« Money-driven Medicine | Main | Steve Landsburg's new book »
Is it irrational to favor Fred Thompson because you like his character on TV?
Of course I'm not talking about myself here, Tyler is candidate-neutral. I'm talking about other people. Can they just say "I like his character on TV, I think I'll vote for him"?
Surely there exists some game in which this strategy makes sense (I always chuckle when I write this line). Let's say many other people vote the same way and thus expect this same character from him. Isn't he then locked into playing this character to some extent? Of course this means you should favor only truly popular and typecast actors, since an obscure actor, or any actor with many different roles, won't be much locked in.
And if he can play the character on TV, maybe he can play the character in the Oval Office as well. The actual content of policy would still be driven by his ability to pick and heed good advisors, which presumably is not negatively correlated with acting ability or with the nature of this single character. In fact maybe his agent told him to take the role and he listened.
Ankush has negative remarks on Thompson.
Posted by Tyler Cowen on April 15, 2007 at 07:52 AM in Television | Permalink
Comments
Is it any more irrational than voting for someone just because the candidate is black or a woman?
Posted by: Hei Lun Chan at Apr 15, 2007 10:10:20 AM
In my limited understanding, Fred Thompson is playing himself on tv. So if you like his character, then you like him. I could be mistaken. But I do know that he got into "acting" because the actor playing him in some docudrama sucked, so they ended up casting him to play himself, literally.
Posted by: Sameer Parekh at Apr 15, 2007 10:21:01 AM
Your strategy was tried and failed in the Phillipines; as an actor, Joseph Estrada was typecast as a straight-talking tough guy who always did the right thing. His tenure as president was marked by corruption, racketeering, and associations with organized crime.
Posted by: Neel Krishnaswami at Apr 15, 2007 12:52:20 PM
I prefer Fred Thompson the prosecutor to Silk-pony Johnnie-Boy the defense attorney. America will too.
Posted by: daveinboca at Apr 15, 2007 1:02:00 PM
Joseph Estrada was a long-time Mayor, two-term Senator and Vice-President before he became President. His failings were that of a traditional politician's. As an actor, he was ok.
Posted by: cvj at Apr 15, 2007 1:22:46 PM
Sameer is correct, Fred Thompson isn't acting.
Posted by: Patrick R. Sullivan at Apr 15, 2007 3:18:53 PM
Does Arnold govern like a cyborg from the future?
Posted by: josh at Apr 15, 2007 3:55:42 PM
John Edwards is so smooth that he won millions for his clients as a defense attorney. You just can't trust someone like that.
Posted by: Barbar at Apr 15, 2007 3:57:01 PM
He's a great communicator, as demonstrated by his acting on TV. That quality was a great asset to Reagan.
Irrational to vote for him just because of that, but if he ever got in the running I think he could charm voters.
Posted by: JTapp at Apr 15, 2007 4:03:46 PM
No, your vote will have the same value than the onet from someone who study the candidates, see every debate and listen to political pundits in order to be a informed voter
Posted by: jcm at Apr 15, 2007 5:24:21 PM
I read Tyler's comments and wonder if he really even KNOWS anything about Fred Thompson: Federal prosecutor, accomplished attorney, brought down a corrupt governor, Watergate Committee counsel, U.S. Senator, Senate Judiciary, Finance, Foreign Relations, Intelligence and Governmental Affairs Committees. Fred Thompson is not just an actor.
Posted by: km at Apr 15, 2007 9:06:09 PM
basically i'm gonna just start voting for the one who sounds like a president.
the one we have now sounds like a petulant child.
Posted by: j godsey at Apr 15, 2007 9:55:26 PM
I think its true of a lot of actors that they successfully portray convincing likable characters because they have likable personalities and are mostly just 'acting' like themselves. Not that that necessarily diminishes what they do. I suspect it might actually be harder to play 'yourself' than 'someone else,' at least in high tension scenarios (think how people can tell when we're lying because we don't seem to be acting like ourselves).
(/aside)
While I do enjoy Fred Thompson's character on Law and Order, I personally would not vote for him for that reason. Governor of California isn't President of the USA, but still Arnold is far more absurd as the executive of a major political entity than Thompson, that *should* at least satisfy everyone from the novelty angle. Now as to voting because you like someone's apparent character (haven't we been hearing 'character counts' ever since Clinton's shenanigans?), I can certainly see that happening to an extent. We can scream and shout all day about the policies of the current administration being wrong or right, but one thing I think most people would agree on is the administrations serious incompetence problem. Obviously, someone far more articulate and presentable than GWB could be preside over just as incompetent an administration, but he does indeed appear incompetent on the surface, and a lot of people may end up evaluating candidates in terms of how they act, and less so for their policy this time around. I offer this more of an on the margins influence then a driving force but I really could see FDT's 'character' on Law and Order affecting his perception as a presidential candidate in a lot of people's minds (and for the better at that).
And one more aside while we're mentioning Arnold, I don't know that anyone reading this blog would remember this, but I'm pretty sure Conan O'Brien had to stop using clips of some of Arnold's worst films to mock him when he was first running for governor because of some campaign finance law that considered any face time as advertising for the candidate. I don't know whether this was a California or Federal law. Lots of people have mentioned the syndication of Law and Order as a source of free advertising for FDT, but I wonder if close to the election episodes with him in it would be illegal to show? Not so bad for NBC because he obviously still wouldn't be making new episodes, but TNT would be wrecked. However, if this is the case, it might wake a lot people up to our absurd campaign finance laws (and would made all the more interesting if it comes up during the primary and the relevant legislation originated from McCain.)
Posted by: mtc at Apr 16, 2007 12:05:51 AM
The fact of the matter is - and this IS a prediction - if and when
Thompson (Fred) enters the Republican race, he'll run away
with it: each of the other announced candidates have serious
failings, according to registered Republicans.
But the real problem is with the general election, assuming
Thompson is the Republican candidate - SURE, they'll be millions
of people who vote for him, simply becasue of the character he
plays on TV.
Posted by: glenn at Apr 16, 2007 8:14:25 AM
I could not have made up a better illustration of the intellectual degeneracy of the American right: you're seriously discussing whether it makes sense to pick a President based on whether you like the character they play on a TV show? I suppose I should thank my lucky stars that Homer Simpson is constitutionally ineligible to hold that office.
Posted by: alkali at Apr 16, 2007 9:04:46 AM
I think that 'intellectual degeneracy' isn't limited to the conservative segment of the population. Back when "West Wing" was on the air, President Bartlett (Martin Sheen) was considered the ideal candidate by many a liberal.
Posted by: fustercluck at Apr 16, 2007 1:07:00 PM
Does Arnold govern like a cyborg from the future?
Or like a barbarian from the mythical past?
Mongol General: Conan! What is best in life?
Conan: To crush your enemies, see them driven before you, and to hear the lamentation of the women.
Posted by: brianS at Apr 16, 2007 3:04:30 PM
To what degree, for better or for worse, did people vote for Ronald Reagan
based on his acting career and persona? (Of course most of those people did
not see his last movie, "The Killers," from 1966, when he played a villain who
pretended to be a state highway patrolman.)
Posted by: Barkley Rosser at Apr 17, 2007 1:12:45 PM
数控机床数控机床。。数控改造。。
数控机床。。
数控机床改造。。
数控机床仿真软件数控机床改造。。
数控机床。。
数控机床。。
数控机床。。
数控车床数控车床。。
数控车床。。
华中数控车床。。
大连数控车床。。
无锡数控车床山东数控车床。。
南京数控车床。。
数控车床。。
数控车床。。
广州数控车床数控车床。。
广州数控车床。。
华中数控车床。。
数控车床。。
数控车床北京数控车床。。
数控车床简介。。
教学车床。。
教学数控车床。。
数控铣床南通数控铣床。。
数控铣床。。
数控铣床。。
数控铣床。。
教学数控铣床教学铣床。。
数控机床实训设备。。
加工中心。。
加工中心。。
加工中心加工中心。。
微型加工中心。。
数控加工中心。。
加工中心。。
加工中心加工中心。。
加工中心。。
上海加工中心。。
加工中心
Posted by: 南京北春 at Aug 21, 2007 2:48:22 AM
大家好，我是臺灣人，從臺灣一個人搬家來到美國，環境很陌生，感覺很孤單。以前在臺灣幾家知名的徵信社工作過，我是一個優秀的徵信工作者，希望早點找到適合自己的工作。希望通過貴站，認識更多的朋友。
Posted by: 謝文豪 at Apr 2, 2008 2:56:22 AM
