Lakoff: Democratic Strategies Lost Big. Here’s an alternative

[cali]

Democratic strategists have been segmenting the electorate and seeking individual self-interest-based issues in each electoral block. The strategists also keep suggesting a move to right. This has left no room for the Democrats to have an overriding authentic moral identity that Americans can recognize.

Those strategists form an infrastructure that all Democrats have come to depend on; not just the candidates, but also the elected officials, Democrats in government, and citizens who either do, or might, find progressive policies morally and practically right. The strategic infrastructure includes PR firms, pollsters, consultants, researchers, trainers, communication specialists, speechwriters, and their funders.

It is an important and powerful infrastructure and we all depend on it. I believe it is vital to separate this infrastructure from the strategies it has been using. I believe the strategies can be greatly improved so as to give a true, deep, and moral picture of what progressive politics is about — one whose content and authenticity will resonate with, and inspire, a majority of Americans.

<snip>

At this point, some details are in order. Here is what is widely done according to present strategies. Not everyone uses all of these, but most are common.
• Use demographic categories to segment the electorate, categories from the census (race, gender, ethnicity, age, marital status, income, zip code), as well as publicly available party registration.
• Assume uniformity across the demographic categories. Poll on which issues are “most important,” e.g., for women (or single women), for each minority group, for young people, and so on. This separates the issues from one another and creates “issue silos.” It does not include segmentation for moral worldviews that differ between conservatives and progressives.
• Assume language is neutral and that the same poll questions will have the same meaning for everyone polled. In reality, language is defined relative to conceptual frames. And the same words can be “contested,” that is, they can have opposite meanings depending on one’s moral values.
• Assume that people vote on the basis of material self-interest and design different message to appeal to different demographic groups. In reality, poor conservatives will vote against their material interests when they identify with a candidate and his or her values.

<snip>

http://www.dailykos.com/story/2014/11/06/1342513/-Democratic-Strategies-Lost-Big-Here-s-an-alternative

[woo me with science]

1. We misunderstand politics and politicians in 2014 when we assume their goal is always to win.

That was the old system, democracy.

In oligarchy, the goal is using the two parties you own in whichever way best furthers the corporate agenda of the oligarchy.


DCCC email campaign: "Accept defeat"
http://www.democraticunderground.com/10025736826


This is not a problem of bad strategy in a functioning democratic contest. This is oligarchy pretending to be democracy.

[MannyGoldstein]

2. Personally, I think emails about doggie Halloween costumes

begging for three bucks will work if we just give it more time. A few more election cycles oughta do.

Sincerely,

Tired-Schtick Manny

[cali]

4. I can't get that out of my mind either.

[Scuba]

3. Maybe we could try some of those "policy" thingys.

Expand and enrich Social Security

Medicare for All

Raise the minimum wage



These are hugely popular. Weird how the Democratic Party doesn't adopt them.

[DinahMoeHum]

5. Lakoff is an ivory-tower twit.

Until he has actually run a political campaign, like Steve Jarding and Dave "Mudcat" Saunders, he can shove his theories up his ass.

The people I want running for office and managing campaigns are those who are ready and willing to kick the GOP in the balls - and keep kicking until there's nothing but HAMBURGER where the balls used to be.

[magical thyme]

6. I'm curious to see what worked in 2 state house districts in particular in my state of Maine

In my own normally very right-wing state house district, a GOP incumbant and relative of a neighbor was beaten by an Independent. I'm wondering what the Indie did here. I voted against the GOP only, and hoped the Indie wasn't a teapartier but assumed the incumbant would win. I was pleasantly surprised to discover the Indie was a former Dem and a transplant. 2 strikes against him, yet he won.

In a normally Dem district to my north, a 3-way race between GOP, Dem and Indie for state house rep went to the Indie. The GOP got less than 10% of the vote (this district that just reached #1 on my places to move to if I am able to sell out here). I was *amazed* to discover that the winning Indie is a former Green party activist! I *really* want to find out how he campaigned -- betcha it was issues-based!

Oh, and I just read the article. He failed to sell me on anything. I don't think democracy is about empathy. I think it's about community.