“Laughing matters on the campaign trail, not only for bringing supporters together but also for defining leaders,” Stewart wrote.

In egalitarian societies, such as the United States, social science research has shown that there is a preference for leaders who display what social scientists call “happiness/reassurance,” which suggests the ability to form alliances and work collaboratively. In the competitive environment of a debate, nonverbal cues can signal such egalitarian values within humorous comments, even when the humor is at the expense of an opponent.

Nonverbal behavior, such as an upward turn of the lips or crinkling of the eyes, signals the emotional intent of a humorous comment, whether the comment is self-deprecating or critical of an opponent. While a speechwriter may script humorous comments and a candidate may rehearse them, Stewart noted, “The ability to successfully deliver such comments nonverbally does not appear to be so easily coached, potentially making them a robust indicator of candidate character.”

Stewart found that the style of the smile that accompanied a humorous comment was an important factor in the amount of audience laughter, and the eyes were key. “Felt” smiles, also known as genuine or true smiles, involve both lips and eyes. In felt smiles, the lip corners pull up and back, and the muscles around the eyes pull up the cheeks and crinkle the corners of the eyes. Such smiles are difficult to fake, Stewart says, and are an “indicator of emotional state and behavioral intent.” In contrast, false smiles involve the lips but don’t typically engage the muscles around the eye opening, “giving the smile a flat or unconvincing quality.”

Stewart suggested that future research should consider whether audience laughter varies with the intensity of specific nonverbal displays, the use of different figurations of facial elements, or a particular combination of smile types. Timing is another issue: his research did not consider whether facial expressions were the product of the humorous comments or a reaction to audience laughter.

“Presidential laugh lines: Candidate display behavior and audience laughter in the 2008 primary debates” was published in the September 2010 issue of Politics and Life Sciences.

Stewart is an assistant professor of political science in the J. William Fulbright College of Arts and Sciences at the University of Arkansas. He is a certified coder in the Facial Action Coding System, and his current research focuses on nonverbal behavior by politicians during debates and the emotional response of citizens to different types of smiles by politicians.

Associated Political Magazines

Similar Posts:

• Norway and US Need To Talk Fish

In a couple of weeks, same-sex couples in Wisconsin will be allowed to declare domestic partnerships and take advantage of some of the rights and benefits extended to married couples.

County clerks around the state are preparing to accept domestic partnership declaration applications starting Aug. 3.

The Domestic Partnership Law was included in the 2009-2010 state budget signed by Gov. Jim Doyle June 29. The budget also includes domestic partner benefits for state employees.

The application process will be similar to applying for a marriage license. At least one of the applicants must have lived in the county for 30 days or longer, both must be of the same sex and at least 18, neither may be married or in another domestic partnership, the two must share a residence and they must not be nearer of kin that second cousins.

Pre Convention

While seeking the party nomination it has been historically about speaking to the base. – McCain did not do that.  McCain kept his ‘maverick’ policies.  The problem affected the base so much that popular republicans publicly voiced their support for Clinton after all other candidates dropped out and McCain was the only remaining choice.

What were the issues?

• “Amnesty” for illegal immigrants and Mccain wanted a fairly easy path to citizenship for millions of undocumented foreign workers.
• 82% lifetime American Conservative Union (ACU) voting record
• Against earmarks (pork-barrel spending)
• Voted against the Bush initiative to have Medicare pay for prescription drugs for old folk
• While the other candidates moved more right McCain did not budge and maintained his middle ground.  Willard “Mitt” Romney and Mike Huckabee spoke directly to the base leaving McCain to have a defensive campaign.
• The McCain-Feingold campaign finance bill made it difficult for interested non-profits to advertise during the primary or general elections. This in effect tied the hands of those who wanted to set the direction of the GOP.
• His wildly incompetent at using his own perfect pro-life record in the Senate. McCain either remained silent or mildly addressed his views and stance.
  
• McCain likes to make common cause with politicians across the aisle from him, leaving the GOP gasping at his inconsistency.

GOP Debates

The GOP debates with their “hand raising” kept the voice of McCain to a murmur.  The only tactic to stand out was to expand on his stance on earmarks, military experience and staying in Iraq. This alone should get him the presidential election except it made McCain looked like he was a social Libertarian instead of the Republican candidate.

• The general public do not understand earmarks and how ‘inside the beltway’ negotiations work.  McCain never using earmarks in fact hurt the GOP time and time again in elevating position.
• McCain’s sacrifice for this country is nothing to piss off, but it is not the only quality the Republicans want in a president.
• Majority of the American citizen doesn’t want to be in Iraq.  All the other candidates avoided the subject and focusing their attention to troop support.  McCain was never had an opportunity to expand on how the experience will assist in making military decisions.  It was all about the quick word and quotes.
• McCain came out of the delegates looking quite liberal.

NOTE: The political debates were a joke.  The candidates that stood out where the ones willing to risk it all.  McCain always took the safe road.

Missing Maverick

The McCain Maverick ideology is appealing and should be to the general US voter.  The Maverick was no where to be seen, like a retiring superhero.  McCain Maverick costume was put in the closet and let there to accumulate dust.

The McCain Maverick was nowhere to be seen on the campaign trail.  He stuck to his stance on earmarks, military experience and staying in Iraq — but no Maverick.

But in fact, the Maverick would have seemed far more suited to a political climate in which dissatisfied voters believe the country has taken a turn in the wrong direction and are looking for someone who promises to upset the old, established order of things. Closeting the Maverick took away the power of the McCain image.

“They managed to take a guy who has one of the great, compelling stories, who had a clear lead, who managed to raise $24 million,” says Republican pollster David Winston, expressing a dismay that many of McCain’s admirers are feeling about the wreckage of his campaign. “They’ve left this guy with virtually nothing.”

McCain’s advisers killed the Maverick and will be one of the greatest supporters of President Obama as a Senator.

Television Appearances

McCain hit the talk show circuit as if he was promoting a book. He went on Ellen, The View and other very liberal talk shows to promote again the death of McCain the Maverick.  Time and time again the talk show ask “where is the real McCain”?

Not going on David Letterman was the only smart move made by McCain.   Although it was under the guise of “putting the campaign on hold” with actually putting it on hold. It took McCain three days to go from New York, NY to Washington DC while hitting the morning talk shows.

One of the safest place for McCain should have been “Meet the Press” but time and time again, McCain stumbled through the interviews, mumbling and barely gave an adequate or mediocre interview. It was pitiful, I was hoping at least one time he would have chugged a ‘Red Bull’ . . . goodness he could have used some wings.

Convention

The convention is to change everything.  It is about stirring the hearts of your party, delegates and preparing for the last leg of the journey into the White House.  What happened?  McCain didn’t lead, but followed.  A no-nonsense Palin brought McCain back to conservatism, just by association.

Key Moments

• The key problems of McCain campaign never did speak to the religious base and lost the limelight as soon as Palin took the stage.
• What did McCain talk about when he took the stage? Expand on his stance on earmarks, military experience and staying in Iraq
• The choice of Palin stirred the GOP.  Fox News anchors, off camera, pointed that this is the end of McCain’s run and left most stunned.   The one time McCain dusts off his Maverick and makes a bod decision angers the supporters more.  It lack a backbone.  He had two vetted possible candidates (Romney and
• When McCain  addressed the delegates there was nothing new.  He read his resume and did not give the sense of a leader. (Compare to Obama/Biden it was not so much about who but where – where the Democrats will go from there and where they will lead the country).
• When your pick for Vice President complains about the current Washington DC . . . she is complaining about you.

Post Convention

Via Palin, McCain never went back to the middle.  After a polictical convention the candidate goes out to get the votes from the rest of the US citizens.  McCain failed to move to get the votes from the moderates.

A stadium filled with conservatives who chant “drill baby drill” is no different than a crowd yelling “off with his head”, “terrorist” – both show that McCain supporters were not the middle America.

It was the time to move towards the moderate movement.  Most of the United States populous is more moderate.

Where was McCain and Palin, sitting on the right.  During this time Obama took his movement and focused his platform to be the three top issues : economy, mortgages, and environment.  McCain

Turn of Election

When McCain was loosing, his focus did not change.  The pundents acknowledged that McCain will loose within three (3) weeks after the GOP convention.  The time was to change ,McCain needed to turn the focus from the Presidency to Congress.  But he didn’t.

McCain ignored advise and his own party . . . too not only fail at another attempt at President and took the GOP plans for Congree with him.

httpv://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IuRUvz8may8

We watched it this morning from the BBC iPlayer eating oatmeal, which is a bad idea when you are laughing from the gut.

As the show pointed out, never an election affected so many people before . . . especially the porn industry.

What we need is a Palin vs Palin via Fey vs Newton.

At the local “The Black Cat” (coffee shop) individuals gather and discuss politics while having a hot cup of coffee with a fresh warm muffin (from the local bakery “Ashland Bakery Company“).  In this small town (Ashland) the political conversation is rarely, if ever, pro Palin.

Ashland like Wasilla is a small town (under 10K population) in the United States.  Lets compare Ashland to Wasilla.

Population

Ashland: 8202

Wasilla: 9236

Religion & Voting

Common

• They both are near water.  Wikipedia has two images of the shoreline of Wasilla and Ashland are quite similar.
• Railroads and Fur Trading are an important part of Ashland and Wasilla history.
• Crimes statistics are very similar, low.

Ashland, WI

Wasilla, AK

Differences

• There is public transportation in Ashland (Bart Bus) for about $ 1.00/one way with .18% of the residents using mass transit; Wasilla’s cost is $2.50/one way and less than .00% ridership.
• Ashland has sidewalks, wasilla doesn’t.
• Ashland has two options for higher education (Northland College, Wisconsin Indianhead Technical College). There aren’t higher education opportunities in Wasilla (unless you count hairstyling and real estate schools).
• Ashland has a Hospital within the city limits, while the nearest hospital for Wasilla residents is 29 miles away.
• Average home price in Ashland is around $84K with Wasilla’s average is about $226K.
• 92% of the Ashland population work and live within 30 mins of each other; Wasilla under 30% with the majority commuting (one per car) to Anchorage.
  • Ashland residents invest in Ashland.  In fact, Ashland has an good old fashion downtown Main Street with coffee shop, Diner, Movies theater (5 screens), bakery, pharmacy, restaurants, and many shops.
  • Wasilla is filled with boxed stores and franchises including Target, Gap, Banana Republic, Nordstroms, and TGIFridays. It is an outdoor mall connected by a large four lane highway, called Main Street.

Which Main Street would you want?

A

B

My choice: B.  Ashland, WI

Personal Thoughts

How can two small towns be so different, so polar?

Ashland and the United States has a higher percentage of Religious than Wasilla.  That is the complete  opposite of Palin’s public promotion and the public perception of Wasilla. Can it be that Fox News and all those religious programs have been wrong?  Based on statistics it is not the religious that vote republican, it is the wealthy.

Is it because Ashland is more compassionate and sympathetic to the real issues of the United States due to the lower cost of living?  For Ashland residents, is it about the poor, hungry, job security and homeless?

It could be a secular education that produces a more balanced mind?

• Ashland 30% of the population has completed higher education
• Wasilla’s 11% of the population has completed higher education

It also could it be values of the Mayors and his/her leadership?  Asking both if being a Mayor of a small town qualifies to be Vice President or President of the United States:

• Ashland’s Mayor Ed Monroe responded, “No”
• Wasilla’s Mayor Dianne Keller responded, “Yes”

I decided to compare Wasilla to other small towns in the United States (via Sperlings) and found that Wasilla is not anomaly.  I looked closely at other cities/towns that have a population under 10,000, home prices above $215K and less than 50% religious residents.  These cites/towns do have a higher population percentage that votes Republican.  The variable of more or less religious isn’t the fact that affect voting either Republican or Democratic.  The higher income, higer cost of living and higher home values affect the residents voting Republican while more balanced values, educated populous, lower cost of living and lower home prices affect the residents voting Democratic.

God is irrelevant it is all about the pocketbook.

Resources

• City Data
• Wikipedia
  
• Sperlings