I was attempting to provide an example where the "right wingers" did not let Bush off the hook.
I get it. You are trying to say that that is true of the partisans on the left but not of the partisans on the right. Or maybe only that there are exceptions on the right but not on the left. (The bit about the media was an aborted red herring.)
>>The process is almost entirely emotional and unconscious, the researchers report, and there are flares of activity in the brain's pleasure centers when unwelcome information is being rejected.<<
I don't see how anyone with half a brain reading the political threads on SI could miss the utter mindlessness that occurs on both sides. I sure didn't need some MRI study to confirm that what the article says is true. If you really think that this syndrome only occurs among Dem partisans, then I suggest that you, yourself, are suffering from a variation of the syndrome. <g>
If, OTOH, you are suggesting that all affiliated voters do not suffer from this syndrome, I would agree with you. I don't think that brief article meant to suggest otherwise. There are thoughtful people on both sides, people who are affiliated out of rational self interest and whose brains and temperaments have the capacity to function above the primordial ooze. Sometimes they speak up and gain traction igniting or pulling along the afflicted. Good for them.
Now, for the example you offered. I think it demonstrates something independent of the syndrome on the table. The article talked about partisanship and it used loyalty to the leader in its experiment as a proxy for partisanship. I think the proxy served its purpose well but, like all proxies or examples, there are elements that don't fit perfectly. Those who opposed Meiers acting on partisanship even as they were opposing their leader. That's a bit too much nuance for a simple experiment on the grey matter of partisan fanatics. It was a rational partisanship that lead them to take that position. Which goes back to the point that not all partisans are irrational. Some don't fall victim to the syndrome or do so more mildly.
Now, re your Clinton/Obama example, I think there is more diversity in the Republican party so it's more likely to find internal opposition among Republicans than Democrats at this point in time. I also think that there is a cadre of intellectual partisans among the Republicans now where that is not so apparent among the Dems. But that in no way means that there aren't large chunks of each party afflicted with the syndrome as the article asserted.
|
