This study investigates candidate behavior in American electoral campaigns. It centers on a question of equal importance to citizens and scholars: how can we produce better political campaigns? The project takes an innovative approach to answering this question by bringing together critical and empirical methods as well as game theory in a sophisticated yet readable text. The answer comes in four parts. First, Simon develops the idea of dialogue as a standard for evaluating political campaigns. Second, he shows that candidates' self-interest in winning leads them to avoid dialogue, that is substantive campaign discourse. Third, he demonstrates the beneficial effects produced by the little dialogue that actually occurs. Fourth, he pinpoints the forces responsible for these rare occurrences. The major lesson of this work is that campaign reform under its present guise will not bring about the more substantive campaigns that the public desires.

This study investigates candidate behavior in American electoral campaigns. It centers on a question of equal importance to citizens and scholars: how can we produce better political campaigns? The project takes an innovative approach to answering this question by bringing together critical and empirical methods as well as game theory in a sophisticated yet readable text. The answer comes in four parts. First, Simon develops the idea of dialogue as a standard for evaluating political campaigns. Second, he shows that candidates' self-interest in winning leads them to avoid dialogue, that is substantive campaign discourse. Third, he demonstrates the beneficial effects produced by the little dialogue that actually occurs. Fourth, he pinpoints the forces responsible for these rare occurrences. The major lesson of this work is that campaign reform under its present guise will not bring about the more substantive campaigns that the public desires.

Public opinion polling permeates today's politics, yet many seem suspicious of polls and skeptical in their prominence, fearing that overreliance on public opinion amounts to pandering or that pollsters can manipulate a feeble public. In this book Adam Simon argues that democracy requires that government listen to the public and that sample surveys are the finest democratic technology yet devised. He lays out the fundamentals of public opinion research and illustrates his discussion of the science of polling with recent political hot button issues as case studies_the decision to invade Iraq, partial birth abortion, and the Clinton health care debate. He advocates that poll results meet the standard for mass informed consent and should play a larger role in our politics. Simon concludes with recommendations to improve democracy from the standpoint of citizens, politicians, and the media. Mass Informed Consent will be of special interest to students of public opinion, political behavior, media and politics, interest group politics, and political communication.

This study investigates candidate behavior in American electoral campaigns. It centers on a question of equal importance to citizens and scholars: how can we produce better political campaigns? The project takes an innovative approach to answering this question by bringing together critical and empirical methods as well as game theory in a sophisticated yet readable text. The answer comes in four parts. First, Simon develops the idea of dialogue as a standard for evaluating political campaigns. Second, he shows that candidates' self-interest in winning leads them to avoid dialogue, that is substantive campaign discourse. Third, he demonstrates the beneficial effects produced by the little dialogue that actually occurs. Fourth, he pinpoints the forces responsible for these rare occurrences. The major lesson of this work is that campaign reform under its present guise will not bring about the more substantive campaigns that the public desires.

This study investigates candidate behavior in American electoral campaigns. It centers on a question of equal importance to citizens and scholars: how can we produce better political campaigns? The project takes an innovative approach to answering this question by bringing together critical and empirical methods as well as game theory in a sophisticated yet readable text. The answer comes in four parts. First, Simon develops the idea of dialogue as a standard for evaluating political campaigns. Second, he shows that candidates' self-interest in winning leads them to avoid dialogue, that is substantive campaign discourse. Third, he demonstrates the beneficial effects produced by the little dialogue that actually occurs. Fourth, he pinpoints the forces responsible for these rare occurrences. The major lesson of this work is that campaign reform under its present guise will not bring about the more substantive campaigns that the public desires.

Public opinion polling permeates today's politics, yet many seem suspicious of polls and skeptical in their prominence, fearing that overreliance on public opinion amounts to pandering or that pollsters can manipulate a feeble public. In this book Adam Simon argues that democracy requires that government listen to the public and that sample surveys are the finest democratic technology yet devised. He lays out the fundamentals of public opinion research and illustrates his discussion of the science of polling with recent political hot button issues as case studies_the decision to invade Iraq, partial birth abortion, and the Clinton health care debate. He advocates that poll results meet the standard for mass informed consent and should play a larger role in our politics. Simon concludes with recommendations to improve democracy from the standpoint of citizens, politicians, and the media. Mass Informed Consent will be of special interest to students of public opinion, political behavior, media and politics, interest group politics, and political communication.