Obama & online dating
If I did not know that the people around me were talking about Obama, I would have guessed that I was among a group of excited fans, infatuated with a rock singer, or a movie star. In fact, when I ask Obama supporters about how they expect him to fare against other US presidents, their general answer is that he is likely to be the best president of all time (some think he will be second to JFK).
Since the emotions and excitement toward Obama seem to be those usually reserved for romantic attraction, I would like to draw on some lessons from our research (Mike Norton, Jeana Frost, and I) on the ways in which people form impressions about others in romantic settings and the pitfalls of their impressions. What we found is that although people expect that the more they get to know another person the more they will like this person, in reality familiarity breeds contempt!
As it turns out, on average, the more we learn about someone, the less we like them. Why is this the case? When we get partial information about others we tend to fill in the gaps optimistically; we assume that they are wonderful, just like us and that they share our exact values and preferences. This may sound like a recommendation to not reveal much about ourselves and as a consequence gain more affection. However, this approach also presents a possible trap: As people learn more, their over-optimistic interpretation dissolves, the disappointment begins, and from then on the disappointment escalates, leading to lower and lower liking. For example, imagine that someone writes that they like music. You assume that it is the same music you like (blues) and you immediately like this blues-music-lover. But when you learn more, you discover that in fact they like classical music, and once you encounter this one disappointing fact, everything you learn afterward is colored by that initial disappointment.
So, what does this say about Obama? In my estimation one of the charms of Obama is that we know so little about him (we definitely know less about him than about Clinton), and I assume that this lack of knowledge, coupled with our tendency to fill in the missing information in an over-optimistic way is one of the reasons for the Obama love fest. It also means that we should expect a hard and disappointing awakening as we learn more about Obama and realize that he is not the super-human we now imagine him to be.
Finally there is also a pragmatic point to all of this: How long will Obama be able to maintain this lack of knowledge about himself? If he can keep it up until the democratic nomination, he might win the nomination. But then the real question is whether he will be able to maintain the lack of knowledge around him until the general election. If he is unable to do this, if we learn more about him between the two elections, we might fall out of love with him just before the real elections.
So I wonder, if the Obama that is a candidate for the Democratic Party nominee (largely unknown and admired), would be different from the Obama that is a candidate for the Presidency (more known and less loved.)
On the other hand, by choosing the person, don’t we also strive to rationalize that choice to avoid buyer’s remorse? Even if the new HDTV doesn’t seem as good at home as in the store, I console myself by referring to its ratings (or whatever) to prevent being depressed at shelling out however many thousands of dollars. I suspect this push-pull is the origin of resentment.
very interesting idea. one point that may be worth noting on the dating comparison is that some people will fall in love with another so completely that they are completely blinded by that love and may never see some difficult truths about that person that do come to light. and the love fest that fans of obama tend to have for him is rather significant.
i think most are willing to over look any previous discretions etc… providing his actions going forward are as pure and well intentioned as his rhetoric. i think his campaign foundation of HOPE goes a long way to overcome the scenario you lay out as a possibility above. though again, the idea is fascinating.
keep up the good work
I think politicians also become associated with sacred values. For Obama, he creates a sacred value aura and any criticism by Hillary results in very negative emotions against Hillary.
Over time, as Obama continues to be in the public eye and the late night jokes (i.e. Letterman, Leno, and SNL), press coverage, and Republican party chip away at the ‘sacred value’ aura of Obama, eventually criticism of Obama will become more socially acceptable though in my humble opinion not before he is elected President.
For Presidents, the peak of socially acceptable criticism usually occurs towards the end of their second term(if they have one). However, many presidents seem to achieve a renewed ‘sacred value’ aura after their death. This is seen, of course, with Kennedy (who Democrats, despite their hatred of Iraq, can forgive Kennedy for his involvement in the Bay of Pigs and Vietnam) as well as with Reagen who can be both praised posthumously by the NY Times and be considered the ‘ideal’ Republican president by the Republican nomination hopefuls.
Dan– Thanks. There are so many attempts to explain infatuation, almost as many as the attempts to mimic or stir infatuation. I came upon your book today and my first thought reading excerpts from it was to deal with the ‘Hillary dislike’ rather than the ‘Obama phenomenon.’ As you say– thinking is unpleasant, and emotions are rousing– a choise is made for us every minute. Everything is evaluated in a certain ‘context’, and the emotional context is not favouring Hillary. It’s common place (not even cynical) that as leaders and performers we do not engage audiences at a ‘rational’ level, (but validate their emotions as rational). Still, looking at the Ohio debate through the perspective of what you write is a novel experience. I am curious what would you advise Hillary to do in this close to “no-turning point” for her. Ligia
True, if he says “change,” we all think of the change we desire. And when he gets around to choosing which kind of change we’ll get, many of us will be disappointed. Franklin Roosevelt carried out much the same strategy in 1932. He spoke generalities and benefitted from the public’s eagerness for change. And yet FDR had a successful presidency, for the most part. Reality doesn’t have to be a rude awakening if the president provides intelligent and thoughtful leadership.
The previous posters have raised some good points. Some of us may use cognitive dissonance to maintain our illusions about our beloved. Others of us will shift our own values to be more in line with those of our beloved. Some will become disillusioned and, failing to find anyone better this time around, drop out of the political process. Some will say, “Well, he isn’t as good as I thought he was, but he’s still better than either the alternative, or my expectations.” I’m starting out knowing that his policy positions are not my policy positions — and yet, if he can really change the tone in Washington (possibly by encouraging like minded people to run for office) to one of cooperation rather than mutual destruction, I will satisfied with my politicial support of my previous beloved.
I feel like I\’m posting in the Pro-Hillary echo chamber. I will not contest your study that, potentially, familiarity breeds contempt. The point is almost tautological, of course the more you know of a person the greater the chance of finding something disagreeable. The question is, does this necessitate a one way trend? Am I doomed to eventually hate my wife because I\’ve known her for 10 years? Of course not, and the point your making is silly. I have no doubt that some people, who\’ve been swept up by the Obama candidacy, will be less enthusiastic about him as time passes. But to characterize this as leading to some kind of betrayal and ultimate letdown? Strange. The big problem for Hillary is that many people already \
Good points.
Also, “I ask Obama supporters about how they expect him to fair”…
I think you mean “fare” and not “fair”.
Fare thee well!
Hello!I got the most relevant knowledge about Online dating, or Internet dating, is a dating system that lets individuals, couples, and groups meet online, and possibly develop a social, romantic, or sexual relationship.
We don’t know much about Obama? “Dreams From My Father”? “The Audacity of Hope”? Is that the Obama we’re talking about?
It is true that when we end up marrying someone we know about them a lot and we like them a lot. But is it that we like them more because we learn about them more or is it that we learn about them more because we like them more?
What our results show is that learning more does not (on average) lead to more liking, and in fact it leads to less liking.
AS for what we know about Obama — I agree that we have some knowledge about him but I also think he is much more vague — allowing everyone to read into him what they wish
Mr. Fujita is quite accurate. Many of us support Obama–even as we disagree with him on certain policies–because he has the ability to go beyond self-imposed borders which many construct and bring people together.
If he is successful in bringing substantive change to Washington, then this “romance” will be worthwhile.
Quite intriguing that my support for him is on a gut level, which includes the positive vibe I get from his stupendous speaking ability and his sensual voice.
As we’ve seen in the debates with Hillary…..he is one smooth operator.
I do solove the little quirks. But it takestime for them tobecome endearing.
For some it move fasterthan others though.
Eh. It’ll work the same on both candidates no? But McCain is more well known, so he should be more disliked by his own party. Oh wait. He is.
I find it interesting that what I read as a post about how people are predictably irrational illustrated by the democratic primaries is presumed to be commentary against that candidate.
I may be reading it wrong, but I assumed the post was about the subject in which the author is an expert.
CNN today has a story that is related to this post:
http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/
I don’t think it is because they have looked at this blog, but it is interesting that we got to a similar conclusion about the role of ambiguity.
Wulfgeat and Miguel– This post exemplifies what the author knows BEST–and from the ‘predictably irrational’ stance you both assumed that what is written is written against Obama and pro-Hillary! Obviously what happens in the Democratic primaries was just an example– and look at the reactions!
I think the reason everyone is so disconcerted about not knowing anything about Obama stems from the fact that we’re not used to having candidates from which dirt can’t be dug up.
It doesn’t say much about what we expect character-wise from our politicians if one who doesn’t screw around on his wife, drink, snort on occasion, experiment with other men, gamble, indulge in internet porn or conduct insider trading deals, makes us question whether he’d be a good political candidate.
Reading The Audacity of Hope and Dreams of My Father reveals loads about who this man is, how he thinks, what he believes and what kind of man he is. He promises the same thing all presidential candidates are promising. There are problems that will never be solved and likely there will be problems created by his admin (should he be elected) that will have to be cleaned up by the next admin. There hasn’t been an administration that hasn’t continued this presidential legacy but if there is someone who has the passion and desire to bring the country together regardless of party affiliation, regain public respect for the Office and world respect for this country, then what’s the problem?
Add to that that he’s clean, articulate and a nice dresser and you’ve got the cake topper.
The only real issue I have with Obama is his wife, Michelle.
In unguarded moments she shows her background in the “grievance industry” far too much.
She majored in Sociology and African American Studies at Princeton which, no doubt, provided fertile ground for the “hate America” mindset she tries to hide.
Someone who has benefited to such an extent because of the kind of country in which we live has no business being a “grievance queen”. Voters will run from that immediately.
I have noticed that in recent days she has shut her mouth.
No doubt, Obama cooled her jets.
Just as I have very positive feelings for him on a gut level……..I have reservations about her and what she’s really all about…on a gut level.
Sure wish he’d married someone more appealing.
bush was a bad boyfriend. obama is the new boyfriend who will treat us better, he\’ll remember birthdays, send flowers and say kind things all the time. he won\’t strike us, but he will be boring and we will tire of him because he will never really do anything great he stops short and doesn\’t have that fire in his belly and the courage of his convictions, he is a man child deep down 46 going on 37. right now he is sitting back day dreaming that he might have a chance to date this really beautiful and great model in november, but what he doesn\’t realize is she\’s got big issues, Big Issues and he will be overwhelmed by her issues and then she will say start to say mean things like, george was better in bed and he\’s just not experienced enough in all the right ways and obama will feel his pain and start to grow distant and just not care any more and his friends and the american people will start to call him john kerry
ROTFLM-tits-O !!!
Dear “Hillary”,
Let us hope that doesn’t happen; however, every romance does fade with time. But then we’ll rely on that deep and meaningful friendship we’ve cultivated.
For now, don’t ruin a good fantasy with reality.
BTW “Hillary”, mind your own business. Shouldn’t you be working on those destructive double-wide hips and those elephant gams we have watch every time you plow onto the stage?
You’re just not “with it”. Just go home and check on Billy Jeff.
Barry O is our man.
Post Script….”Hillary”,
Your post is so deliciously naughty that I must send a copy to pronto.
Quite clever.
Yikes!
This blog doesn’t entertain HTML and part of the post was dropped.
OK.
What I said is…..I must send a copy over to “The Diva World” pronto!
Jeezus!
A politician is never your friend, a relative, a neighbor, a husband or wife perhaps, but never, ever your friend.
Because of my ‘hips and gams,’ as you so delicately put it, I’ve been doing my best to avoid the fatty take out foods here on the campaign trail. I’ve had one of my aids run to the corner 7/11, headquartered here in proud, free thinking, diverse and intelligent state of Texas, Home to George Bush’s Enron, and have had HIM purchase some very delicious American made yogurt. On occasion, not often mind you, but on occasion I have found that it is always best to peal the foiled back on the plastic container produced, by the way, in the hard working and legal citizens of the great state of Ohio and check for mold.
Now this is just a hunch, but I suspect this batch of yogurt, we’ll call it O, I suspect this batch of yogurt has mold and big corporate banker money running through its core. Best to check the side of this Buckeye State cup and look at the expiration date, I think what you will find is that this particular batch is at least a year old. Just toss it, honey.
Deb – Since you brought up elephants… you might think those ears on are cute now, but within six months you’ll be joining the choir looking for a reason not to call him Dumbo. Anyone voting for a candidate because he is the best looking and most popular, because his voice is soft as he sings sweet nothings into your ear, then what you really want and deserve as president and leader of this great and free nation is Brittany Spears.
-hill
vote for me!
I read The Audacity of Hope. I was eager to find if there was anything more to this guy than reverse racism.
He talks about a variety of issues, and his standard treatment of them is to show convincingly that he (or his staff writing the book) has an intelligent understanding of both sides of echo issue. If he makes it clear how he stands (which he doesn’t always do) he’s just a regular liberal.
He’s constantly talking about experiences hee had as a “senator”, which give one the impression he is a seasoned politician. The book was published in 2006, he was elected to the US senate in late 2004. I suspect many of these “senate” experiences were in the Illinois STATE senator, ie, the junior league.
There was almost a complete absence of any mind-blowing ideals or proposals in the book. I did not find it terribly informative or inspiring. I am alarmed by how junior the guy is.
Hillary looks like she’ll be done with in Texas (two days from now), so it’ll be Obama or McCain, who I think is too old.
– Bill
Interesting post. However, all good relationships begin with such a great romance. I mean would you want to marry someone with whom you didn’t have such a great romance to begin with?
Both FDR and Reagan started out with such a romance, and still became very popular presidents.
Also, the more Obama campaigns in any given state, the more people like him. I think in any general election timeframe, Obama will become more popular, as people get to know him and his inspirational message more.
Plus, Obama is very careful to set expectations. He mentions that he will make mistakes, and that change won’t be easy, and will require participation from the public.
I personally think Obama will be elected and go on to become one of our greatest presidents.
“one of our greatest presidents,” based on what? You really think this is a rational choice?
Have you forgotten what the Regan years brought? High unemployment rate, Iran-Contra, the S&L scandal…
FDR took the wealth of individual and gave it to the Federal Reserve, he brought the US into war, a conflict he went out of his way to create.
Lies, theft and lacking genuine sympathy.
Anyone having a romance with either of these two characters…
hey cm, I gotta bridge, interested?
Tsk! Tsk!
Such gloom and doom on such a glorious Diva Monday!
yes, yes, let us to our fiddles and eat cake!
congress is constantly guilty of thinking it has to act when they should be looking for a better barbers trent lott is he blind?
just complying the over acting would take lifetimes in fact congress has made history spending the least time ever and f*cking up more than ever
As Dogbert once advised future Pointy-Haired Bosses:
“You can’t be wrong unless you take a position. Don’t fall into that trap.”
I had to post just because of Fujita’s use of the term “cognitive dissonance” to describe relationship issues…Belly laugh! How about “pre-coital sociological ritual” instead of dating? Thanks for the good time, Frank. Anyway, good luck to all those backing the big B-O based on his “change” trumpeting…When it all shakes out, America will once again “meet the new boss, same as the old boss.” Settle back and enjoy the ride, and hope they don’t raise your taxes to much.
I wonder to hear that some Americans did not know much about Obama, is he not a cetezen of that country, we have hard that his granfather hails from Kenya as a result of slavery,coloniasism we are not realistic indeed, but he is trying to contribute in his nation building, so if he wins the primaries let us see wether if he can depeate John Mccain of the Republicans. I have no ill-feeling against whomever wins Clinto or Obama to me they are all the same.