It's all about your attitude

In this article, Michael Medved claims, “Romney’s real problem isn’t a question of ideology, it’s a matter of attitude.” Out of all of the papers we have read thus far in the semester, attitude has not been sufficiently addressed. Attitude in this context is not synonymous with ideology, but rather the approach or mind-set about a set of issues or election.

Attitude is difficult to include in public choice theory because it is always changing, and it is very hard to measure because it is multidimensional. Attitude is also something that does not follow “party lines”, and it is completely dependent on the state of the country at the time of the election.

The concept of attitude can be best applied to public choice through the relationship between constituent and representative’s attitudes. Constituents can pressure representatives to adopt certain attitudes, and many legislators base their campaign off an attitude. Attitude plays a major role in a constituents support for their representative. For example, during the 2008 presidential election, Obama relied heavily on the attitudes of “hope” and “change”.

Medved claims that Romney’s attitude is not aligned with the attitude of his fellow conservative constituents. Mitt Romney’s followers from the 2008 presidential election have a much angrier attitude towards Obama and the current state of the country going into the 2012 presidential election. Although, Romney still shares the same ideology with his conservative constituents, his lack of aggressive attitude seems to be his downfall. Romney might respond to this demand for more passion in his campaign in order to please his Republican constituents that share his ideological views, or he may continue to stay composed in an effort to attract moderates. If Romney can win the primary for the Republican Party, conservatives that agree with Romney’s ideology will definitely vote for him over Obama. If Romney realizes that he already has these votes secured, it might be smart for him to maintain his composed attitude going into the 2012 presidential election, because an angry attitude against the Democratic Party and the current state of the country might deter potential moderate votes. Romney’s attitude dilemma demonstrates the importance of constituent and representative attitudes in campaigns and election outcomes.