|
this is one of many topics for which polling is of limited use.
most importantly, this does NOT mean that people *ARE* less likely to vote for a candidate funded by anonymous business groups. it means that people THINK they are less likely to vote for a candidate funded by anonymous business groups.
this, in turn means that an attack ad denouncing your opponent as being funded by anonymous business interests might be somewhat effective.
however, crucially, it does NOT say that this information is MORE damaging or LESS damaging to your opponent than the advantage your opponent gets from the advertising from the anonymous business groups.
so if, as a candidate, you're thinking of getting the help of anonymous business advertising, this poll tells you that you might open yourself up to attack on that basis, but it still might pay to run those ads anyway.
a similar topic is negative advertising. when asked in the abstract, most people claim to be turned off by it and would be less likely to vote for the candidate USING the negative attacks, rather than being less likely to vote for the TARGET of the negative attack. but if you SHOW them a negative attack, then ask them, they're also less likely to vote for the target -- because they see the actual attack and can't help but believe (or at least suspect) that the attack is true and damaging. moreover, if you look at actual BEHAVIOR (as opposed to polled claims of future behavior), negative ads are often very effective.
|