Thanks for the thoughtful comment. As I think more about it, I do wonder how useful the Gingrich polling arc (and I note that it seems to have stabilized in recent polls) is for testing our campaign advertising/media effects theory, in that the disparity in advertising was so great – with such a preponderance targeting Gingrich, and only Gingrich – that it may be sui generis. But it will be interesting to see if his advertising counteroffensive, even at this late date, arrests his slide in the polls.

My read of the media effects literature is consistent with the priming model. Framing effects clearly matter, but their impact is moderated by intervening variables: most importantly education levels and the degree of public deliberation. Education helps determine the strength of the priors that voters have and deliberation serves to moderate and reduce the importance of framing effects. If we think Iowans are a particularly deliberative bunch, then these ads shouldn’t matter too much. If we think most voters are “bowling alone” and divorced from social deliberation, then the ads should have a great impact. Right now it seems to be the latter, although I view the caucus process as somewhat more deliberative, so Gingrich might do better than polling suggests. If the electorate is relatively uneducated and lacking in deliberation, then Gingrich is toast.

See: Druckman, James N. . 2004. “Political Preference Formation: Competition, Deliberation, and the (Ir)relevance of Framing Effects.” The American Political Science Review 98 (4):671.

One thing to keep in mind is that the surveys are showing that even evangelical voters aren’t very concerned with social and religious issues this election cycle – they are more worried about economic ones. the real divide is between those who worry about job creation versus those who focus more on cutting government spending and shrinking the deficit.

As for citizen’s united, we’ll see if total spending on campaign ads is up over 2008- but I agree with you regarding the transparency aspect. The real anomaly, however, is how much of the negative ad targeted Gingrich. My guess is he is going to start fighting back. And that may be the lesson here – we need more advertising, not less!

Furthermore, when religious or social issues are the most important factor in who wins in Iowa, and Citizens United permits anonymous “groups” to say almost anything without identifying who is paying for what they are telling the voters on TV and radio, “something is rotten” in the way we pick candidates and elect presidents.

The law of unintended consequences? We need a 28th amendment.