Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

How to Talk to a Republican, If You Must

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (1/22-2007 thru 12/14/2010) Donate to DU
 
ProfessorPlum Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jul-19-07 04:14 PM
Original message
How to Talk to a Republican, If You Must
Diane Rehm’s public radio talk show is both interesting and frustrating. Her guests are often people you really wish to hear from, top-level politicians and journalists. But, because her show lives within the beltway, you often hear these people repeating the same tired, tainted, gelded “conventional wisdom” that somehow always manages to favor the corporate line.

A clinical psychologist whom Rehm interviewed on her show last week has recently quantified what progressive bloggers, the GOP, people at Democratic Underground, and the population at large have known for quite some time: that people vote with their hearts and their heads. The importance of emotional engagement appears to be lost only on one group of people: top Democratic politicians. They present superior policy positions, and then wait passively for the votes to come rolling in. :eyes: One of the reasons I supported Howard Dean so enthusiastically in the 2004 primaries, is that he really seemed to understand how to speak to Democrats’ heads AND hearts. (I think Kucinich is rather good at this too.)

The psychologist, Drew Westen, has written a book titled “The Political Brain: The Role of Emotion in Deciding the Fate of the Nation“ in which he cites his own frustration with Democratic politicians and describes how they should actually talk and engage the populace with their message. He claims that several important politicians, including Bill Clinton, have read his book and reviewed it favorably, and that he is being courted by several of the Democratic presidential candidates. Towards the end of the show, he is asked to give examples of the kinds of language he thinks would have been most effective against Kerry’s SwiftBoat problems:

…southerners are characterized, particularly southern males, by what’s called by anthropologists a “culture of honor”, where if someone dishonors you, if someone speaks to your face ill of you and you don’t respond, you’ve been shamed. And you know, 200 years ago that would have lead to a duel. And here is this man who is a war veteran, he’s being run against with a story that he’s going to be weak on terrorism, he's going to be weak on national defense. Someone punches him. What does he do? He says nothing. He waits three weeks and then he sends his female campaign manager out to write a letter to the campaign manager of Bush, imploring him, ‘Please take it down’. Boy, if you want to send a meta-message about what you’ll do if America’s attacked, he sure sent a powerful meta-message, and he could have done it very differently. . . At that particular point, I would have suggested that Kerry get right out on television immediately and say, “President Bush, for you, a man who dodged the draft, who did nothing but protect the borders of Louisiana, while being a staunch advocate of the Vietnam War, who called your daddy up and said ‘get me out of this!’ when you got the call, ‘please, send some Texas millworker in my place to get shot at’, and who managed to pull those strings, for you to say to me, a war veteran with the shrapnel still in my leg, that I don’t deserve the Purple Hearts that I earned and to put on a campaign ad like that that shows that I don’t deserve my Purple Hearts! Every veteran in the United States, you have just affronted. What you’ve done . . . and, and to do this in the middle of a war when we have boots on the ground, what do you think this says to our soldiers in Iraq or in Afghanistan who are fighting bravely, who are taking bullets right now, that someone someday is going to come back and make fun of their Purple Hearts? How can you have the moral authority now to be the commander-in-chief?”


Concerning Gore’s mistakes in 2000, Westen points out:

Here is a guy who is running against a man who had spent most of his life with his liquor cabinet better stacked than his bookshelves. He is a guy who had been investigated by his own father’s SEC for insider trading. He had handed his entire state over to polluters to such an extent that his Crawford Ranch - he couldn’t actually fish at the rivers in it, he had to stock it with man-made lakes because he had allowed the polluters to pollute it so badly that he couldn’t fish on his own ranch. Who had put to death a woman who was, like him, a born-again Christian, who for sixteen years had lived as a model prisoner, this was Karla Faye Tucker? When, I think it was Tucker Carlson actually, who asked him, “what were her final words to you when she pleaded for clemency?”, he pursed his lips and said “Oh, please, please, save me!”. That that wasn’t on ads that people saw over and over and over, with a president that was running as a “compassionate conservative”, that is absolutely malpractice by both the consultants and the strategists and by the candidates themselves.


Obviously, Westen doesn’t suffer from the severe politeness of our usual candidates. I’m glad he’s getting on board and that his research is being used, but his conclusions and framing have been obvious and available for free on the internet at progressive blogs for years (starting with the dear departed Media Whores Online). I urge you to listen to the show (on the same page, you’ll find a fascinating discussion on Iraq including Wesley Clark and “surge” architect Kimberly Kagan, who pulls an audio deer-in-the-headlight act as she tries to spew the GOP talking points in front of Clark and Lawrence Korb of the Center for American Progress, who don’t let her get away with her spin). Westen is fascinating, and he’s right. But I would point out that he sounds exactly like the people I hear on this board, exactly like Digby and Atrios and all of the others who have been trying to wake the Democrats up for so long. Why don’t the Democrats get this? Is it because they don’t really have the courage of their convictions? That they know that they are also bought and paid for by corporations, and can’t get their dander up on behalf of the people?

Let’s hope that now that an academic has published this (blindingly obvious to everyone but the Democratic leadership) thesis, the party begins to find its fighting voice and soul again.


Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
Warpy Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jul-19-07 04:26 PM
Response to Original message
1. K&R for the blindingly obvious to everyone
but those inside the beltway Democrats who insist they're the only ones qualified to run things.

BTW, you need to speak to their wallets, too. People who work for a living have taken a beating over the last 37 years and they know it. Easy credit has disguised it for a while, but they all have a sense of impending doom that the bills are going to come due sooner rather than later.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
rndmprsn Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jul-19-07 04:38 PM
Response to Original message
2. K+R
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
jgraz Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jul-19-07 04:39 PM
Response to Original message
3. You don't have to come from the south to understand these simple rules
You just have to step outside the beltway every once in a while.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Cerridwen Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jul-19-07 04:51 PM
Response to Original message
4. K & R
"...that is absolutely malpractice by both the consultants and the strategists and by the candidates themselves"

I wholeheartedly agree with that statement.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
AndyTiedye Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jul-19-07 06:34 PM
Response to Original message
5. Kerry Would Have Run Out of Money
…southerners are characterized, particularly southern males, by what’s called by anthropologists a “culture of honor”, where if someone dishonors you, if someone speaks to your face ill of you and you don’t respond, you’ve been shamed. And you know, 200 years ago that would have lead to a duel. And here is this man who is a war veteran, he’s being run against with a story that he’s going to be weak on terrorism, he's going to be weak on national defense. Someone punches him. What does he do? He says nothing. He waits three weeks and then he sends his female campaign manager out to write a letter to the campaign manager of Bush, imploring him, ‘Please take it down’. Boy, if you want to send a meta-message about what you’ll do if America’s attacked, he sure sent a powerful meta-message, and he could have done it very differently. . . At that particular point, I would have suggested that Kerry get right out on television immediately and say, “President Bush, for you, a man who dodged the draft, who did nothing but protect the borders of Louisiana, while being a staunch advocate of the Vietnam War, who called your daddy up and said ‘get me out of this!’ when you got the call, ‘please, send some Texas millworker in my place to get shot at’, and who managed to pull those strings, for you to say to me, a war veteran with the shrapnel still in my leg, that I don’t deserve the Purple Hearts that I earned and to put on a campaign ad like that that shows that I don’t deserve my Purple Hearts! Every veteran in the United States, you have just affronted. What you’ve done . . . and, and to do this in the middle of a war when we have boots on the ground, what do you think this says to our soldiers in Iraq or in Afghanistan who are fighting bravely, who are taking bullets right now, that someone someday is going to come back and make fun of their Purple Hearts? How can you have the moral authority now to be the commander-in-chief?”


If Kerry had done that in August, it would have reduced the impact of the Swift Boat Liars.

But he would have had to spend almost ALL of his money to counter the Swift Boat Liars ads combined with all the free repeats the networks gave them!
He would then have run out of money some time in September.
Nothing left to respond to the next attack, or even to run a campaign in the last month or two before the election.

Bush's campaign didn't have to spend a dime.

We tried to fight 527s with 527s, but were hopelessly outgunned, especially given all the free airtime the TV networks gave the Swift Boat Liars.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ProfessorPlum Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jul-19-07 06:53 PM
Response to Reply #5
6. I've heard that argument, and I'm sure there is a lot to it
However, do you think there might have been some TV venues that would have let him on to rebut this for free? Did he make any media appearances during that time? Even a press conference, had he said this, would have gotten some play - even in the GOP favoring media. They were a lot more forgiving of Kerry in 2004 than they were to Gore in 2000.

I do agree, that paid ads were not possible for him at the time - but there are other means of generating national discussion.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
AndyTiedye Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jul-19-07 07:25 PM
Response to Reply #6
7. No
However, do you think there might have been some TV venues that would have let him on to rebut this for free? Did he make any media appearances during that time?


The Daily Show? He actually did go on there. Not exactly a venue from which to mount a counterattack.

Other than that and the debates, the only airtime Kerry got was what he paid for.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ProfessorPlum Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jul-20-07 08:09 AM
Response to Reply #7
11. Come on
I'm a big fan of Kerry's, I think his career and service to this country has been exemplary, and his time in Washington has been spent going after terrorists and crooks and Iran/Contra felons. His performance in all three debates was masterful, and I really don't have any complaints about his campaign.

But his money management timeline doesn't have much to do with the TONE of his response to the Swiftboaters, which was essentially to ignore them. He could have called a press conference for free, given Chimpy a piece of his mind, and it would have been all over the papers - probably in some from pundits having fainting spells over his "rudeness". But it would have gotten a lot of play and not cost him a penny.

I don't know if Westen's advice is good or not - it certainly feels right, and it was something that everyone rooting for Kerry was hoping for. You don't seem able to beat Republicans by showing them respect as they crap all over you.

Again, the "I'm out of money, so all I can do is be completely quiet for five weeks as my character is smeared by a bunch of paid-off a**holes" excuse doesn't really cut it.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Vadem Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jul-20-07 12:03 AM
Response to Reply #5
9. No, he wouldn't have run out of money! If he had come...
back hard against those liars, he would have doubled his money from those of us watching and praying that he would knock the hell out of all of them!

What a shameful feeling I had watching the Republican convention when those bastids had the band aids with the purple hearts on them and Kerry and the Dems didn't say a word, that I remember. Kerry and the Dems should have raised the collective roof with their outrage!!

Only we DUers were outraged, as I remember it!

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
AndyTiedye Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jul-20-07 01:08 AM
Response to Reply #9
10. He Was Subject to Federal Spending Limits By Then
It seems pretty clear that the Swift Boat Liars' attacks were coordinated with the RNC, which is illegal, but OK if you're a Repiglickin.

They were thus able to place Kerry in an impossible position.

If he spent his money fighting the Swift Boat Liars, he would have run out during the final stretch — in the weeks just before the election he would have no campaign.

As it is, he was well ahead in the polls on Election Day and would have won the election if it had not been stolen.




Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
hfojvt Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jul-19-07 07:33 PM
Response to Original message
8. Somerby kinda trashed Westen
and, as usual, I think his analysis makes sense

http://www.dailyhowler.com/dh071007.shtml

"Our first thought? Maybe the professor should drop the passion and just go back to some basic research. In fairness, we’re dealing with Cohen’s account of that passage from Westen’s book, not with Westen’s book itself. But as Cohen tells it, Westen’s advice isn’t just bad. The professor’s advice is embarrassing."
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ProfessorPlum Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jul-20-07 08:14 AM
Response to Reply #8
12. I love Somerby,
but his defence of Gore, his college roommate, is a little knee-jerk here. Certainly, Gore's performance in the debates was much better than it was portrayed afterwards. And Bush's DUI and AWOL status were not really uncovered in the press until much later. I don't really think the debate was the right place for Gore to bring that stuff up.

BUT . . .

it was widely known that Georgie drank and drugged his way through life until he was 40, and that instead of serving in Vietnam, he was in the Champaign/TANG unit. Therefore, calling him a drunk and a draft dodger (possibly in more polite terms) was certainly possible in the 2000 campaign, at any time.

Gore, bless his noble heart, decided not to make those things issues, and the media certainly knew not to touch them. And I think that is what Westen is remarking on.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Thu May 02nd 2024, 02:28 AM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (1/22-2007 thru 12/14/2010) Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC