Thinking Out Loud: Effective Emotional Appeals Liberals Can Use?

[darkstar]

I always read Bush’s 2000 campaign as one big sop to our nation’s emotional centers. Namely, in the incessant promise to restore “dignity and honor” the campaign used Clinton as a symbol of 60’s generation excesses, creating a convenient string to twang in the collective Boomer subconscious.

I see it as follows: Before our parents die, show them, the “greatest generation,” that we have grown-up and rejected the silly questions about war and organized religion, along with our fascinations with sex and inebriants and, instead, are restoring honor and dignity on every front. Comfort them in their twilight years that we are, in fact, just like them, and not merely Clintonesque pleasure-seeking, pain avoiding adolescents in adult’s bodies.

A vote for Bush might be characterized as having said: “We’ve returned to the cultural values of your day, Mom and Dad. And you were always right. Thank you for the slack you gave us to go exploring alternate routes and sorry we abused our generous privileges so badly.”

The fact that Bush could play this role with authenticity during the campaign was crucial to its success. He had strayed exceedingly far from the path, only to return to take up his father’s *very* mantle with even greater fervor. And this, of course, was all played out-- like Prince Hal’s return to his Kingly father’s fold--on our national stage. As if being Republican—-and all the attendant drug war, family values, uber-patriotic themes—-wasn’t enough, Bush was dealt the cathartic strong hand in terms of his ability to set the harp strings of our nation’s Gen Boomers a-thrummin’.

Hence, I was convinced in the 2000 race that Gore should have emphasized his tech-wonk geekishness rather than distancing himself from it. Be the steely eyed, unswerving future, Al, a clear alternative to Bush’s misty eyed past. Don’t be embarrassed by your control of fact and figures, Al; on the contrary, be an unrelenting data spewing machine instead of feeling like you have to counter with campaign-crafted emotional refrains of your own.

In short, if given a choice, Al, Americans at the turn of the new millennium would sooner vote for Spock than McCoy.




Who knows if the opinions re: Gore above were right or wrong? They are untestable. But I truly believe that Team Bush captured enough of Gen Boomer vote through *their* calculated strategy to make the difference.

But given the current state of affairs, I feel anyone who, in 2004, follows the strategy I put forward for Gore in 2000 would be doomed.

Ultimately, I don’t mean for this to be about the current crop of candidates. As Clinton showed us in snatches as brief as 2 minute answers in to unrehearsed debate questions, it’s not an either or proposition anyhow, i.e., you can successfully address people’s intellect and emotions at the same time.

Rather, I’d hope to tap in to the larger DU mind to unearth and evolve and generate deeply resonant emotional appeals from the left in general, appeals complementary to the flawed logic, lie-detecting, here’s-the-real-figures and otherwise imminently rational critiques I read (and write) here. Because IMHO, these need to be bubbling upwards. Soon.

Like it or not, we are going to have to fight a good portion of the battle on the freshly fertilized turf of patriotism, fear, uncertainty, self-righteous assuredness and the like. And I submit that the challenge, for now, is to formulate these emotional touchstones, not argue over who’s personality is best suited to serve as messenger.

In short, I'd love to see *new* ideas coming from us, not mere reflections of what the candidates we're drawn to make partisans such as ourselves feel inside. Instead, I’d hope that we could generate some wholly original possibilities here, memes (emos?) that the left as a whole or any of its candidates could legitimately use to address the current emotional state of middle America.

So how do we do this? (You’ll notice I have no answers.) What strings can we strike that will help modulate the emotions already echoing in the U.S. to suitably powerful and moving resoncnes in keys of our choosing?

[calimary]

1. We need some quick hits to start some good memes.

Like - let's start referring to rethugs as republi-CONS. Or republi-CON ARTISTS. And what they're about as republi-CON-JOBS. Because that's what they are.

It's also quick and easy to repeat-repeat-repeat, til it sinks into the national consciousness and the national dialogue. We need to repeat-repeat-repeat until somebody in the media or in prominent Democratic circles starts picking it up and running with it. The better to imbed that concept into people's minds.

[belle]

2. Hammer the lying, cheating, and wasteful aspects of the * gov't.

"You've been conned" (which is true), not just once, but a number of times. Lost your job, lost your retirement plan, maybe even lost your loved one(s) to the Iraq war machine--and for what? Lies, lies, lies. Repeat as necessary.

I'd like to see an anti-Shrub ad with a really bad stage magician using obvious sleight-of-hand. With the audience member handing over a big wad of cash and the magician making it magically disappear...then benevolently handing over a quarter (or perhaps pulling one from the audience member's ear.") "Here you go!" Then pan over to a the saw-in-half box. Magician pulls out a rusty saw with ominous red stains. "And now for my next trick! Any volunteeers?..."

[Cocoa]

3. fairness

a very powerful idea that everyone understands. Even though it's not talked about enough, there are so many things that are so glaringly unjust in our society.

Also credibility. Watching the house debate yesterday, every time a republican spoke I couldn't help but think, who could possibly believe that this republican jerk is doing this for the good of seniors.

[david_vincent]

4. fairness = justice

If Kenny Lay and his CFO are still walking around free, that should be made a big issue. *Everyone* understands that it's not fair to do what they did and get away scot free. Keep talking it up, keep asking the embarrassing questions, i.e. WHY isn't Ken Lay in jail?, and above all, keep pointing out how much money Enron gave to Governor Bush.

[darkstar]

7. fairness

and the way it relates to justice--and ownership, empowerment and a non-cynical, eagerly paricipatory democracy--strikes me as a good avenue to explore.

The idea of fair play appears to be a natural instinct. Did anyone read that monkey experiment that got some mainstream press play 6 weeks or so back? Fascinating two monkey experimental design of how the primate brain might well be hard wired to expect fairness and be disgruntled *when it sees others not being treated fairly.* (I'll search for story and/or descrbe in detail if anyone cares.)

At any rate, at risk of sounding like school teacher on Beavis and Butthead, would you please expand on these notions of fairness and justice? What issues does it make the best natural fit with? How to employ?

Maybe fair play for citizen's of Iraq? That is, how fair of it is for us to choose to "fight terrorists on streets of Iraq rather than here at home." A shadowy figure with no known home strikes you in your own house, and you choose to have your showdown in the home of a wholly unrelated third party?

As to the numerous corporate scandals suggested and Ken Lay's continued booking of tee-times. I'm no expert here. Clearly a sense of fairness attaches to him and the recent mutual funds and monetary exchange scandals, but can these be broadened beyond bad apples to de-regulation and permissive oversight policies that creates the climate for this?

[acmavm]

5. How about pointing out that just because republicans can say "I voted

for George W. Bush" it will not mean that they won't go down in the same sinking ship with the rest of the country. For some reason these people seem to think that they will not be adversely affected by this administrations elitist and corrupt policies. That somehow their children will escape the cold hard retribution that is to come. Being a repulican will not mean that when they get older (now that Medicare is on its way to being destroyed) they will have a health care system that will give a damn about their needs. Being a republican will not prevent them from escaping the ugly reality of trillions of dollars in debt being run up by this administration. Being a republican will not shelter them from the continual erosion of our rights and liberties granted us by the Founding Fathers under the Constitution and Bill of Rights. They will suffer right along with the "rest of us". This, in my mind, is a fact that seems to escape the bulk of the people who support this idiot and his henchmen.

[mitchtv]

6. borrow and spend

that one is starting to stick and "low wage republicans"

[darkstar]

12. Right on!

Generational fairness seems to me to have *huge* potential, mitchtv. As I recall, it was used by Clinton. I truly don't recall if it was used by Gore in as broad of strokes. What's your recollection?

More importantly, given the new context of deficits and war, how do you you think it could be employed to better effect this time around? This would be an especially good place to yoke a stat to the appeal to fairness, IMO.

How much did the war and Homeland Security and funds for NY add up to vs. the former surplus plus the accumulated debt? Hold their feet to the fire when they try to write it off as policy so inherently tied to patriotic need, because as Ophi sez below, they will try to make that their strong suit, oh yes indeed.

Anyone got some rough figures on the percent of the debt that they can/will attempt to attach to patriotic fervor? That stikes me as a potentially powerful figure that would do well with seniors and boomers, i.e., self-defense aside, look at what our grandkids and kids will have to deal with thanks to your fiscal mismanagement. . . .

[terrisel]

8. I think you are right about Gore and in general

I was reading some of the US Army propaganda training online (some of it as old as the 1970's)and it's obvious that it is being used on us).


On the prescription drug issue I think something additional is needed-
the Republican free market rhetoric should be turned against them thusly:


1. We want to be able to let the free market work. If pharmacies in Canada and Mexico can sell us prescription medicine cheaper we need to buy them from Canada and Mexico. The Canadian and Mexican governments have negotiated good deals for their citizens. The U S government has not. We need to be free to shop for the best deals and the free market needs to be free to reward efficiency.

After all, we have already helped out the drug companies by contributing tax dollars for reseach and development. If they can't help us out with fair prices, we need to shop with our feet.

2.Under George Bush US corporations are exporting jobs to other countries where they say they get a better deal on labor costs. But under George Bush we are being forced to buy our prescription medicine from US companies at inflated prices. Why are the good deals only for corporations?

[darkstar]

9. Hi terrisel !

Welcome to DU!

:toast:

I think both those ideas really make for a nice fit with the theme of fairness that has emerged from Cocoa and david_vincent's posts. Number one, prescription drugs, is clearly a winner as you've spelled it out.

As for number two, exporting jobs, do you know if this problem can be tied to misguided policy initiatives? Even if not--allowing others to argue that this is just the free market at work in the new global context--are there progressive policy proposals afloat that can make the transition from wonk-ville to heartfelt more readily than others?

Thanks in advance and another round of :toast:.

edit: readability and toast vs cheers

[HairyPoppins]

10. How about this idea from right here on DU?

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=104&topic_id=757738

So much for compassion and concern for the non-guilty.

[darkstar]

14. Thanx, HP !

That's quite a rant from Generic Other I'm afraid I hadn't got to. Great, great rant! I personally like the way it forms the flipside of the coin to the other generational fairness issue, i.e. seniors responsibility to not leave youner gens burdened w/ debt as the reciprocal of the younger gen finding a way to take care of elderly in fair, cost-effective manner.

Always go for the twofer!



edit: minding my manners --->


Welcome to DU, Hairy Poppins !

:toast:

Hope to see round :hi:

[opihimoimoi]

11. I luv this thread, Hits the Challenge where it hurts.

Damn it, it is the question of the year for the Dems to confront.

and I too have no real answers to offer that would lead to the golden door of success.

But, perhaps, some similar observations:

The Pubs are not lolos, not by a long shot. They know the Human mind and its weaknesses. They know how we Humans are an Emotional species, given to fear, excitement, etc. So they play on these themes and much to our chagrin, viola, success, while we Dems wallow in our tears of defeat.

It appears to me, the Pubs are in for the long haul, hence their pysops campaign, the brain washing thingy. They use a number of things to keep the masses distracted and burnt out.

Number one is poverty. They want us Poor. They want us tired. When we are poor and tired, we got no time to think.

Then, number 2, they give us distractions, movies, sports, etc etc/ They know information over load is good for THEM.

and 3, the Pubs have heavily influenced the media, if not bought them out almost out right. This gives them an advantage unprecedented except for the days of the Kremlin. The sound bites are very carefully crafted. Note how Sean Hannity, Rush, OReilly use their words and slanted reasoning. Very effective. and when its played on the poor, tired, masses, it fucking works.

and last, 4th. Basically, we Humans are somewhat lazy, we find excuses not to read, study, etc. Having not learned as we should have, we Humans are collectively an Ignorant bunch, given to fantasy and simplistic answers. This is how the Pubs win and we lose. not all the time but they sure are trying.

Thanks for the op to rant.

[darkstar]

13. The "monkey's have sense of fair play" study and links

Monkeys display sense of justice



Monkeys have a sense of justice. They will protest if they see another monkey get paid more for the same task.

Researchers taught brown capuchin monkeys to swap tokens for food. Usually they were happy to exchange this "money" for cucumber.

But if they saw another monkey getting a grape - a more-liked food - they took offence. Some refused to work, others took the food and refused to eat it.

Scientists say this work suggests that human's sense of justice is inherited and not a social construct.


The research was carried out at Emory University in the US, by Sarah Brosnan and Frans de Waal, and is reported in the journal Nature.

"I'm extremely interested in the evolution of cooperation," Sarah Brosnan told BBC News Online.

"One of the most interesting areas is the recent suggestion that human cooperation is made more effective by a sense of fairness."


More. . . .
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/sci/tech/3116678.stm



Other reports on study here:

http://www.sciam.com/article.cfm?article
ID=000C3167-BADB-1F68-905980A84189EEDF


http://www.msnbc.com/news/969716.asp?cp1=1

PS/Help: Link above split in half. How do you do the "tiny url" thing I've been seeing?

[rhino91063]

15. Taking back the White House

From big business and giving it back to the people!