1.6 Billion Dollars. That's Billion with a "B". That's how much money will be spent on political advertising for state and national political candidates and issues. What do you think? Is this a wise expense?

Then, look at those ads. How many of them are "positive"? Not many. In fact, the Republican Congressional Campaign Committee will be spending 90% of its funds on negative ads. Do they work? The answer seems to be yes. If you can set the terms and the tone of the debate, you have a leg up. According to George Marcus, president of the International Society of Politcal Psychology, unless a political ad evokes an emotional response, it doesn't have much effect. He says voters need to be emotionally primed before they pay much attention. This partly explains the enduring success of negative ads and it suggests that candidates are appealing for reasons other than their ideas. Campaigns are won or lost on a more emotional level.

Nicholas Valentino, a poltical psychologist at the University Of Michigan, was interviewed in the Washington Post this week. He said, "The ability of a candidate not to tell people how to feel about an issue, but which issue they should focus on-- that is the struggle of most modern campaign managers."

Last week, Jim Davis announced that Daryl Jones would be his running mate at the top of Florida's Democratic ticket. Jones, who ran unsuccessfully for Governor in 2002, was a supporter of Rod Smith during the primary. Jon asked Jones why the change. He told him, he didn't have a bad relationship with Davis but decided to support Smith. Now, "Jim is the nominee and it's important for party unity... but he's also the best candidate." Jon also asked Davis if this was another effort to mend fences with the African-American community. Davis said no and that "quality counts."