Undecided voters aren’t as ill-informed as you might think

Undecided voters have spent most of 2012 being courted: by the warring presidential campaigns, the endlessly inquiring press, the focus group social scientists and the attack ad producers.

They were hunted Friday in "Real Time" by political comedian Bill Maher.

On his popular HBO show, Maher made big sport of the small percentage of American voters who aren't sure whether they will cast their ballot for President Barack Obama or former Massachusetts Gov. Mitt Romney. They have yet to reach a decision despite all of the information available and all of the millions that have been spent by the campaigns to win their favor.

In his hilarious "New Rules" segment, Maher filleted the press for making so much of undecided voters, and he skewered the equivocators for their seemingly endless waffling.

"Seriously, if at this point you still can't figure out who you like more, Mitt Romney or Barack Obama, stay home, because you probably couldn't find your polling place anyway," Maher said.

He concluded, "And that, in a nutshell, is America's celebrated, undecided voter: put on a pedestal by the media as if they were Hamlet in a think tank, searching out every last bit of information, high-minded arbiters poring over policy positions and matching them against their own philosophies. Please, they mostly fall into a category political scientists call 'low information voters,' otherwise known as 'dipsh*ts.' "

It was good for a laugh, and the segment reverberated through the blogosphere.

But it's funny Maher should bring up the great fuss over the hedging American voter. I've met plenty of them in recent weeks and listened as they've stood in long lines on warm afternoons, waiting for a chance to hear Obama and Romney for themselves.

The voters I visited with were trying to keep their sense of humor amid the roar of the campaigns and the 24-hour news channels. With all the fearmongering and misdirection going on, that isn't easy.

Some criticize them as "low information voters," but if anything, they appeared to suffer from information overload. Far from taking the election too lightly, they took the race so seriously that they spent hours waiting for the opportunity to get a feel for the candidates in person.

John Frey is a 35-year-old Ron Paul supporter who turned out Sept. 12 at Cashman Field to hear Obama speak. Frey considered himself fiscally conservative, but socially progressive.

A student of history, he has read plenty about the candidates and their positions, but like a lot of voters, he doesn't trust that their words will match their deeds.

"I don't know what I really learned from it," Frey said after the president's speech, "but what I really wanted to get was a sense of Obama's personality, the vibration he gives out."

Although he appreciated the president mentioning the need to corral unnecessary military spending, Frey refrained from announcing his final decision.

Outside UNLV's Cox Pavilion on Friday, retired massage therapist Christine Didas waited in the heat to hear Romney speak. Like many Americans, the past four years have been hard for her. She recently started collecting Social Security, but she wants to make sure the best man for the job wins her vote.

"I'm looking for some details, not so much generalization," she said. The future of Social Security and health care are concerns for her, and she is "tired of the war."

It's not much of a punch line, but the undecided voters I spoke with were attempting to focus on the nuances and searching for facts in a noxious fog of misinformation and sound bites.

Far from being out of touch, they were highly attuned to the fact they will be casting what could be the most important vote of their lives.

John L. Smith's column appears Sunday, Tuesday, Wednesday and Friday. E-mail him at Smith@reviewjournal.com or call 702-383-0295. He blogs at lvrj.com/blogs/Smith