WILL LONG LINES DISCOURAGE MARGINAL VOTERS?

The Horserace Blog has an interesting take on the issue of whether or not we will see large numbers of new voters today.

Game theorists would argue that people vote based on a cost-benefit analysis. There are inherent costs to voting (information costs required to learn about the candidates, transportation costs, time lost costs) and these can be compared to the psychological benefits (i.e. fulfilling civic duty, following tradition). Now, in 2000 the benefit from voting was greater than the cost for voting for about 54% of eligible adults. In other words, about 46% of America decided that the costs were too great, 54% decided that they were not. Suppose that these early turnout indications are true, that the Democratic and GOP faithful are coming out in droves upon droves. What happens to the marginal voter? The probability that he will vote actually declines, as his time costs are going through the roof. He gets to the polls, sees a wait of up to two hours and decides, "Awww...forget it! I don't like either of those bozos, anyway!"

Read the whole thing. It sounds plausible, but the problem with this argument is that doing a cost-benefit analysis on human behavior cannot take human emotions into account. Fear may be motivating some first-time voters to get out this time, or hatred, or any number of other emotions. If so, those people will not calculate the cost of standing in line in their determination to act on their motivating emotion.