Abstract
In the United States, public support can play a crucial role in the decisions to initiate and terminate military action. Some scholars argue that the public holds "prudent" opinions regarding the use of the military-supporting efforts to stop aggression but not to engage in nation building. We argue that what seems like a "prudent" opinion may be driven more by the White House's rhetoric. Experimental tests show that the rhetorical complexity has a more powerful impact on the respondent's support for military action than the actual policy goal, although this result is substantially tempered by political awareness.
| Original language | English (US) |
|---|---|
| Pages (from-to) | 83-96 |
| Number of pages | 14 |
| Journal | Political Research Quarterly |
| Volume | 63 |
| Issue number | 1 |
| DOIs | |
| State | Published - Mar 2010 |
All Science Journal Classification (ASJC) codes
- Sociology and Political Science
Fingerprint
Dive into the research topics of '"Pretty prudent" or Rhetorically responsive? The American public's support for military action'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.Cite this
- APA
- Author
- BIBTEX
- Harvard
- Standard
- RIS
- Vancouver