mild terms, given that the first part part of the dilemma at least at first glance seems quite plausible, is the second part plausible too , be it less plausible than the first one? I have in mind an answer, which is quite logical, but i would like to know your opinion. thank you

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

2 answers to this question

Recommended Posts

  • 0
Guest

Here is a dilemma i was thinking about, during a pre-electional period. I don't know if it is a dilemma which consists of equally justifiable parts, but it seems to me that it would be one such.

Α political party x is the ruling party, with party z being the opponent one. For a long time all public polls show a prevalence of x over z, in terms of what people intend to vote for in the elections to be held. But after a time t, after x have failed in applying politics at the interest of the public, all polls show a precedence of z over x. Nevertheless, in any case, either before or after t, there is a steady precedence of x’s leader over z’s leader, in terms of who of the two is considered by people as the most suitable for prime minister.

On these grounds, in view of the forthcoming elections x members, as well as x’s leader, decide that their pre-electiolal campaign must focus on the comparison between x’s and z lead., and not on the comparison between x and z, for they consider that it is at the personal level that z is inferior to x, and thus they hope that it is through such a comparison that the status of x is strengthened. Such an argument seems quite justifiable.

On the other hand,though, someone would claim that the comparison at the personal level isn’t at x’s interest, on the basis of the following argument

Given that in any case all public polls show a precedence of x’s lead. over z’s lead, and reversely of z over x, to focus on the comparison between x’s and z’s lead. adds nothing to the common knowledge, besides the fact that it confirmates x’s lead. prevalence. On the contrary, if during the pre-electional campaign x’s lead, and all members of x, argue solely for the advantages of voting for x, and for the disadvantages of voting for z, -deciding to focus on the comparison between x and z, and not between x’s and z’s lead-, in case their arguments are convincing enough and also are imposed over people's attention to who of the two leaders is the most suitable, it is possible that they help x to take precedence over z, as to which party people intend to vote for in the elections to be held.

Which tactic seems to be the most justifiable onein theoretical terms? Or, to put it in mild terms, given that the first part part of the dilemma at least at first glance seems quite plausible, is the second part plausible too , be it less plausible than the first one? I have in mind an answer, which is quite logical, but i would like to know your opinion. thank you

My initial impulse is that party x will fare as well if not better by focusing on their leaders as opposed to actually comparing themselves with their opponents. It's a matter of psychology and propaganda.

X's leaders are trusted above those of z, so while it adds nothing to the discourse to talk purely about the leaders (as that trust is common knowledge), it helps x solidify their perceptual advantage among the populace. If z's leaders are inferior, then it would be in the populace's best interest to keep x in power so that their leaders continue to lead (even if, as the polling indicates, their policies haven't been helping the populace).

If x tried to focus on issues (which they seem to be weak on in public polling), then they risk being asked pertinent questions about issues on which they have failed to deliver. Even if they successfully avoid answering such a question, the appearance of weakness could be fatal for their grip on power. So even while it might help the public discourse and expansion of public knowledge to focus on the issues and differences between x and z, it hurts x politically, so they are better off comparing themselves to z's leaders instead.

This cynical argument seems (unfortunately) based on actual events more than just theory (IMO) as when people want to "win" a debate, they turn to character assassination as opposed to actually trying to put forward their own ideas on the subject. After all, if your opponent looks bad regardless of his stance on important issues, then you will look better, even if you don't agree with the majority of the populace about those issues. If you actually stand up and discuss those issues, then you risk the possibility of people disagreeing with you. So while it would be in the populace's best interest for x to focus on the differences between x and z's policies, it's in x's political interest to focus on the differences in the leadership. :dry:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 0
Guest

Thank you so much for your so detailed reply... I think you're generally wright, given that often populace emphasize upon persons and ''personal profiles'' rather than on politics. Theoretically, though, iut isn't precluded that, be it rarely, the populace turns on ideas, rather than on persons.

In my opinion there are two critical factors. On the one hand, where voters are going to emphasize upon, and, if so, if x's members' arguments on ideas ore policies are concincing enough, so as to overcome people's disappointment shown on public polls. I mean that x members must find an argument, which can overcome the shown disadvantages

Theoretically, i mentioned the two above factors that are critical. In fact, though, it seems that things are often as you mentioned in your reply. Thank you so much...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Answer this question...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
Sign in to follow this  

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...