I’ve never done a diary before, and I don’t know that I’ll do another one, but reading through the Marist Poll thread today got me to thinking back to my undergraduate psychology.

In particular, I have been amazed by the people who are still pleading Obama’s case. “Re-elect him!” they urge. “Yes,” they’ll say, “He’s not what we wanted but he’s better than anything else.” (To which I must disagree most strongly).

Then it hit me: many more years ago than I want to admit, I’d read about the phenomenon behind this: escalation of commitment. According to this theory, once you have made an investment in something, you will feel like you should continue to make further investments, even in the face of evidence or knowledge that you are investing more into this than you expect to get back. That certainly seems to fit the case of cheerleading for Obama.

My question is: at what point do the costs get so expensive that the commitment wanes? In my case, it was the health insurance “reform.” I made excuses, less and less enthusiastically, with each disappointment until the I reached my breaking point. What was yours? Are there some people for which there is no price too great? As I watch the Democratic party walking off the cliff behind their pied-piper president, I have to think that maybe, sometimes, there isn’t.



Missouri Mule

Missouri Mule