Why do we always vote for the same candidate even if he proves to be an idiot?

Voting once conditions our future votes by not wanting to break the routine.

I want to ask you a question: how can you tell if a given person is caring, or selfish, or violent, or any other qualifier you can think of?

For purely operational reasons, I can't hear your answer, but I can imagine it: Surely you would tell me that to know if the person in question possesses those qualities I should first be able to observe how he or she behaves. And this does not surprise me. We judge others, and eventually apply qualifiers to them, by observing how they conduct themselves in their daily lives.

What does turn out to be a rather curious fact is that we often use the same methodology to judge ourselves. we use the same methodology to judge ourselves. ourselves. We know if we are affectionate by making a mental review of the gestures of affection that we usually have with our partner, or our children, for example.

Usually the dynamic follows this order, even if we are not aware of it: first we look at how we behave and then we apply a label to ourselves, or put ourselves into a certain category, whether it be brave, funny, optimistic or sensitive. This is the first issue I wish to establish in order to answer the question that shapes the title of this article.

Coherence as a value

And speaking of human qualities, the second issue to be taken into account is the need for consistency. to take into account is the need for congruence that most human beings experience. most human beings experience.

Coherence, defined as a certain harmony between what a person says and does, is a highly valued virtue in all cultures. The opposite, incoherence, translates into erratic, inconsistent or unpredictable behavior.inconsistent or unpredictable behavior. And the truth is that no one likes people who fail to conform to a line of conduct.

It is normal for people who constantly change their minds, or are easily influenced, to be labeled as lazy, weak-willed, or just plain dumb. Thus, consistency is a highly valued personality trait.. When we form an image of ourselves, we strive to be consistent with that image.

At all times, our own behavior tells us a lot about ourselves, even at election time. When we vote for candidate So-and-so, in parallel we build a whole scaffolding that begins to function as a prop and facilitator that will help us return to our facilitator that will help us to vote again in the following elections.. In that sense, if we already decided for So-and-so the first time, it is consistent for us to continue in the same line of action and vote for So-and-so the second time.

Electoral biases and persistence

The phenomenon becomes even stronger if, when we choose our candidate the first time, we proclaim it loudly and let everyone know. When we openly communicate our support to Fulano in a sort of amateur party militancy, the need to be coherent under the watchful eye of others imposes itself on us with even greater force.

Having reached this point, when it is time to vote again, we not only suffer internal pressure to be consistent with our previous decision, we also suffer external pressure from those who know us.

But the subject does not stop there, it has some even more surprising aspects: It has been experimentally demonstrated that when a person has formed an opinion on any subject, showing him concrete evidence that proves that the truth is on the opposite side of the road, is not enough to persuade him the vast majority of the time.Worse still, any solid evidence indicating that such and such a person might be wrong, contrary to common sense, helps that person to cling even more to his or her belief.

This curious psychological phenomenon is known as "persistence", and it is theorized that a person's belief in a particular person's beliefs may be wrong. and it is theorized that once someone has invested time and effort in convincing himself of something, he sticks vehemently to that idea in the face of any hint of doubt or external threat. Know that dismantling an entrenched belief in the mind is extremely painful for the brain.

Why we always vote for the same candidate

It doesn't matter much what brutal economic or educational gaffes the ineffective politician of the day may be making; those who voted for them have no choice but to continue defending him or her to the hilt, have no choice but to continue defending him to the hilt, putting patches here and there, putting patches here and there, putting patches there and there, putting patches there and there.They have no choice but to continue defending it at all costs, putting patches here and there, and constructing all kinds of rationalizations and fallacious justifications that help sustain the precarious cognitive scaffolding that is now tottering.

To accept that this time, instead of voting for So-and-so, it would be better to vote for So-and-so, is also to accept that they were wrong from the beginning, and by doing so, they will implicitly also be accepting their own stupidity, and throwing overboard all the personal resources put into play up to that moment.

Most probably for that reason, in spite of everything, politicians who only concentrate on their own benefitThe need for internal coherence of those who originally voted for them can be very powerful.

The need for internal coherence of those who originally voted for them can become very powerful. And the psychic cost of recanting, too high.