Will cognitive dissonance produce a new block of voters, the Clinton Republicans? Is this something we should wish for? I think it will and we should, and I'd like to explain why.
Inducing someone to express an opinion (or take an action in support of an opinion) that they are opposed to makes them more favorably inclined toward the originally disfavored opinion. In some of the classic cognitive dissonance experiments, subjects were assigned to give a talk or write an essay arguing in favor of an opinion that they opposed as shown on pre-testing. Post-testing showed a shift in the subjects' opinions in favor of the one that had been assigned to them in the experiment. The conjecture was that tension was produced by acting in opposition to one's beliefs. That type of tension is uncomfortable and people look for ways to relieve it, and one way to get relief is to alter the belief.
Thanks to to five-alarm fire that is Donald Trump, we are now embarked on a massive experiment in cognitive dissonance, the subjects being our Republican brethren and sistren. Every day we hear of more high-profile Republicans declaring they cannot vote for Donald Trump, and in some cases announcing they will vote for Hillary Clinton, very much against their long-held beliefs. I'm guessing that for every Republican whose decision to do this hits the news there must be thousands of everyday R voters making the same choice. Polls, in fact, have shown a significant movement of college-educated women to Hillary, many of whom are undoubtedly Republicans.
If cognitive dissonance works the way we think it does, at least some of those new Hillary voters will alter their beliefs, if not about Democrats, at least about Hillary herself. But I think the opportunity we have right now goes well beyond a small shift in Hillary's favorability numbers, however. In an interesting jujitsu move, the 25-year-long campaign of defaming Hillary Clinton might add extra momentum to the shift that basic human psychology will naturally be pushing these reluctant voters toward. The fact is, they know very little genuine about Hillary Clinton. They may have had their eyes opened a little if they watched the DNC, but in general what they know is the lying, untrustworthy, crafty, maybe downright criminal Hillary of the political comic book we live in.
In order to ease the tension they feel about their choice, they will look for any redeeming qualities she might have, to put their minds at rest about this awful choice they've had to make. And they will find them! For R women in particular, her policies, her history, and her consistent commitment to issues they care about will be a pleasant surprise. They will feel not just a little easing of the tension, but more likely a great deal of relief. And that's another thing we know about human psychology: Relief of this kind of mental anguish is hugely rewarding. They may end up liking Hillary (and Dem policies) even more than we could anticipate.
The case of Democratic policies writ large is another potential amplifier of the opinion shift that may occur this year. It's a matter of huge frustration to progressives that majorities of voters consistently express preferences for many progressive policies yet continue to vote for politicians who oppose them. The tribalism of party identification and the effects of the Mighty Wurlitzer make it really difficult to get voting behavior to match expressed policy preferences. This year we have a crack in the wall of tribal voting. If just enough information sneaks through that crack, there could be an opinion shift that extends beyond just a higher comfort level with Hillary Clinton. What if it turns out the good things they've discovered about Hillary also apply to that Democrat they have running for Senate? What a coincidence, right? Maybe those new Hillary voters could even decide not to split their ticket!
One way to help this process along is to not give up on persuading your R friends and family members even if it looks like we have this one in the bag. Confirmed Trumpsters are probably out of reach, but anyone who's squishy on The Donald is worth talking to. The important thing is not to concentrate solely on how disastrous a president he'd be -- he's taking care of that message just fine all by himself-- but on aspects of Hillary's candidacy that might be appealing: debt-free college, infrastructure projects and the jobs they'd produce, relief with child care costs, etc. You could also point out the very high opinion her former colleagues in the Senate and diplomats world-wide hold of her. Help them ease that tension in their minds and make them feel good about who they vote for this year.
If these forces act upon enough Republicans we might even see a new voting cohort, the Clinton Republicans. After all, if the Rs were able to capitalize on the turmoil of the 60s and 70s to produce Reagan Democrats, why can't we capitalize on the current danger and gridlock to get Clinton Republicans? It can be done without moving to the right, without triangulation, without abandoning basic principles. It's not in any way assured, of course, but it's in no way impossible.