The conventional wisdom in the United States seems to be that "negative campaigning" (whatever that means; apparently you know it when you see it or something) tends to result in lower voter turnout. The theory appears to be that people get disgusted by "negativity," say "a pox on all your houses," and stay home. Not that there's any real evidence for this being the case, but why spoil a good story with empirical evidence. The fact is that political campaigns have been rough and tumble here in the United States, going back to the beginning of the Republic. Does anyone remember John Adams vs. Thomas Jefferson back in 1796 and 1800? Here's a reminder:
Newspapers associated with Adams characterized Jefferson as a bloodthirsty atheist (because he admired the French Revolution) and a coward (because he saw no military service during the Revolutionary War). While Jefferson proclaimed himself champion of the common citizen, the pro-Adams papers said he represented "cut-throats who walk in rags and sleep amidst filth and vermin." Jefferson's forces shot back that Adams planned to cancel the Constitution, crown himself king, and anoint his son heir to a new American throne.Or how about Democrats calling Abraham Lincoln "Honest Ape" back in 1860? Or how about the Republican campaign slogan against Grover Cleveland in 1884 ("Ma Ma, Where's my Pa?"). It goes on and on; more or less, every election has been like this, with no discernible correlation between "negativity" and turnout (turnout in the LBJ-Goldwater election of 1964, which featured the infamous "Daisy" ad, was a respectable 61.9%).
But at least they didn't go in for unsavory personal attacks, right? Oh wait--this just in: Jefferson's camp alleged that Adams had two mistresses specially imported from England.
But U.S. elections have nothing on Iran, where presidential candidates have - among other things - accused each other of "corruption, bribery and torture" (Ahmedinejad also attacked the wife of challenger Mir Hussein Moussavi). You'd think that people would be disgusted and stay home after a slimefest like that, but apparently not.
... Turnout appeared to be extraordinarily high, with long lines forming outside some polling stations well before they opened at 8 a.m.Anyway, so much for the theory that "negative" campaigning turns off voters.
Polls were originally due to close at 6 p.m. (9:30 a.m. in New York), but voting was extended for at least two hours due to the strong turnout. Initial results are not expected until 12 hours after the polls close.
