zed?

CHS en fuego!

Maahketing!

For all intents and purposes the Democratic party is dead to me. When we can have someone as blatently conservative and beholden to corporate masters as Reid as our leader I knew the end was near. We have lost our way.

I noticed this yesterday with Joe Sestak (who is my congressman). I had to reread his answers 12 times to try and understand what he was trying to say. He never really answered any questions coherently and that just adds to the frustration. I want democrats to answer in clear concise sentances.

“of the people, by the people, for the people”

Sure, it’s been used before, and by a republican at that. But I don’t think Lincoln would recognize today’s republican party.

Hmmm . . . got to think more about this one, but you picked the wrong morning for me to have lots of free thinking time! ;)

Good post, and from the standpoint of the Democratic party, long overdue.

Here’s my suggestion for the Democratic brand:

“Liberty and justice, for all.”

The only remotely political subject I hear discussed in my office is gas prices. I honestly don’t think people know or care about anything outside their routines.

If there was only a way of turning this into a soundbite, we’d be on our way;

http://www.mnftiu.cc/mnftiu.cc…..aymond.jpg

Shoe on the other foot, hypocrisy, power. I was talking to a conservative Philippine American who thought that marshal law could never happen here. I asked her if she imagined when living in the Philippines that Marco’s would impose marshal law and she said no. I asked how life was for her under Marcos’ marshal law and she said it was ok because she had special privileges as a doctor. This discussion raised the subject of the Philippine American war, which began in 1899 and has many disturbing similarities to the Iraq war 100 years later. During the war 4,324 American soldiers died and civilian deaths were as many as 1,000,000 Filipinos.

And this from wikipedia
“U.S. attacks into the countryside often included scorched earth campaigns where entire villages were burned and destroyed, torture (water cure) and the concentration of civilians into “protected zones” (concentration camps). Many of the civilian casualties resulted from disease and famine. Reports of the execution of U.S. soldiers taken prisoner by the Filipinos led to savage reprisals by American forces. Many American officers and soldiers called war a “n*gger killing business” http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/P…..erican_War

I wonder if this woman who supported Bush twice would have liked being in a “protected zone” during Americas “n*gger killing business” in the Philippines. Mark Twains powerful “War Prayer” is protest against the Philippine-American war, but appropriate for today’s Iraq. http://www.warprayer.org/

Their brand is “not the Republicans” which can only go so far. To me it should be something like “common sense solutions to complex problems.” Everybody know the stroy about all the disparate groups that make up the Democrats and how hard they are to bring together. To me, that is a cop-out; we just need to work harder in creating a storyline that the other things can be hung off of.

jeannefisk at 5 — See, I disagree there on the clear, concise answer thing, but only slightly: I am sick to death of sound bite politics. But it is the way things are at the moment. And Democrats suck at it. So we need to (a) figure out a way to beat the GOP at this so that we can (b) use a win at this to change the dynamic. But we can only get there once we have done (a) — which we are NOT doing.

And it is frustrating the hell out of me.

One option would be for the Dem leadership to NOT try to blow the smoke up our collective a**es with spin like Wrong-Way Rahm was trying to use about how the vote was such a great victory.

Iraq- We invaded and it’s an occupation, not a war.
GWOT – Terror is a tactic not an ideology.
Economics – There is a class war going on and the rich are winning it.
– Corporations are NOT people. Why treat them as such?

Note: The Wizard’s First Rule was also paraphrased in the movie Men In Black by Tommy Lee Jones: “A person may be smart, people as a whole are stupid.” Or something like that.

Rock on! This is one of the most important, and often most overlooked issues we face as protectors of the Constitution. Outstanding insights!

It’s especially important when KKKarl Rove is ghostwriting for the AP.

Don’t be eating anything if you click on that link…you might choke. Such a dishonest and one-sided piece of garbage.

PeteCO at 88 — See, that’s pretty much true everywhere, I think. On both sides of the aisle. No one is happy with that particular issue at the moment. I was at a dinner last week at which Rep. Shelly Moore Capito spoke (she’s the only R from WV in Congress at the moment) and even she was bitching about gas prices — and it was at a Chamber of Commerce dinner where everyone was listening and nodding. It was like being in some sort of bizarro world.

Our core values are in JFK’s speeches. You blogged about one of the most important values we share as progressives on Thursday, Christy; we seek progress as individuals, as a people, as a movement. Not for ourselves alone, but for the betterment of mankind.

What concerns me is that we’ve dumbed down; there has to be a way to encourage Americans as a whole to move back from using only their visceral-response reptilian brain and forward towards their cerebellum once again. It is the right-wing’s use of fear that drove Americans backwards, regressing to their basest and most automatic instincts; how does the left tease them back out without continuing the dumbing down of America?

jeannefisk @ 5

I noticed this yesterday with Joe Sestak (who is my congressman). I had to reread his answers 12 times to try and understand what he was trying to say. He never really answered any questions coherently and that just adds to the frustration. I want democrats to answer in clear concise sentances.

I had the same thought. And I think that when people sound like they don’t have a clue what they are talking about–it is because, for some reason, they are holding back on what they really think. I got the same feeling watching former Sen Kerrey (not John Kerry) of teh New School the other night on Bill Moyers. Moyers kept on asking him, over and over and over, the question that has been on my mind, and I am sure almost everyone elses:

You say you want to end the occupation (Kerrey made an excellent point in this respect–itis no longer a war, it is an occupation). Yet, you vote for the supplemental. So, what they hell is your plan for getting out of Iraq?

Someone needs to spell it out.

I have a feeling that military guys like Sestak and Kerrey have thought about it from a strategic military perspective. And I have a feeling that for some reason they are loath to spell it out because they are afraid that some parts of it may not be particularly palatable to the Dem “base” –or even the average Joe. But–if that is the case, then they are underestimating both themselves and most people. If they make it make sense, then they can “sell” unpleasant concepts (and to tell you the truth–given what Iraq is now, I can’t imagine that there are any pain-free solutions, either for us or the Iraqis).

If they don’t learn this–they will continue to look either duplicitous (Emanual, Lieberman) or spineless (Reid, Kerry).

PeteCO @ 8

The only remotely political subject I hear discussed in my office is gas prices. I honestly don’t think people know or care about anything outside their routines.

If there was only a way of turning this into a soundbite, we’d be on our way;

I don’t think soundbites will do any more. People want action but they are seeing little difference in the actions of the two parties. They are seeing the same mincing and parsing from both sides.

A Gooper’s Worldview has two lenses – “I’m right” and “I’m a victim” – for them, ready made answers for any situation spring from these. A 28%er cannot, under any circumstances say, “I was wrong.”

So, the Mighty Wurlitzer spins the story “We’re always right, unless we’re victims.”

Fascination Street – The Cure

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=E_nSETaWNzY

Unfortunately, I think there is a great deal of truth in the argument that people don’t vote “for” a party, they vote “against” it. I’d love to see the Dems ride to power on a popular tide of reforming zeal, but I think if they do win, it’ll be more on a “Vote for us, because we’re not this http://www.mnftiu.cc/mnftiu.cc…..aymond.jpg
bloke”.

I take no joy in this, btw.

For some thoughts on Liberal “branding,” who better to turn to than the late, great Steve Gilliard:

“I’m a fighting liberal
You know, I’ve studied history, I’ve read about America and you know something, if it weren’t for liberals, we’d be living in a dark, evil country, far worse than anything Bush could conjure up. A world where children were told to piss on the side of the road because they weren’t fit to pee in a white outhouse, where women had to get back alley abortions and where rape was a joke, unless the alleged criminal was black, whereupon he was hung from a tree and castrated.

What has conservatism given America? A stable social order? A peaceful homelife? Respect for law and order? No. Hell, no. It hasn’t given us anything we didn’t have and it wants to take away our freedoms.

The Founding Fathers, as flawed as they were, slaveowners and pornographers, smugglers and terrorists, understood one thing, a man’s path to God needed no help from the state. Is the religion of these conservatives so fragile that they need the state to prop it up, to tell us how to pray and think? Is that what they stand for? Is that their America?”

(taken from Maura’s post on myleftnutmeg.com)

Democrats – Making America Work For Everyone

How about:

Stop destroying Iraq
Start building up America

Too nuanced?

CHS at 10 – I agree. I was thinking more specifically about yesterday. He had an excellent opportunity to explain himself to an audience who wanted to hear what he had to say and he was still unclear. If he can’t explain it to people who care, there is no way a person who semi cares is going to listen. As a dem supporter I need a concise message to bring forth also. The republicans are great at that, everyone just repeats the same sentence over and over and that is all anyone remembers.

i hate soundbites too.

Money is vastly overrated as a measure of wealth.

Sharing is powerful therapy for the soul.

Rayne @ 14

Our core values are in JFK’s speeches. You blogged about one of the most important values we share as progressives on Thursday, Christy; we seek progress as individuals, as a people, as a movement. Not for ourselves alone, but for the betterment of mankind.

What concerns me is that we’ve dumbed down; there has to be a way to encourage Americans as a whole to move back from using only their visceral-response reptilian brain and forward towards their cerebellum once again. It is the right-wing’s use of fear that drove Americans backwards, regressing to their basest and most automatic instincts; how does the left tease them back out without continuing the dumbing down of America?

The opposite of fear is hope, as in a positive vision for the future.

Think about Clinton’s “man from Hope.”
Think Harvey Milk’s “You’ve got to give them hope.”
It’s JFK’s challenge to go to the moon; it’s FDR’s “the only thing we have to fear is fear itself;” it’s Reagan’s “morning in America.” (Even if that didn’t prove to be true, it’s what he was selling.)

Today, I’m guessing that it’s where Obama’s trying to go with his “Audacity of Hope” book. (Note: haven’t read it, just noting the title)

Hope. That’s what you’re talking about, Rayne.

Hey – Iraq has a president (on George Stephy now).

Who knew?

(and he both looks and sounds like a gooper) feh.

Got to run, but will catch up later!

Competence, Community and Compassion

I think The GOP successfully pivoting against the Bush administration for 2008 is going to be equivalent of a completing a ‘Triple Lindy.’

PeteCO @ 8

The only remotely political subject I hear discussed in my office is gas prices. I honestly don’t think people know or care about anything outside their routines.

If there was only a way of turning this into a soundbite, we’d be on our way;

http://www.mnftiu.cc/mnftiu.cc…..aymond.jpg

How about ‘The Stop Gouging America Bill”?

I’m printing out this post to send to Sen. Dorgan and Conrad. Thanks Christy.

jeannefisk @ 23

CHS at 10 – I agree. I was thinking more specifically about yesterday. He had an excellent opportunity to explain himself to an audience who wanted to hear what he had to say and he was still unclear. If he can’t explain it to people who care, there is no way a person who semi cares is going to listen. As a dem supporter I need a concise message to bring forth also. The republicans are great at that, everyone just repeats the same sentence over and over and that is all anyone remembers.

I think the video up top also raises another good point, i.e., the visuals matter, no matter how they may be ginned up.

There was discussion on the Sestak thread after he left about his wanting to plan for and fund an orderly withdrawal from Iraq. I pointed out that the lasting and most prominent visuals for the end of Vietnam War were the scenes of people dangling from helicopters lifting off from the US embassy during the fall of Saigon. At that point, we had been out of the ground war and most troops had long since left the country. But THAT visual has been used by the Repubs for decades to paint us as having “lost” the war and run away in ignominious defeat. If we do the same thing in Iraq, we’ll be fighting this same battle long after I’m dust.

Ian Welsh @ 21

Democrats – Making America Work For Everyone

I like that.

Christy,

I should probably stay out of this, as I’m at best a dilettante when it comes to things political, and have disastrous instincts w/r/t supporting political candidates: John Anderson, Jimmy Carter, Michael Dukakis, Gary Hart, Bill Bradley, Howard Dean. But I believe there’s a huge problem with developing and managing a brand for a political party, and it’s this:

While the techniques and results of brand management are uniquely suited to apply to political campaigns (and in modern representative democracies, may in fact be the only way to understand what issues concern voters in measurable ways), the application of the same techniques to both domestic and foreign policy issues presents grave problems to the formulation and implementation of effective and comprehensive policies and programs. In particular, the creation of politically driven brands of U.S. foreign policy, and the requirements and limitations that maintaining the brands place on foreign policy decision making, implementation, and evaluation, impede the United State’s ability to participate in the established system of diplomacy amongst nation states and international organizations, and international agreements such as treaties and protocols.

Shorter scory: be very careful what you wish for. A brand identity that has the effect of drawing in voters and maintaining brand loyalty may constrain the ability to govern effectively, particularly with regard to foreign policy.

Our late friend Steve Gilliard was very clear about what the Republican political brand meant: we may talk about a big tent, but we really don’t care about, or want your kind if you’re poor, of color, or ABC (Anything But Christian). That message underlay the brand identity, built the base, and has been the principle of Republican governance for the last 35 years.

I’ll argue that what Rayne discussed at 14 is right on, and it encapsulates the challenge of developing a meaningful and useful Democratic brand identity.

This website provides a reminder of what was at stake in Vietnam, and think of how long, with a draft and with the enormous numbers of US dead–500 per week–it took to end that debacle.

While the vote on the war made me sick, sick at heart and furious at the suffering in Iraq, we are fighting a war here at home, to end this. It is not easy.

I watched Timmeh last week for the first time in forever, because my dad really likes Richardson. I was muttering and talking back to the TV immediately. It is maddening to watch and listen to Timmeh’s tripe.

I suppose we need some messaging, but I would settle for some simple Democratic slapdown of these clowns in the media.

When my conservative friends and Demo “centrist” pals ask why am I being so damn radical, I respond: Just common sense. That’s all.

Chances are I cannot top this: ;0)

“Scratch that. The Democrats have no brand. What’s their slogan? Together we can do better? Who ran that fucking focus group, Ed Gillespie?”

What we really need is for a progressive news network on tv. Air America would be great. Americans are not getting the news they should.

Great post, Christy, but I don’t want to go along with the premise that most people are stupid.

I think it likely that you meant that to be a little tongue-in-cheek. But what really frosts me about the conservatives’ message is that it is so often transparently based on the premise that people really are stupid. So much of what they say is based not just on an appeal to the emotional core, but is also quite brazenly simple-minded, and disdainful of evidence and reason. Whenever they are confronted with realities that contradict their world-view, they are famously willing to discount reality, if that’s what it takes to keep believing what they want to believe — and far from being embarassed by that, they’re enthusiastic about it. No wonder they’ve always been so anti-intellectual, especially nowadays; intellect would be fatal to their entire set of beliefs.

This is one of the ways that the media plays into their hands, with the ever-present assumption that consumers of information cannot handle complexity. The audience is presumed to be intimidated and bewildered by trains of thought that go beyond a soundbite; so the media happily package news and opinion into stupid little platitudes, just the way the right likes it. Journalists think they’re doing they’re job well when they do that; but I think they’re being lazy, and condescending to their audience.

You’re quite right that we on the left should speak forthrightly about the moral core of the goals that we pursue, and about the passion that underlies our beliefs. But I’ve thought for a long time that we can win people over by openly giving them credit for their intelligence. “The conservatives and the media think you’re stupid, but we don’t. We think we can challenge you to understand something we think is important; we think you’re willing and able to accept the challenge.” That kind of appeal will get citizens and voters to perk up and pay attention.

Democratic leadership?

Peterr @ 24

Hope. That’s what you’re talking about, Rayne.

Yes, that’s a start, Peterr; we need and hunger for hope, something we’ve had too little of for th last 6-plus years.

We choose to go to the moon. We choose to go to the moon in this decade and do the other things, not because they are easy, but because they are hard, because that goal will serve to organize and measure the best of our energies and skills, because that challenge is one that we are willing to accept, one we are unwilling to postpone, and one which we intend to win, and the others, too. [JFK, Rice University, 1962]

There’s something more than hope, though, for which we hunger. We need to be reminded that we are bigger than this dreck in which we’ve been mired. We have been looking too long at our navels when not looking over our shoulders, and forgotten to look towards the farthest reaches of our vision and towards the stars.

old gold @ 28

Competence, Community and Compassion

I think The GOP successfully pivoting against the Bush administration for 2008 is going to be equivalent of a completing a ‘Triple Lindy.’

What’s a Lindy? *g*

What we really need is for a progressive news network on tv. Air America would be great. Americans are not getting the news they should. Then, we wouldn’t have to deal in sound bites. We could have an informed, detailed analysis of the issues

scory at 32 — I think that would be a very valid concern if I were worried that the Dem party could run its branding into the weird lock-stop demogoguery territory that the GOP inhabits. But given what I know about how they function, that’s frankly not a concern. But I will settle for an overarching theme that weaves together the various points and counterpoints into some sort of whole with a story that actually works.

The pernicious claim that government is the problem, and not the solution is at the root of much of the complaints from the right.

We should hammer on that idea as a lie.

Remind folks that the government is the problem, now, only because it is staffed by scam artists and ticket punchers. Managed by thugs who don’t believe in what they are doing and are there only for the loot.

solai @ 41

What we really need is for a progressive news network on tv. Air America would be great. Americans are not getting the news they should. Then, we wouldn’t have to deal in sound bites. We could have an informed, detailed analysis of the issues

i like this the 1st AND 2nd time.
try for 3. maybe you’ll catch s’more dawgs ;->

I view this fight as a struggle between the DLC and Democratic core values. DLC: Let’s ‘bounce’.

Oklahoma kiddo @ 45

I view this fight as a struggle between the DLC and Democratic core values. DLC: Let’s ‘bounce’.

;-> how did THEY get to be OUR leaders anyway?

oops. s’pose i’m a radical now…

Government CAN and MUST work for us. We can make it so together.

George Lakoff’s books on linguistic “framing” of political issues should be read by every Democratic person in office, as well as all Democratic candidates, staffers, office workers, etc.

It’s pretty clear that the Republicans have only been successful in hoodwinking the electorate because they have spent some effort in shaping their messages. They can be outdone. Rather easily.

Bob Shrum needs to get his ass kicked to the curb and replaced by bartcop, is another thing.

What exactly have we gained, if in 2008 we saddle ourselves with a bunch of watered-down Demos?

The dems need some policy direction. They will run on health care and fossil fuels reduction- along with getting out of Iraq- if that issue hasn’t been dealt with on election day. They don’t know exactly what flavor of policy they will be running on until they pick a presidential candidate- as the candidate will dictate the policy details.

Right now they really don’t have any policy positions- nor should they- Clusterfuck will veto anything they do anyway- so they would be setting themselves up for two years of failure if they announce any big legislative goals.

Dems job right now is to keep the goopers from fucking things up more than it already is- that’s what they were elected to do- and they’d damned well better do it effectively. Their strategy for blocking “the surge” was not confidence inspiring. They waited to long to do anything- and then they took on a bigger bite of the apple than they could digest.

They set themselves up on the war vote. They didn’t have a chance in hell of forcing withdrawal- and they knew it- so instead of admitting that and working to slow the surge- they pretended that they could force a withdrawal date and then had to back off and pretend that failure was sweet victory.

Good PR consists in setting expectations that you meet or exceed- not ones that you are doomed from day one to fail on.

Buckeye — It would have been more accurate to say that most people are in some sort of self-imposed stupor and supremely unaware — either deliberately or otherwise. But then it wouldn’t have been close to the Wizard’s First Rule and I would have misquoted Mr. ReddHedd had I said it otherwise. *g*

shrimplate @ 48

George Lakoff’s books on linguistic “framing” of political issues should be read by every Democratic person in office, as well as all Democratic candidates, staffers, office workers, etc.

It’s pretty clear that the Republicans have only been successful in hoodwinking the electorate because they have spent some effort in shaping their messages. They can be outdone. Rather easily.

Bob Shrum needs to get his ass kicked to the curb and replaced by bartcop, is another thing.

whoosh! one giant leap for ‘personkind’…

Why do “we” own the internet? Not because Al invented it.
Because it is democratic. How do we make the Democratic
party serve the internet? I don’t think it is by branding.

Adie @ 46

Oklahoma kiddo @ 45

I view this fight as a struggle between the DLC and Democratic core values. DLC: Let’s ‘bounce’.

;-> how did THEY get to be OUR leaders anyway?

oops. s’pose i’m a radical now…

;0)

shrimplate @ 48

George Lakoff’s books on linguistic “framing” of political issues should be read by every Democratic person in office, as well as all Democratic candidates, staffers, office workers, etc.

It’s pretty clear that the Republicans have only been successful in hoodwinking the electorate because they have spent some effort in shaping their messages.

The focus on marketing is pointless, nobody trusts political soundbites anymore. Democrats must demonstrate their values through action.

Oklahoma kiddo @ 54

Adie @ 46

;-> how did THEY get to be OUR leaders anyway?

oops. s’pose i’m a radical now…

;0)

-uh- not that there’s anything wrong with that…

Buckeye Hamburger @ 36

Great post, Christy, but I don’t want to go along with the premise that most people are stupid.

Stupid, or don’t care; it’s much the same thing. I’ll leave you with this gem from the Onion, which isn’t funny at all, because it’s true. I work with these people, they’re everywhere.

http://www.theonion.com/content/node/33878

Have a great day, Y’all!

The “Democratic” brand:

“We’re marginally less hostile to Democracy, Liberty, and Freedom in the USA than those other guys.”
/

Republicans respect power. Democrats respect pressure.

wow, GREAT post, our “brand” has not only been under attack, it is already considered a dirty word…”liberal” is a perjurative when talking politics

we can reclaim the word and the dialogue…the neo cons have ruined the republican “brand”, we can “rebrand” “republican” as “corporatist”, we can rebrand “concervative” as “screw everyone but themselves”

we can make the brand “concervative” a pariah on the middle class, we can point out liberals are the REAL concervatives and this is true by the way

we can point out that the founding fathers were LIBERALS, the bill if rights is a LIBERAL document, the constitution of the United States of America is a LIBERAL document, DEMOCRACY IS A LIBERAL PRINCIPLE OF GOVERNMENT

and “concervative” government is a government FOR CORPORATIONS

we need to reclaim our legacy as the protectors of our constitution, the protectors of democracy AND THE LEGACY OF THE FOUNDING FATHERS OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA

I rest my case

Rule #1: Drop the name “Branding”

the very word is anathema to most liberals, eh?

if we’re gonna play “join-up” we’re gonna have to do better than that.

Air America as it exists today is a disaster. Great idea, horrible execution-those guys would fuck up a 2-car funeral parade.

aki on 55,

I do not disagree with you, but you must have noticed that even when Democratic people *do* act on their principles, they get hammered by the noise machine.

That can be changed.

somewhat OT, although this demonstrates Repug “values.” A sitting Repuke in CT legislature tries to hire a hitman to “threaten” someone. Wonder if he was a LieberME supporter?

How about “Democrats are problems solvers, not problem creators”.

Bill Clinton often talked about getting up in the morning and doing the people’s work, finding solutions. He didn’t bother complaining about who made the mess, just showed by his own example that he was ready to roll up his sleeves and get to work making it right.

In the face of all the negative the Republicans threw at him, he kept it positive. As someone who is deeply bitter about the disaster the Bushies have wrought as well as all the squandered opportunities, I’d love nothing better most days than to sit around bashing this bunch, taking every chance to make that point. But the problems we face are huge and will require concerted cooperation globally to save our collective bacons. We need to focus on finding solutions, together.

I think nothing but a full-frontal attack will work. Remember how cool it was when Clooney and company stood up and said “Not in our name”? Remember how effective Bubba was when he slapped Chris Wallace around a TV studio? And who remembers Al Gore’s speech via MoveOn?
There has to be some muscularity to our message, but not the brutal words of DeLay, Cheney, Dobson, Donahue, etc.
The real problem may involve continuity. I remember Harry Reid shutting down the Senate over Phase 2, but I also remember instantly thinking, “Well Harry, what have you got for tomorrow, and the next day, and the next.

Nice post Perris.

Good choice to skip Meet the Press. I couldn’t control my gag reflex longer than five minutes. The self-satisfied superficiality and false bonhomie was breathtaking.

Carville and Matalin obviously deserve each other, but neither deserves thirty seconds broadcast time. What Democrat would hire Carville? Who besides a desperate DC madame would hire Matalin? And Timmo, oh, my, he’s an Uncle Tom for Big Dick.

Brands are for cattle. Storylines are what people respond to. Just ask Babs Comstock!

Although Repugs are the most sheeplike amoung our electorate, so maybe that’s why “branding” works so well on them.

The muscularity must be principled, but it needs to be consistent as well. Every time we fold it reinforces the Thug frame.

Adie at 60 — The word “branding” may be anathema to some liberals. But running away from the things we think are not the nice way to play is exactly the reason that we get our asses kicked. This is no time to play nice or pretend that we can take the high road and not get kicked in the balls by Rove and his political proteges. Namby pamby may be good for kindergarten, but it does not work in politics and it is time we stopped using wishy washy tactics to fight our way to a tie or a cave-in.

snoboysdrift @ 53

Why do “we” own the internet? Not because Al invented it.
Because it is democratic. How do we make the Democratic
party serve the internet? I don’t think it is by branding.

Yes, but as Adlai Stevenson said, “That’s not enough, madam, we need a majority!” *g*

Basically a bunch of unruly hippies, so called ‘radicals’ and the Democratic Party stopped the Vietnam War. Come on Democrats!

Everyone wants healthy returns on their investments.
This adm doesn’t believe in investing in education, health care coverage, jobs, food & other safety standards, envronment, foreign policy, national security, you name it & the results show a serious decline in quality of life for most americans other than the wealthy.
Ironically, I have read more than one article about the wealthy complaining they are getting paid less & working harder than the super wealthy who in turn are starting to say the same about the super, super wealthy.

Today’s “uber/ultra/faux-conservatives” have made a mockery of the true meaning of “conservative”, and i think a lot of repubs know it. I know my own parents, who were dyed-in-the-wood Repubs their whole adult lives, would not recognize their own party today.

Re: us Dems/Liberals.

Clarifying message is terrific idea.

Branding sounds awful, just AWFUL. imho…

I’m thinkin about Edwards and his haircut-if he smacked those fuckers down hard, it would never have been an issue. Instead, he apologized, as if he did something wrong. Contrast that with Fake Fred, who had to rent a pickup so he could campaign as a “good old boy”.

A reader at FDL yesterday posted what I think the Dems could use as a theme song:

Republicans moan
And Republicans bitch:
The rich are too poor,
And the poor are too rich.

Get a good hook, stong bass and percussion line, and I think you’ve got a hit.

Catchy, and funny because it’s true.

earlofhuntingdon @ 68

Good choice to skip Meet the Press. I couldn’t control my gag reflex longer than five minutes. The self-satisfied superficiality and false bonhomie was breathtaking.

Carville and Matalin obviously deserve each other, but neither deserves thirty seconds broadcast time. What Democrat would hire Carville? Who besides a desperate DC madame would hire Matalin? And Timmo, oh, my, he’s an Uncle Tom for Big Dick.

Cruella and Wormtongue DeCarville playin’ with Mr Punkin’ Haid…

We need to ask America to adopt a new kind of patriotism, a patriotism about something more than just war.”

- John Edwards

dakine01 @ 46

Government CAN and MUST work for us. We can make it so together.

That’s another important shift that should be reversed; the Republicans have for a very long time now encouraged the public to see government as something foreign, remote, separate from ourselves.

But this country is singularlyu differentiated from the rest of the world by three words: We, the people. This was and should be a government of, by and for the people; there should be no daylight between us and the representatives we choose to effect our decisions. It is this separation based in perception that allows the right-wing to co-opt our government and take it from us, as evidenced all too clearly in the response of government to the needs of the victims of Katrina, in the extensive corruption of the Department of Justice and other government offices.

They’ve also widened the gap between us and the Fourth Estate, completely owning the media so that it no longer responds to our demand for information. While the Fourth Estate is not a government function, it is supported by our Constitution and our publicly-owned airwaves; they use these resources against us.

The internet allows us, though, to watch closely and with great immediacy what our representatives are doing. We can literally whisper in their ears as they work for us. It’s time for us to use that to further reduce the perceptual gap between us — there shouldn’t be one. And we Dems and progressives are much better at using this technology.

It just needs to be renamed, “Meet the Russert.” Especially since Timmeh wasn’t even a journalist before this gig. How is an appearance on that show meeting “the press”? It provides good cover for what he really is I guess…Dick Cheney’s mouthpiece.

scory at 32 — I think that would be a very valid concern if I were worried that the Dem party could run its branding into the weird lock-stop demogoguery territory that the GOP inhabits. But given what I know about how they function, that’s frankly not a concern. But I will settle for an overarching theme that weaves together the various points and counterpoints into some sort of whole with a story that actually works.

I’m laughing out loud. The DP is in advertising and public relations, and positively froths at the mouth when he hears Rahm Emmanuel talk about message discipline and promptly ignores every word he’s just spoken.

Message discipline means agreeing on a theme and key talking points, and then sticking to them. Without question. Even if you think you’re smarter, and more clever than everyone else. It’s how the Mighty Wurlitzer worked, in its heyday.

Ian’s “Making America work for everyone” is very close to what I believe might be a workable “overarching theme” that you’re looking for.

Perris @ 60 – yes. Take inspiration from Steve Gilliard, and don’t be AFRAID of that term. We need to take BACK liberal. It’s what this country was founded upon.

Rayne, talking about JFK, and hope – it wasn’t JFK who turned me into the liberal I am today. It was Robert Kennedy – that man of privilege who saw poverty and injustice as the MORAL issues they are, and wanted to end them.

This idea that morality is all about sex is wrong – that unprovoked, preemptive war is the way to go, that poor people somehow deserve to be poor – that’s what’s immoral. What is it that Randi Rhodes says the military taught her, to be a liberal? Because we’re only as strong as the weakest among us?

We have to find a way to remind this country how great it is. We need another “go to the moon”, this time as a nationwide effort to find alternative fuels and get off our dependence on fossil fuels. We were once the most innovative and resourceful country ever. We need to be again.

We need leadership.

Gotta go read some RFK speeches.

noblejoanie @ 65

How about “Democrats are problems solvers, not problem creators”.

Bill Clinton often talked about getting up in the morning and doing the people’s work, finding solutions. He didn’t bother complaining about who made the mess, just showed by his own example that he was ready to roll up his sleeves and get to work making it right.

In the face of all the negative the Republicans threw at him, he kept it positive. As someone who is deeply bitter about the disaster the Bushies have wrought as well as all the squandered opportunities, I’d love nothing better most days than to sit around bashing this bunch, taking every chance to make that point. But the problems we face are huge and will require concerted cooperation globally to save our collective bacons. We need to focus on finding solutions, together.

imho, joanie, the Clenis didn’t really accomplish anything liberatory or empowering in his 8 years. He presided (president?) over a period of prosperity which wasn’t really the result of anything he did, or any initiative he undertook. I am having a difficult time recalling ONE domestic program which actually improved the lot of the people.
Otoh, he triangulated NAFTA and associated neo-lib globalisms into being.

Democrats at one time had a brand. A political brand is what the party stands for. We need a brand.

Soundbites are the point of the spear in political communication — they always have been, and always will be.

This is not to say that substance doesn’t matter, because it does. But substance without soundbite is MEGO inducing dross, that opens the door for a whithering attack from a counter narrative soundbite. (Best example: “Where’s the Beef?” A three word demolition of Gary Hart’s substance filled but soundbite free campaign.)

Put another way — people notice the gloss, not the substance.

Example — pick up a drab pebble, and wet it. Suddenly, it’s eye catching qualities are greatly increased. So it is with politics and political communication. Without an easily understood narrative and killer soundbites, the best policy initiative will go nowhere.

Which is why “Medicare for All” is the mose useful soundbite path to universal healthcare.

History is filled with examples of soundbites leading movements — in the best of these, the soundbite and substance are congruent, and lead to positive outcomes.

In the worst case, the soundbite is marketing fraud, that leads to disaster — like Dubya’s “Compassionate Conservatism” or Lenin’s “Land, Bread, Peace.”

For positive, movement leading Democratic soundbites, I look to FDR —

And right now, we need a “New Deal for the 21st Century.”

This could use some polishing, but “We’re the people who make government work for everyone.”

One thing Democrats have to stop getting rolled on is this “government is the problem” crap, and the Bushies have handed us a prime opportunity to do it. There are an awful lot of Dems who bought into the Republican propaganda that most people don’t like government, and were apologetic or hesitant in saying anything good about it because they were afraid of the tax attack.

Now we’ve got the two prongs — if the next Katrina hits your town, who do you want in charge, “government should work well for everyone” or “government is the evil, you’re on your own”?

Second — “tax and spend” from guys who spent like drunken sailors and said the money doesn’t matter because the Chinese are practially giving it away?

I just lost an old high school friend yesterday, then I read about our old friend Steve Gilliard passing away.

Sad days.

-GSD

albert fall says

teapot dome, anyone?

Thanks for a great post and the commentary is above average (the small parts I have time to read as I rush out to a performance with my music ensemble).

As a small token of appreciation, here is my offering (though topically tangential):

Danner on fire…

Add in the fact that American democracy is on life support too.

-GSD

1) It’s easy to overrate the goopers- and their “branding” bullshit. GW stole one election and then managed a narrow victory- near loss while “The wartime president”. Goopers just lost the house and the senate. Generic voter preference is running dem by 10 points or so. Dems have a voter registration advantage of about five points right now. Why mimic the fuckin loser goopers?

2) Voters know who the dems are and who the goopers are- always have- always will. Goopers have been more successful in saddling dems with baggage than in selling their own pollyanna free enterprise bullshit. If ya think people are buyin it- look at what happened when Clusterfuck tried to sell his revolutionary social security system. That was what brought his JAR down to the thirties. People don’t really want most of the bullshit the goopers are sellin- they DO like lower taxes if it doesn’t cost em anything- other than that- it’s pretty much all bullshit.

3) There are some good analogies between selling toothpaste and selling political candidates and parties- but that’s been WAY overblown in my opinion. Politics- in the end- comes down to CANDIDATES- not secret cavity formulas, upscale packaging, and jingles (that’s the Proctor Gamble formula for “branding”- and they’re the best at it. To win- a party has to have superior candidates- and they will pick their OWN message- they won’t swallow one worked out at “corporate”. For that reason, most of the party communication is better spent attacking the opposition. Let the candidates sell themselves in their own way. In the end- the view of the party will be a composite of the views of the elected officials who represent it- nothing more and nothing less. The view of the gooper party is Clusterfuck- and they will try to wriggle off that hook- but it won’t be possible until after the convention when they have a new face.

Every time someone starts talking to me about the “War On Terror” I reply, “I’m too busy working on the ‘War On Fear’”.

What has my party assumed as a ‘brand’? We are the party of liberal Republicans and conservative Democrats. Vote for us! I am not pleased with this as a platform. I want clear cut distinctions and definitions. I want a decipherable brand-name!

Klev,

The Asiatimes online has that address too. With a great Mission Demolished graphic.

-GSD

“And right now, we need a “New Deal for the 21st Century.” FDR’s New Deal was followed up, I believe, by Truman’s “A Fair Deal.” Works also, I think.

wgg: tokin lib’rul @ 89

albert fall says

teapot dome, anyone?

Yes, I went from lurker to poster here at the start of the DoJ scandal, and thought a classical reference was needed.

“Branding” probably isn’t the way to go considering that dems, progressives, liberals don’t do well at herding or being herded. We’re such a bunch of renegades.

Christy Hardin Smith @ 71

Adie at 60 — The word “branding” may be anathema to some liberals. But running away from the things we think are not the nice way to play is exactly the reason that we get our asses kicked. This is no time to play nice or pretend that we can take the high road and not get kicked in the balls by Rove and his political proteges. Namby pamby may be good for kindergarten, but it does not work in politics and it is time we stopped using wishy washy tactics to fight our way to a tie or a cave-in.

oooh please don’t get me wrong.

My problem with branding is, I have tracked roverian tactics for years now just by noting the repetition of robotic talking-points. They’re disgustingly easy to pick out and nail, if only Dems would call ‘em on it, whether repeated by candidates or (worse!), pundits and MSM. I just don’t want US to sound like robots(!)

I totally agree with your desire to have Dems come forth with strong PUNCH of a message. We’ve been lacking that ever since, John Kennedy(?), & that drives me crazy as it does you.

I also agree with Mr. Redd. Call it what you will, the general public is incredibly lazy and distressingly easy to lead astray. Rover, using common ordinary toothpaste-commercial methods, has proved that beyond any reasonable doubt.

What to do? What to do?

FDL’s doing that now. Brainstorming. Plans. Action. Thanks (((Redd!)))

It’s not really about “branding,” it’s about “framing,” which goes a little deeper.

For example, “right-wing bloggers” is a brand which we all basically recognize. But referring to them with the term “blogtards,” as offensive as that may be to some, immediately frames the debate and takes away the right-wing blogosphere’s most potent, or only, weapon: ugliness.

Throw in a little humor and message discipline and presto: you’ve won a debate, an election, a country back.

My party needs to understand clearly that they are on the edge of irrelevance.

-ck- @ 86

Soundbites are the point of the spear in political communication

Only if they are perceived to be honest.

If the Democrats could actually cause meaningful change maybe it would be worth the effort to build a soundbite around it.

Oklahoma kiddo @ 85

Democrats at one time had a brand. A political brand is what the party stands for. We need a brand.

with that definition, okay… ;->

Repubs are: WE the corporations, BY the corporations, FOR the corporations.

Dems are NOT. (Some dems anyway)

A day or 2 after the Libby verdict, Tweety had on one of the jurors, and Ole 60-Grit was there, too. The three chatted for most of the show, and at one point, Tweety was actually talking about the facts! He delved into the Niger trip and the “new facts” about it. O”Bierne was pinned and flushed by it, and had nowhere to run, so she lied straight-faced into Tweeyt’s pearly mug.

From a sputtering Kate – she actually said this, too – came the move that stopped Tweety in his tracks – she insisted that Valerie had been planning the Niger trip for Joe before Shooter had even inquired about Iraq’s supposed inquiries about yellowcake!!!

I could not believe what I had just seen and heard, but to compound the lie, Tweety leaned back in his chair, considered the comment, and moved cautiously away from the topic as if to not be domed by his own lack of facts. She intimidated him on his own show with the big lie pulled from nowhere, and he wimped out.

Forgive me for this, but there was a time when James Carville actually did some good, and it was his time in Bubba’s war room. That assemblage would have called bullshit so loudly and rapidly and repeatedly that it would never have been allowed to stand. And the liar who told it would have had to hide in shame.

We live in a different time.

i just want affordable health care.

and legal marijuana.

and stop this fuck’n war.

is that too much to ask? i’d settle for 2 out of 3.

rwcole @ 92

1) It’s easy to overrate the goopers- and their “branding” bullshit. GW stole one election and then managed a narrow victory- near loss while “The wartime president”. Goopers just lost the house and the senate. Generic voter preference is running dem by 10 points or so. Dems have a voter registration advantage of about five points right now. Why mimic the fuckin loser goopers?

Because the Republicans have been successfully using this formula since 1972 and reelected a supposedly an “unelectable” President, Richard Nixon.

Who in their right mind would have thought Ronald Reagan could be elected President, let alone govern (incompetently) for eight years?

I hate the idea that marketing and advertising are more important than rhetoric, policy, and performance. But damn, I’m tired of having good candidates loose elections because they won’t play hardball.

albert fall @ 97

wgg: tokin lib’rul @ 89

albert fall says

teapot dome, anyone?

Yes, I went from lurker to poster here at the start of the DoJ scandal, and thought a classical reference was needed.

he’s a figure of some substance in new mexico…involved in the Catron ring, iirc, and had something to do with pat garret’s demise, defending his killer and winning an acquittal…

Sharon @ 104

Repubs are: WE the corporations, BY the corporations, FOR the corporations.

Dems are NOT. (Some dems anyway)

true. but we have to be careful to frame our message(s) in a positive way. Going ALL negative is no good.

saying, simply, “we’re not repubs” is not enough.

The reason the Gooper meme and Gingrich thing that you put this way:

“distance the GOP from the Bush brand, fob off all responsibility for failure onto the Bush crew, and try and walk unscathed through the stench of failure to the other side and somehow manage to paint themselves and the Republican party as smelling like a sadly duped yet earnestly trying to make things right for America rose.”

Could work is that it plugs into what people themselves would like to believe. They didnt buy into this mess either. Yes, we knew and hated Bush from the start, but most of America was in the 90% that was with him in fall 2001 and the 60% that was with him later and the 51% that elected him in 2004.
This thing the Goopers are trying to do has an emotional tie to how much of America feels.

“We can have the best policy ideas the world has ever seen, and incredibly practical and logical means of implementing them for the greater good of all mankind.

But if the Democratic leadership doesn’t stop selling them like a crappy Head-On knock-off commercial with bad production values and crap scripting and the world’s most untrained actors? Then we’ll continue to get screwed.”

“Then we’ll continue to get screwed”

That’s the driving force behind this “selling them like a crappy Head-On knock-off commercial with bad production values and crap scripting” in my opinion, and our not being willing to recognise this is the real problem.

With all the evidence that we have pointing to this all being intentional are’nt we allowing them to get away with it by excusing their actions?

klevenstein @ 90

Thanks for a great post and the commentary is above average (the small parts I have time to read as I rush out to a performance with my music ensemble).

As a small token of appreciation, here is my offering (though topically tangential):

Danner on fire…

oh yeas, that danner piece is VERY good…

Democrats: Say it and mean it: ‘Vote for us in 2008. We’ll set things right!’ And tell the people how we’re going to accomplish that. Give America a choice! We ARE the party of choice, health, prosperity and peace.

How is this for a slogan:

“Unleash your inner FDR” or even “Open a can of FDR Whoopass” or more prosaically “The New New Deal’

Over the last 30 years the Republican Party has successfully discredited the New Deal by selling the notion that its central pillar, the Social Security System is a proven failure. And Democrats and particularly Democratic leadership has bought it, hence everyone agreeing that we need to do something, anything to fix it.

Well it is just not true. There is no evidence at all that anything needs to be done and quite a bit of evidence that Social Security is in fact over-funded as currently configured. Only a series of manipulations of the Reports has served to disguise that fact and my projection is that they will not be able to keep up the coverup past the 2009 Report, due on March 31, 2009. Details at the Econoblogs.

Old fashion New Deal Democrats are going to wake up to the realization that the Rat Bastard Republicans have been lying to us all the time and that in itself is going to provide an opportunity to reinvigorate the brand.

The New New Deal is Real. We have nothing to Fear but Fearmongers themselves. Everything most people ‘know’ about Social Security is the product of a deliberate campaign set forth in the Fall 1983 issue of the Cato Journal. Google ‘Butler Germanis Leninist Strategy’, it is all there in detail and it is breaking down as we speak.

FDR is going to raise out of his grave and take Cousin Teddy’s Big Stick and whale the crap out of the Republican Party on Social Security, And mostly they don’t even see it coming.

Social Security as Political Opportunity

Did I say “Third Rail of American Politics” out loud?

jeannefisk @ 5

I noticed this yesterday with Joe Sestak (who is my congressman). I had to reread his answers 12 times to try and understand what he was trying to say. He never really answered any questions coherently and that just adds to the frustration. I want democrats to answer in clear concise sentances.

It seemed that I was reading canned talking points instead of clear answers. That was a huge disappointment because most of the people FDL gets talk straight.

I still don’t see that there will be any difference between what Sestak wants to do and voting no would have done. Both will be called not supporting the troops rather than saving lives by the wingnuts.

And if he said “Date Certain” one more time I was gonna throw the computer. Why does he think that saying those words means anything? All I can see is that Sestak hasn’t gotten his plan voted on, so it’s just putting things off.

I agree with OK that John Edwards, or someone(s) on his team, seems to get the re-branding need. Two Americas is the essential war behind all the battles. Reclaiming Patriotism positions Democrats as taking back our country from those who have stolen it. These are messages that speak to the people who need to hear them.

It’s not a brand, but a line of attack I’d like to see Democrats with access to megaphones try is “they think you’re stupid.” I see it as a way of facts that Republican propaganda has obscured without telling people they are stupid for believing it, and more important, letting them be not-stupid by rejecting it.

At best, it’ll put TV talking heads in the position of saying “wait a minute — are you saying [Republican talking point X] is actually bad for the average American?” Answering “absolutely” to that is even better than saying it yourself.

Goopers have been crowin bout Newt’s “contract with america” and have credited it for winning congress for em in 94. The truth is that they got that goat choker out to the public just days before the election after everyone had already decided- and no one read the disgusting piece of crap. So why did they produce it? Simple- so they could say that they had just won a mandate to do all the shit that Newter put in it!!

Such documents don’t win elections- and the public usually falls asleep when a party tries to “define itself”.

Dems put together some kind of generic “platform” last election and it was read by two americans and mentioned by zero candidates for office.

Democrats: Peaceful strength!

I do not know how Congress works, the Democratic side in particular. Pelosi goes to Syria, the GOP from POTUS to MSM rake her over coals, and her colleagues say — nothing. The Dems get out a fairly good bill on Iraq, POTUS vetoes it, and — the Dems decide that what they need to produce is a bill that POTUS WILL SIGN; no effort at all is given to pointing out that POTUS just “defunded the troops”. Committee hearings are held, and there is no evidence whatsoever that Dem members conferred beforehand or coordinated their approach.

How do these people do their job? Have we the people elected only prima donnas on the Democratic side?

Adie @ 103

Oklahoma kiddo @ 85

Democrats at one time had a brand. A political brand is what the party stands for. We need a brand.

with that definition, okay… ;->

;0)!

Bruce Webb @ 114 on Social Security.
yes, it works. And the proof is the check that turns up every month. And the math–read Atrios or any other good economist on it (not hooover inst hacks) and the truth is it will go on and on.
We can’t stand for Dems walking away from it or talking about fixing it.
Pelosi got that right and very right, early on.
Grandma P needs some tough LTs and not short-term calculaters like steny and rahm.

behindthefall @ 120

I do not know how Congress works, the Democratic side in particular. Pelosi goes to Syria, the GOP from POTUS to MSM rake her over coals, and her colleagues say — nothing. The Dems get out a fairly good bill on Iraq, POTUS vetoes it, and — the Dems decide that what they need to produce is a bill that POTUS WILL SIGN; no effort at all is given to pointing out that POTUS just “defunded the troops”. Committee hearings are held, and there is no evidence whatsoever that Dem members conferred beforehand or coordinated their approach.

How do these people do their job? Have we the people elected only prima donnas on the Democratic side?

i hate to be a downer about all this, you know, but the differences between the GOPukes and the Dems were summed up nicely a generation ago by Gore Vidal: The US is governed by the Party of Property, which has two Right wings, a Right Wing and a FAR-Right Wing.

Seems ta me that Sestak probably voted the way he did because:

1) His vote wasn’t going to matter a bit in terms of accomplishing anything.

2) He figured that voting the way he did would win more re-election votes than voting the other way.

He didn’t put it that way cause- well- it doesn’t sound so good- but it’s a virtual rule of political behavior. If ya find any politician acting contrary to this rule– she/he is a rare speciment- and likely an endangered species as well.

Perception and Reality

rwcole @ 118

Goopers have been crowin bout Newt’s “contract with america” and have credited it for winning congress for em in 94. The truth is that they got that goat choker out to the public just days before the election after everyone had already decided- and no one read the disgusting piece of crap. So why did they produce it? Simple- so they could say that they had just won a mandate to do all the shit that Newter put in it!!

We could start right off by continuing to refer to newt’s nonsense as his “Contract ON America.” That lil’ turn of phrase was delightfully effective during ITS all-too-short lifetime. It’s probably part of what brought the scoundrel down. So use it to KEEP him down eh?!

Ian Welsh @ 20

Democrats – Making America Work For Everyone

In 1992, a friend (who was a successful political consultant) and I were talking about what President-elect Clinton needed to do to be successful. We came up with the four “P’s”:

Potholes
Police
Principals (as in school principals)
Prosperity

Effective government in a healthy democratic republic needs to be about making sure that people have what they need to lead healthy, secure, and satisfying lives.

Fixing the potholes — or more broadly, maintaining the physical infrastructure of the country — is a visible manifestation of this.

Police — or ensuring domestic safety while at the same time ensuring individual liberty and freedom — provides citizens both security and satisfaction. It also means pursuing a foreign policy that constructively engages the United States in the global community, and working in concert with our allies to prevent events like Kosovo, Darfur, or global organized crime.

Principals means investing in the social infrastructure – schools and social organizations – that provide education and opportunities for socialization for all, not just an economic, religious, or ethnic elites.

Prosperity means ensuring that economic opportunities exist for all, and that reasonable incentives are in place for people to invest in potentially risky opportunities that may well lead to significant long-term returns.

I’d argue that this is what most, if not all Democrats (and not a few Republicans) really believe.

Ian said it better. ☺

Christy and Mr. Reddhead. I don’t think most people are “stupid”. Lazy, complacent, apathetic, discouraged, beat down , not caring, hypocritical…. turned into zombies by the MSM Yes..but stupid NO.

I heard all kinds of people questioning the validity of a pre-emptive invasion months before March of 2003. The MSM filled the airways with the liars( Condi “mushroom cloud” Rice, Rumsfeld, Bush, Cheney, Wolfowitz etc. The MSM did not give any of the common folk the time of day, allowing those at home in VFW;s, Moose lodges etc feeling alone with their questions watching the Bush administration liars fill the airwaves with their lies about WMD’s in Iraq.

Americans “should” be able to trust the MSM
but they have proven over and over again that they are not to be trusted. (the reason for the blogossphere explosion. Most Americans do not have or make the time to dig a liitle further than the MSM and they really should not have to.

I do agree that the Republicans are better at spin and redirecting. Bush focused on the Aids program, Darfur and Global Warming.

Political opinion in this country falls into a bell shaped curve. The bulk of the public is in the fat part of the curve- and the political parties and candidates will manuever inside that safe area. You’ll always have a few firebrand congresscritters from “safe” districts goin outside the frame- but they are more for amusement value- the game is in the middle.

I missed the slestak exchanges.

did he ever say–has he ever said–he opposed the war IN PRINCIPLE, because it was fucking WRONG?

or just in practice, tactics, etc?

given he’s ‘lifer military’, i’d bet the ranch that, if he mentioned it at all, it was the latter…

Democratic Party. I have been faithful to you for over forty years. Don’t corner me and press to leave you with this in ‘08. Please.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CIIzkEWPocs

The Democratic Party Brand Identity:

“Yes, we’ll give you our lunch money, just don’t hit me.”

Or perhaps:

“Hey, did you read Lakoff yet? I hope we can come up with a brand identity, too….”

The way the Republican ‘brand’ works is this: There is only power. There is power in winning arguments legitimately, and there is power in being a bully. So if you can do either or both, you get power. This is fundamentally the lesson that Democrats must learn. They must learn that *any* power is good. If you shout down an opponent, you are powerful. And if you allow yourself to be shouted down, you have given up your power. (If you give Bush his open-ended spending bill, you have no power. If you let Bush go to war, you have no power. Etc.)

The issue is power. Not just votes in Congress, but in moving the discourse. Democrats have to learn to be bullies, if only so they can choose not to bully.

In the American system of government, political parties are proxies for armed rebellion. Keep that in mind.

shrimplate @ 100

It’s not really about “branding,” it’s about “framing,” which goes a little deeper.

For example, “right-wing bloggers” is a brand which we all basically recognize. But referring to them with the term “blogtards,” as offensive as that may be to some, immediately frames the debate and takes away the right-wing blogosphere’s most potent, or only, weapon: ugliness.

Throw in a little humor and message discipline and presto: you’ve won a debate, an election, a country back.

I refer to them as the Blogostomy™.

tokin

As I recall he made it clear that he was opposed to the war and not just the tactics used to prosecute it. He has his own preferred formula for getting out and says that cutting funding is too dangerous. I think he really meant politically dangerous- hell Murtha (from the same state) voted the same way.

Of course he can’t come on here and say- “I voted the way I did because of political expediency- so we got the “support the troops” bullshit.

New day- same ol bullshit. I don’t blame him personally. There was zero chance of getting anything substantive done.

How about FAIR ELECTIONS FOR A WORKING DEMOCRACY

Although I understand Adie’s dislike of “branding”, the concept works. There’s a reason it’s taught in business school as part of marketing.

There’s another word that scares people: marketing. But it works, every day. Marketing is only a commercial label for the concept of promotion. What is promotion? It’s increasing the reach and desire for a product or concept, and I’d say that’s exactly what we want to do with Brand Dem.

Branding is a subcomponent of marketing; it’s the identify of a bundle of traits and attributes into a single, unified identity that can easily be asked for, can summon up a whole host of responses just by mentioning the name.

Both marketing and its subset, branding, require real thought and effort — something we haven’t done overmuch as a political party or movement. We’ve concentrated our efforts on events or single pieces of legislation or prosecution or investigation, but have never taken the time necessary to put an effective, gripping, appealing label under which we can bundle all.

When someone says Democrat to you, what’s the first thing you think of? What’s your gut response? And more importantly, what’s the gut reaction of Joe SixPack who isn’t politically active, but votes with fair regularity? That’s what we need to adjust and change, and branding is merely the label we put on this effort.

My spouse is more of the Joe SixPack type; he gets his news in 30-second snippets, too busy to sit still to read much. What does he think Democrats are when all he can base his decisions upon are the bits and pieces he gleans from cable on monitors in airports? This is why branding is so damned critical; we don’t have a lot of time to grab a critical mass of citizen’s attention, only seconds at a time. We have to be very effective to do this with success.

Still don’t like the idea? What do you think about:
– The Daily Show
– The Colbert Report
– Apple Computers
– Google
– Toyota Prius
for starters; each of these things is a brand, and the brand has been actively shaped with your response in mind. Granted, there’s a decent product underlying each one, but isn’t that theoretically what the Democrats are, a solid product whose brand has been misshaped by Republicans? Can we improve the product AND improve the brand?

Hi Christy-

A few weeks ago I had a conversation with an 80 plus year old couple. They are both registered Rs. The gentleman said that his perception of the Dem party is that it began as, and is comprised of, “all the fringe groups that did not fit into the R party.” He specified “Jews, Negros, and unions”.
His R-centric view, and his dated R-social views were interesting, but not surprising.

I have not heard this same perception from younger Rs, or from Dems. From both groups (mostly 58 and below), taxes, social programs, war, business vs environment, immigration, wages, outsourcing, lessening of regulations on business, and degree of freedoms have been most of the main differences that I can see.
The Democratic brand would be more in the realm of financial, social, freedoms, and health well being for all Americans. We are more about sunlight and statesmanship, and less about secrecy, oppression, and bombing.

Christy/Mr.Redd:

I’m not so sure stupid OR lazy covers it all.

I get the feeling, stronger & stronger, that rover’s mastery of inducing fear and indecision as a lot to do with why public action has become such a scarce commodity. inertia from constant state of near-panic, subtly but deliberately stoked from within the “machine”?

help me out here, psych. gurus…. ;->

rwcole @ 124

Seems ta me that Sestak probably voted the way he did because:

1) His vote wasn’t going to matter a bit in terms of accomplishing anything.

2) He figured that voting the way he did would win more re-election votes than voting the other way.

He didn’t put it that way cause- well- it doesn’t sound so good- but it’s a virtual rule of political behavior. If ya find any politician acting contrary to this rule– she/he is a rare speciment- and likely an endangered species as well.

Between the first and second bills, the idea of NOT producing a second bill received no serious attention AFAIK: the inference is that the suggestion was irresponsible. Of course, now, after the second bill, it just may have been the best tactic the adults in government could have used.

What is unclear to me is why on earth the Dems felt compelled to produce another bill. Was it because not producing one would have locked up all other legislation as well, because the GOP would have refused to cooperate on anything? The evidence I see for this explanation is the bump in the minimum wage that was tucked into the second bill: GOP says, “Give us our war and we’ll give you one small one from Column A on your Wish List.”

If that is what happened, then the Dems need to go for counseling to wean them from this addiction to horsetrading. Stand up for what is right, publicize why you did it, when the GOP won’t give the kids at Fries-R-Us a raise, point out that the GOP is making life hard for the youngsters here but offering them another, much more lethal job abroad.

It’s not “the” government. It’s YOUR government and for the last eight years, it’s been sold to the highest bidders, who’ve made huge profits at your expense. Democrats are fighting to give your government back to you. Help us with your vote.

snoboysdrift @ 135

How about FAIR ELECTIONS FOR A WORKING DEMOCRACY

the DEMS, strategically, cannot as a serious matter impugn the fairness or the legitimacy of elections they’ve apparently LOST; not without enduring the same rhetoric when, should it happen that they actually WIN something, the shoe is on the other foot…

Murkins don’ wanna hear about vote theft…we HAVE to believe our votes count and are counted…otherwise the whole thing collapses like the house of cards it is…
.

The dems have a brand- and it’s downscale. It’s a chevy to the gooper cadillac. When ya tear the actual cars apart, there’s more similarity than difference in the two- but the perception is rather different.

Dems are seen as connected to “the working man”, the poor, the downtrodden, immigrants, etc. whereas the goopers are seen as the party of the up and comers and the “winners” in the great Darwinian battle for social survival.

Now THAT’S real branding–such brand connotations can be changed- but it’s VERY expensive- takes a lot of time- and is only marginally successful- particularly if you don’t change the product attributes that drive it.

I don’t think dems should change it- better to be a reliable, practical, chevrolet than a caddie that breaks down at every traffic light.

rwcole @ 129

Political opinion in this country falls into a bell shaped curve. The bulk of the public is in the fat part of the curve- and the political parties and candidates will manuever inside that safe area. You’ll always have a few firebrand congresscritters from “safe” districts goin outside the frame- but they are more for amusement value- the game is in the middle.

I don’t agree with this. Republicans have shown that they can skew debates sometimes so that the parameters are between the far right and the very far right. Also, 70% of Americans want out of Iraq. That’s not a bell shaped distribution. At the same time, Republian and media framing continue to reverse this and portray it as an outlier.

Jane as made reference in the recent past to a double camel hump which recognizes that the center of what is supposed to be a bell shaped curve is in fact empty and that voters and views have congregated at the extremes of the distribution.

“”"We can have the best policy ideas the world has ever seen, and incredibly practical and logical means of implementing them for the greater good of all mankind. But if the Democratic leadership doesn’t stop selling them like a crappy Head-On knock-off commercial with bad production values and crap scripting and the world’s most untrained actors? Then we’ll continue to get screwed.”"”

yes, but then you have an arms race in which you invariably force the other side to develop more sophisticated means. we are just one side of the coin. the problem is the coin. let go of the coin. alternatives! the only reality is perception.. there is no other reality. if you have a strong inner desire to defeat the republicans then you are tied to “the game”. it has you. to try and beat “them” in the “tragedy creating” media is a losing proposition. “to a man with a hammer, everything looks like a nail”.

rwcole @ 118

Goopers have been crowin bout Newt’s “contract with america” and have credited it for winning congress for em in 94. The truth is that they got that goat choker out to the public just days before the election after everyone had already decided- and no one read the disgusting piece of crap. So why did they produce it? Simple- so they could say that they had just won a mandate to do all the shit that Newter put in it!!

Such documents don’t win elections- and the public usually falls asleep when a party tries to “define itself”.

Dems put together some kind of generic “platform” last election and it was read by two americans and mentioned by zero candidates for office.

I think part of it is that we Dems tend to move on after something is completed and the Goopers are able to do “backwards/after the fact” framing. As witness:

“the election of 94 was won by the Goopers because of the Contract” or
“Saigon falling was becuz Dems lost the war” or
“Ray-guns beat the Soviets in the Cold War” or more currently
“Clenis was distracted from going after Bin Laden becuz of Monica I”.

“common sense” goes a long way.

rwcole @ 141

The dems have a brand- and it’s downscale. It’s a chevy to the gooper cadillac.

Could we reframe this image, make it more contemporary?

My kids have a visceral, negative response to anyone driving Hummers; they have been know to call them Republicans.

More likely to see our most conscious community members driving a Prius or a small car like a Pontiac Vive these days…

Buckeye Hamburger @ 37

Great post, Christy, but I don’t want to go along with the premise that most people are stupid. [snip]

I think this is really important… People will act stupid if we treat them that way. And if “our side” managed to find a way to manipulate the people and get into power, we’d suddenly discover that nothing had changed — except “we” had become “them”.

we gotta find a different way. which I think means looking for incremental progress politically (no redemption via politics), neutralize the political evildoers, minimize the harm, and look elsewhere for the significant societal change.

it’s a balancing act …

architect66 @ 146

“common sense” goes a long way.

Except it is about the most uncommon human attribute.

Watched Stephanpolous, Russert and Matthews this morning.

Joe Klein and Matthews say Libby will get a pardon, the rest of the quest say no.

Murtha was really worked up on George Steph’s program. He said “the Iraqi people want us to go” (my friend Peggy Gish who is a member with the Christian Peace Maker Team and who has been in Iraq three and half years over the last 5 agrees). She has said for years now the Iraqi people want us to go.

I thought Mary Matalin had the most absurd statement of the morning news programs. She said (referring to the Iraqi people) “what kind of people stone women and send 12 year oldsout to behead people.”

I would ask Matalin just what kind of people(U.S) invade a country that has not attacked us based on a barrel full of lies?

Just what kind of people allow our military to hold people for years (Guantanamo) without access to the rule of law?

Just what kind of people create a prison enviroment where Iraqi people are stacked up butt ass naked, stood on boxes butt ass naked while growling dogs stand at their feet, electrodes hooked to genitals, menstrual blood wiped on you, etc. etc etc

Just what kind of people send American soldiers into your country who rape a 14 year old girl while her family is locked in a room, and then burn the young woman and kill her family.

To be sure if American soldiers are ever truely honest about some of the atrocities that have taken place in Iraq most do not have anything great to write home to Gramma about in Iraq. (I have talked with quite a few Iraqi soldiers who have come home, for now)

Dear Mary Matalin if you care to notice or at the very least tried to be honest and stop operating with that selective and short term memory. You might come to the realization that our country has absolutely no room or right to be pointing fingers at any other people or nation as far as human rights or following the rule of law are concerned.

wgg–when I mention Bill Clinton, I was addressing the branding discussion Christy started. Whatever you think of his results, and I don’t much disagree with what you said, Clinton had a positive message, one that resonated with most Americans who get up and go to work everyday, trying to do their best for their families.

People love Bill Clinton. He tapped into a theme they could identify with. The Republican noise machine was most effective in silencing Dems on ALL things Clinton, including what made him so popular.

behind

Yeah doin NOTHING was the only solution the dems had that had a chance in hell of working. Clusterfuck can’t veto “no bill”. Goopers can’t filibuster “no bill”.

Why didn’t they just sit on their hands? I can only speculate- but:

1) Public opinion is clearly against cutting the funding.

2) Goopers would have a field day with that. Clusterfuck would be on the road daily- generals would be giving press conferences sayin how many kids died this week cause the funds were cut- it would be an all out firestorm and the Pentagon would support the White House. Dems would lose 20% of their own members in such a storm- and then they would be forced to back off- which is the WORST thing that they could do.

Just guessing- but they were probably thinkin somethin like that.

snoboysdrift @ 53

Why do “we” own the internet? Not because Al invented it.
Because it is democratic. How do we make the Democratic
party serve the internet? I don’t think it is by branding.

The kick-ass democrats who won the election just six months ago have brought fear and loathing to the splintering Greasy Old Patricians. Even the “low information voter” have had their bullshit meters tweaked by this mal-administration. In normal times, this debate could be about Sunday afternoon and cole-slaw. Now that the BusChen Occupation’s scorched earth policies are cannibalizing its own base and thus triggering civil dissonance, the time for branding has past. The GOP Titanic has already struck the iceberg and the great hubris of unsinkability is drawing the behemoth beneath the waves. The lifeboats don’t float on slogans, and the survivors aren’t rescued by sound bites.

Democrats are now the first responders to our national emergency. The rebushlicans are the perps. The revolution is indeed the internet.

Lindy @ 40

old gold @ 28

Competence, Community and Compassion

I think The GOP successfully pivoting against the Bush administration for 2008 is going to be equivalent of a completing a ‘Triple Lindy.’

What’s a Lindy? *g*

In “Back to School” Rodney Dangerfield’s character performs the ‘Triple Lindy’-a jump from the high platform to a springboard, to a sideways double flip with knees tucked to a lower springboard,

Hugh @ 142

Oh, I think there’s still a standard distribution curve, but the curve shifted to the left on the scale. The deadenders demanding to stay the course are approaching 3 standard deviations to the right, while the bulk of the distribution is to the left of that end. What the folks to the left of the deadenders can’t agree upon is how and when to leave Iraq — they all agree we must, though. When we do develop consensus, the curve will shift yet again to the left and the dead-enders will look more like they are passing 3 standard deviations from norm.

Rayne 136

we’re getting there…. heh heh.

I love your analyses.

May I please be allowed to tweek my comments to which you referred.

I don’t hate “branding”, per se, just getting caught at it, heh. I think liberals in general probably wouldn’t like using the term “branding” terribly much, but would most likely be delighted to have a punchier, more effective campaign to join. (yes, one that judiciously incorporates some techniques of “branding”)

Further, partly for that reason, partly out of false pride, I’d hate to be caught knowingly using simple branding methods the way jr. does, repeating the same token phrases ad nauseum, to the point that everyone’s rolling their eyes in exasperation.

So… whack ‘em with a nice tough, punchy, focussed campaign(!), but with the subtlety that allows individuals to use their own brains and not just stick to the same old tired phrasing over & over & over & over…

repug leaders of today still sound like broken records, and the public is not only sick & tired, older & a bit wiser, but they’re ANGRY.

We can USE that anger, but only if Dems don’t just sound like another copycat version of repug.

does that make any more sense???

I am craving honesty from the Democrats — for instance, I would really like to know, without any spin, why the Democrats gave the money to continue funding the occupation of Iraq without any restraints. I don’t want to know what tv pundits think is the reason, or what they hope is the reason, or what sounds like the least offensive reason. But it can be applied to any and every discussion or debate or decision. They have to establish trust and being open and honest is the only way.

Be blunt and honest. Sometimes the truth hurts but in the long run it’s for the best.

dalloway @ 140

It’s not “the” government. It’s YOUR government and for the last eight years, it’s been sold to the highest bidders, who’ve made huge profits at your expense. Democrats are fighting to give your government back to you. Help us with your vote.

DING!

The Democrats: the reality-based party.

The Democratic Party, finding real solutions to real problems.

The Democratic Party, working for real people, not privilege.

The Democratic Party, working to improve reality, not perception.

The Democrats: dealing with real issues, not marketing slogans.

The Democratic Party: blow away the smoke and mirrors.

I resent it intensely that there are some in the Democratic leadership who think we will sleepwalk to the polls in 2008. Because we have nowhere else to go. For any front-runner who thinks this way; guess again. Pressure on… boys AND girls!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v…..mp;search=

Oklahoma kiddo @ 49

What exactly have we gained, if in 2008 we saddle ourselves with a bunch of watered-down Demos?

this is the question that drives me nuts …
and why I have not been particularly a support of the dems in the past.
but, we gain neutralization, less harm and evil in the world. which really really matters. there’d be a lot less people dead in Iraq right now if the last two presidential elections hadn’t been stolen …
Just don’t mistake meutralization for long term societal change to the good.

David at 156 — I can tell you that one: they didn’t have the votes, because the blue dogs and the Lieberman-types sold the Dems out to the White House before the vote was ever taken. But they went ahead with the vote to potentially build momentum for the next vote forward — but idiots like Rahm have so muddled the message, and so alienated the very supporters that they need to keep that momentum going, that no one — and I mean NO one — is remotely motivated at the moment. Welcome to the world of incompetent political consultants and their idiotic triangulating messaging concepts. Bah.

PeteCO @ 8

The only remotely political subject I hear discussed in my office is gas prices. I honestly don’t think people know or care about anything outside their routines.

Gas prices are on their way down. The national average for regular gas today is $3.164 down from a high of $3.227 on May 24.

As I have tried to point out before while I found this most recent rise in prices really irking because of its contrived nature, the object of the exercise was only incidentally to hit a new high. The real aim was to raise the base price and set the stage for further rises later in the summer if the oil companies luck out and there is a bad hurricane season, a war close to oil fields, or some other nifty and convenient excuse.

Adie @ 61

Rule #1: Drop the name “Branding”

the very word is anathema to most liberals, eh?

if we’re gonna play “join-up” we’re gonna have to do better than that.

branding is rebranded as framing …
framing is the way to frame branding

The soviet union died from a bleeding Afganistan. How
can we heal the USA of a bleeding Iraq? If a Democratic
Party brand can become the bandage I’m all for it.

lee5 @ 164

Adie @ 61

Rule #1: Drop the name “Branding”

the very word is anathema to most liberals, eh?

if we’re gonna play “join-up” we’re gonna have to do better than that.

branding is rebranded as framing …
framing is the way to frame branding

cool! heh.

But we already have the ‘theme’, Redux…

It’s: Change the fucking course, goddamn it, or else!

We just need a real driver. Not a bunch of frigid clowns.

And we definately need to follow through on our ‘or else’ provision!

Adie @ 155

…repug leaders of today still sound like broken records, and the public is not only sick & tired, older & a bit wiser, but they’re ANGRY.

We can USE that anger, but only if Dems don’t just sound like another copycat version of repug.

does that make any more sense???

Absolutely.

So if you’re an angry Joe SixPack in the heartland of America, what do you want to reach out for to relieve that anger?

Okay, maybe a beer, but what is it about that beer that is preferred above any other item or concept to relieve that anger?

And do we have IT, whatever that thing is to which Joe SixPack is reaching out?

Sounds a bit simplistic, but sometimes it helps to just strip away all the other stuff.

BTW, I really like this blog about branding. Read any of the posts on branding, replace the subject or product in question with Brand Dem and ask yourself how we make Brand Dem better.

Jane asks of the dems:

“What’s their slogan?”

At this point, Jane, what it SHOULD be, is this:

“George Bush, the man who sent our troops to create this bloody abomination, can start pulling them out of it with a stroke of his pen. He can do this, beginning tomorrow; no debate required; no deals necessary; he can do it like he scrathes his ass.

And the republican party, which has been nearly unanimous from the first pimping of the war, and to this day, still is, in their support of it, could help by joining US in forcing him to do it.

Instead, they continue to sit on their hands and gibber about “victory”, at the same time they savage us, with their last, best, hope, of a talking point, for OUR not wanting to singlehandedly put OUR asses on the line to cover the asses of the people who created this misery.”

I haven’t heard the democrats saying this.

And you know what, guys?

I may just have missed it, but in all the GOP-style bashing of Pelosi and the dems that’s been going on lately, I haven’t heard anyone on HERE say it, either.

Legitimacy. While this speech is mainly about our foreign policy, I believe the same ideas apply to domestic issues — restoring our legitimacy at home by honoring and restoring the ideals and laws our founding fathers created in forming this country.

General Wesley Clark – Legitimacy: First Task for American Security

Hosted by: Center for Politics and Foreign Relations, Paul H. Nitze School of Advanced International Studies (SAIS), The Johns Hopkins University

May 16, 2007

~ snip ~

But today I’m not here for that purpose. Today I’m here on a very serious and sober topic. I want to talk about restoring legitimacy as the first order of business for a new American strategy.

~ snip ~

How do we get this legitimacy? Where does it come from?

I think it comes from the heart of American institutions themselves. I think it’s because we formed our institutions with the consent of the governed. We are guided by an adherence to our Bill of Rights, and at least in the last century, we’ve viewed our conception of mankind and our rights as universal truths. We’ve had them embedded in documents starting with the UN Charter and Declaration of Human Rights around the world. We’ve advocated the enlargement of these rights to all of mankind. And in many ways, not without exception, but largely we’ve acted consistently with these principles, and in so doing, we earned the goodwill, the good opinion – legitimacy – in the eyes of mankind.

~ snip ~

How do we regain our legitimacy?

Well, there are three elements here. First, we have to change some of what we’re doing abroad. Second, we have to change some of our laws and policies at home. And third, we’ve got to make some inquiries and serve justice about past conduct.

~ snip ~

And finally, we’re not going to restore the legitimacy we seek without a full inquiry into how we as Americans could’ve gone so wrong. How could it have happened? Why did it happen? And who must he held accountable for abusing the good name and authority of the United States of America. This includes not only addressing the administrations misuse of intelligence in the run up to the war in Iraq, but also into who and how we misled our Armed Forces and our intelligence agencies into believing that our international obligations under the Geneva Convention and the 1996 Treatment on the Prevention of Torture- Treaty of the Prevention of Torture weren’t somehow legally binding or applicable.

Holding a few soldiers accountable in military trials is not enough. Their actions reflected a broadened tolerance for hither afore reprehensible acts of mistreatment all in violation of international law and the responsibility for which must be sought at the highest levels of the Pentagon, the Justice Department and the White House itself.

I say this without partisanship and with a great deal of sadness. I love this country. generations of Americans have served and sacrificed in battle to preserve our freedoms, including our inviolable Bill of Rights. Torture, however you define it – and let’s not quibble with the definitions – was never acceptable as a matter of policy. It was always something deeply abhorrent to our ideas of human dignity, and we sought and supported legal retribution against those who employed it elsewhere.

How can we as Americans hold others to high standards of conduct unless we hold our own leaders to the same high standards?

~ Much more. Read in full at Securing America.

Democracy is a conversation. It’s not just about the rich and powerful.

Government is good, when it is a conversation (implication that you must be involved)

Checks and balances please.

I wholly agree. The gooey mush core that appeals to your gut, is what is missing from the democratic message.

Why are the dems missing this.

And will someone please find the duct tape for Al Frum’s mouth.

CHS,
Thanks. I was just using that vote as an example (actually I wasn’t surprised by it) however I’d like Nancy Pelosi or some official spokesperson of the Democratic Party to have come out and said exactly what you just stated.

I’ll be listening to you on Sam Seider.

On Matthew’s Sunday program Joe Klein also said that there ismore evidence that Gore will declare in the fall. Klein mentioned the Nobel Peace Price in Oct or Nov. I thought Klein went over the top when he told Gore “to run as a fat man”. I just wish people like Matthews and Klein would stop bringing attention to the way people look or dress instead of the issues.

George Will made one of the most crazy statements I have ever heard him make.( I find myself agree with Will more often than I would think) Will said that studies show that Mars and I believe he said Saturn are heating up and that the earth and these other planets may be heating up due to solar activity.
http://www.thechrismatthewsshow.com/index.php

Sam Donaldson ripped into Will’s comments about global warming with humour and grace.

Mary Matalin on Meet the Press
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/3032608/

jen @ 168

Legitimacy. While this speech is mainly about our foreign policy, I believe the same ideas apply to domestic issues — restoring our legitimacy at home by honoring and restoring the ideals and laws our founding fathers created in forming this country.

Ooh, thanks for that, jen, excellent!!

Legitimate democracy. Love it.

rwcole @ 118

Dems put together some kind of generic “platform” last election and it was read by two americans and mentioned by zero candidates for office.

Yes, but they had a really amazing slogan: “We can do better.” I mean that still gives me goosebumps in its haunting evocation of man’s existential quest to create meaning in an otherwise barren and indifferent universe. *g*

Christy goes after Rudy upstairs

Thanks Rayne(!)

One thing that concerns me a lot is rover’s clever clever attempt to tar everyone with the same brush, whenever repugs are caught in the cookiejar.

There’s a VERY short hop for joesixpack tw’ being angry at [whatever/whomever] &
“throw ALL the bums out!”
… aided and abetted by any & all repug bobbleheads i’ve seen/heard on the telly.

Beware that very real danger, and we’re home…

Sharon @ 104 has the right of this.

Let’s go back to basics and start talking like the greatest Republican and his sidekick:

“Labor is prior to, and independent of, capital. Capital is only the fruit of labor, and could never have existed if labor had not first existed. Labor is the superior of capital, and deserves much the higher consideration.”

Our country is a theatre, which exhibits, in full operation, two radically different political systems…The principle [of one] of the system[s] is, that labor in every society, by whomsoever performed, is necessarily unintellectual, grovelling [sic] and base.

Until the Democrats can unapologetically state they are out to promote the interests of those who earn their income we are going to be governed by default by the champions of unearned income, trickle down economics, and the leisure class.

How about it if the Democratic Party starts to celebrate Labor Day again – is that too radical?

Fresh thread for everyone.

lee5 @ 164

branding is rebranded as framing …
framing is the way to frame branding

This is something that criminals have long understood. They always say they were framed.

lee5 @ 161

Oklahoma kiddo @ 49

What exactly have we gained, if in 2008 we saddle ourselves with a bunch of watered-down Demos?

this is the question that drives me nuts …
and why I have not been particularly a support of the dems in the past.
but, we gain neutralization, less harm and evil in the world. which really really matters. there’d be a lot less people dead in Iraq right now if the last two presidential elections hadn’t been stolen …
Just don’t mistake meutralization for long term societal change to the good.

Gore is the person for the job. He will roll over the rest of the candidates in the fall.

Standing back as all of the other candidates duke it out.

Hope. That’s what you’re talking about, Rayne.

Not me. I’m way past hope at this point. I am at desperation and rage. It can go either way at this point: acts of desperation to bring America back from Amerika or acts of rage to bring America back from Amerika.

Either way, the Dems are not going to do it…not the party, that is certain.

Dems run scared from Gooper attacks.
Remember a few years ago when Trent trotted out the picture of the small, gas-saving car and said this is what the Dems want to bring you with lower gas standards for cars and any standards for trucks?
The Dems ran.
That is an emotional attack. What is the emotional response. Perhaps it is talking about leaving a healthy planet and a secure country for your kids, a country NOT dependent on oil.

OT (sorry Christy)

Mmmm. Mutant rice makes breast milk proteins.

Coming to fields near* you…

Rice made with human genes: GM menace or saviour?
By Geoffrey Lean, Environment Editor
Published: 03 June 2007

Rice containing human genes is being grown commercially for the first time, in a dramatic application of genetic modification. The highly controversial development – which environmentalists say bears out their charge that the technology is creating “Frankenstein Foods” – is also likely to open the door to a new generation of GM crops.

The rice, which has been called “the Holy Grail” by GM enthusiasts, has been modified to grow two proteins found in human breast milk. It is produced by the California-based Ventria Biosciences, which says that it wants to use them in baby milk and rehydration drinks to fight the severe diarrhoea that kills some two million small children in the Third World every year. Critics dismiss this as window-dressing, citing a US government disclosure that the proteins will be used in “yoghurts” and “granola bars”.

Apart from its use of human genes, the rice heralds a new type of crop modified to grow drugs, a process dubbed “pharming”. This could lead to people who should not be exposed to the drugs unwittingly eating them in their food. The leading technical journal Nature Biotechnology compared growing such pharmaceuticals in crops to “packaging pills in candy wrappers.”.

(*if you live in Kansas)

USDA’s May 16th approval of drug-producing rice cultivation in Kansas…poses needless risks to the safety of the American food supply. USDA;s approval permits cultivation in the Junction City area of up to 3,200 acres of rice genetically engineered to produce pharmaceutical compounds that the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) has refused to approve.

[snip]

the decision comes just a week after tornadoes in the Kansas River Valley and heavy rains caused severe flooding in east-central Kansas, including floodwaters on the Smoky Hill River, which passes just a mile from one of the proposed planting sites. USDA had earlier dismissed concerns raised by the groups that floodwaters could carry the pharmaceutical rice into surrounding cropland and contaminate farmers’ crops with drugs unapproved by the FDA. USDA concluded in its environmental assessment that: “Extreme weather events are rare and unlikely to occur in the area of the field trial.”

About two weeks ago, I was huddled with other travelers in a rest stop on Interstate 70 as tornadoes were reported on the ground in the very area where Ventria proposes to expand their production between Junction City and Topeka, said Dan Nagengast, Executive Director of the Kansas Rural Center.

[snip]

Groups opposing the scheme include the USA Rice Federation, U.S. Rice Producers Association, Riceland Foods, Mississippi Rice Council, Arkansas Rice Growers Association, Missouri Rice Research and Merchandising Council, and Rice Producers of California. In addition, fourteen independent scientists signed a joint scientific assessment warning of potential adverse health impacts from even trace-level exposure to one of the rice-produced drugs.

These rice-grown drugs are unapproved by FDA, may be hazardous, and whether hazardous or not could cause huge economic losses to Kansas farmers whose wheat, soy or other crops become contaminated with drug rice, said Bill Freese, Science Policy Analyst with Center for Food Safety.

Thank you. It is way past time someone said Americans are stupid. They are. For proof, watch the next time you go out on the busy road/freeway. How many do you see talking on cell phones WHILE DRIVING? FACT: Only 1 out of 50,000 can do this safely. And you wonder why there are so many accidents?

Yes, most Americans see Bush is a failure. Why? THEIR lives are effected. But they are ripe for Newt’s schtick. And it will work.

Example: Obama’s health care plan. Is it new? No. Will it work? No. WHY DOES HE EVEN BRING IT UP? It is way past time for single payer health care. Why in the F**K can’t most Americans see this?

lee5 @ 164

Adie @ 61

Rule #1: Drop the name “Branding”

the very word is anathema to most liberals, eh?

if we’re gonna play “join-up” we’re gonna have to do better than that.

branding is rebranded as framing …
framing is the way to frame branding

The instant people start bringing hellish market/corporate speech into the conversation my eyes glaze over and I look for an exit. Branding begets soundbites. Marketing begets branding. All that business crap speech begets corporatocracy.

I run into a related thread of business management hellcrap nonsense in the military. Hallways are loaded with those irritating and mushycrap posters with single words of “inspiration” on them or marketing and business management slogans on them.

GAH! I HATE that nonsense. Speak right! (sic) Speak clearly and plainly in NORMAL English.

Kathleen @ 181

lee5 @ 161

this is the question that drives me nuts …
and why I have not been particularly a support of the dems in the past.
but, we gain neutralization, less harm and evil in the world. which really really matters. there’d be a lot less people dead in Iraq right now if the last two presidential elections hadn’t been stolen …
Just don’t mistake meutralization for long term societal change to the good.

Gore is the person for the job. He will roll over the rest of the candidates in the fall.

Standing back as all of the other candidates duke it out.

got my fingers crossed…
and the gore bumpersticker of choice?
“re-elect Gore”

Hugh,

(Bell shaped curve or two humped camel)

This is, I think, a very important question. The evidence for the two humped camel shape is- as I recall- that there is less ticket splitting going on than in the past- that is- people are more party loyal than they used to be. But are the parties bunching toward the middle or are they far apart on the issues? I’d say that for the most part they are pretty close together.

Public attitudes on social security, medicare, taxes, medical costs, gasoline prices, etc. are fairly uniform.

Few support the more radical positions put forward such as:

Flat tax

public funding for private religious schools

legalizing all drugs

eliminating social security in favor of private savings programs

etc.

Most americans want a social safety net, they want progressive taxation, they want the govt to protect the quality of the air and the water and to regulate businesses.

That’s the fat part of the curve. On the war- attitudes should be looked at carefully- here’s a CNN poll from early May:

As you may know, President Bush vetoed a bill passed by Congress that would have provided additional funds for the war in Iraq and would have set a specific date for the withdrawal of all U.S. troops from that country. Do you approve or disapprove of Bush’s decision to veto that bill?”

.

Approve Disapprove Unsure
% % %
5/4-6/07
44 54 2
.

“One proposal would provide additional funds for U.S. troops in Iraq and would require the U.S. to start withdrawing all its troops from Iraq by a specific date. Would you favor or oppose this bill?”

.

Favor Oppose Unsure
% % %
5/4-6/07
57 41 2
.

“Some proposals would provide additional funds for troops in Iraq and set benchmarks that the Iraqi government must meet to show that progress is being made in Iraq, but would not set a date for troop withdrawal. Would you favor or oppose this bill?”

.

Favor Oppose Unsure
% % %
5/4-6/07
61 36 3
.

“One proposal would not provide additional funds for U.S. troops in Iraq and would require the U.S. to withdraw all its troops by March 2008. Would you favor or oppose that bill?”

.

Favor Oppose Unsure
% % %
5/4-6/07
39 60 2
.

“If you had to choose just one of the three proposals I just read, which ONE would you MOST like to see become law? A bill that would provide additional funds for Iraq that would set a specific date to start withdrawing troops. A bill that would provide additional funds for Iraq that would set benchmarks for the Iraqi government but not set a specific timetable for troop withdrawal. A bill that would not provide additional funds for Iraq and would require all troops to be withdrawn by March.”

.

Funds,
Specific Date Funds,
Benchmarks No Funds,
March
Withdrawal Unsure
% % % %
5/4-6/07
33 40 24 3

Only 39% approve of a bill that would require troops out by March of 08..57% want a timetable for withdrawal- but many want that timetable to be fairly long apparently.

70% say that they don’t approve of how Clusterfuck is managing the war- but there is much less agreement on just what should be done- and there are plenty of landmines surrounding that issue.

Back to the basic issue of the humps- it seems to me that american political attitudes on specific issues tend to fall more into a unimodal distribution than a bi modal- but I would love to discuss this at some length.

My Dad said that brands needed to be managed to overcome their perceived weaknesses. If consumers thought a brand=not x, then the advertising had to be all about how your brand was very, very x.

For instance, in the auto world: Hyundai’s long warranty was introduced because consumers perceived Korean cars as the lowest in quality. Hyundai still advertises the hell outta that warranty, since it meant they would pay for any defect that appeared in the first ten years or 100,000 miles of ownership. Most people couldn’t conceive of owning a car for that long, so all risk of buying a low-quality care was eliminated.

Shorter, more pithy example: didn’t all my fellow boomers grow up believing Wonder Bread was really, really good for us? “Wonder Bread builds strong bodies twelve ways!” Do you think that slogan was a coincidence for that product with most of the nutritional value leached out of it?

So, to the Democrats. Where does our brand lack value? What is our party’s worst weakness? Well, through years of tough talk, the GOP has claimed the “national security” mantle. Most people, instinctively, know that Bush has weakened our country’s security in several (many) ways. So let’s go straight at our own party’s created weakness, and play to most American’s perceptions as well.

DEMOCRATS: WHEN NATIONAL SECURITY MATTERS

Everything fits under that slogan: our children’s education, our energy independence, our interconnection with other nations (allies) and adversaries (today’s “axis of evil”), our borders, our political opponents’ incompetence in vision and execution, ending the occupation of Iraq. Everything.

DEMOCRATS: WHEN NATIONAL SECURITY MATTERS

test?

I really appreciate the theme of this post and the thoughtfulness of the responses.

A “brand” is not simply a tag line, but is encompasses the values that are associated with the brand. The tag lines are effective when they resonate with the brand.

Reps have succeeded with their branding through consistency, and Dems have failed because they have not bothered to try to define themselves, and by default have let the Republicans do it.

We also need to bear in mind that another key to Republican success has been concealment and deception:

–the grounds for the war

Buckeye Hamburger @ 37

Great post, Christy, but I don’t want to go along with the premise that most people are stupid.

I think it likely that you meant that to be a little tongue-in-cheek. But what really frosts me about the conservatives’ message is that it is so often transparently based on the premise that people really are stupid. So much of what they say is based not just on an appeal to the emotional core, but is also quite brazenly simple-minded, and disdainful of evidence and reason. Whenever they are confronted with realities that contradict their world-view, they are famously willing to discount reality, if that’s what it takes to keep believing what they want to believe — and far from being embarassed by that, they’re enthusiastic about it. No wonder they’ve always been so anti-intellectual, especially nowadays; intellect would be fatal to their entire set of beliefs.

This is one of the ways that the media plays into their hands, with the ever-present assumption that consumers of information cannot handle complexity. The audience is presumed to be intimidated and bewildered by trains of thought that go beyond a soundbite; so the media happily package news and opinion into stupid little platitudes, just the way the right likes it. Journalists think they’re doing they’re job well when they do that; but I think they’re being lazy, and condescending to their audience.

You’re quite right that we on the left should speak forthrightly about the moral core of the goals that we pursue, and about the passion that underlies our beliefs. But I’ve thought for a long time that we can win people over by openly giving them credit for their intelligence. “The conservatives and the media think you’re stupid, but we don’t. We think we can challenge you to understand something we think is important; we think you’re willing and able to accept the challenge.” That kind of appeal will get citizens and voters to perk up and pay attention.

Excellent!!!

neokneme @ 153

snoboysdrift @ 53

Why do “we” own the internet? Not because Al invented it.
Because it is democratic. How do we make the Democratic
party serve the internet? I don’t think it is by branding.

The kick-ass democrats who won the election just six months ago have brought fear and loathing to the splintering Greasy Old Patricians. Even the “low information voter” have had their bullshit meters tweaked by this mal-administration. In normal times, this debate could be about Sunday afternoon and cole-slaw. Now that the BusChen Occupation’s scorched earth policies are cannibalizing its own base and thus triggering civil dissonance, the time for branding has past. The GOP Titanic has already struck the iceberg and the great hubris of unsinkability is drawing the behemoth beneath the waves. The lifeboats don’t float on slogans, and the survivors aren’t rescued by sound bites.

Democrats are now the first responders to our national emergency. The rebushlicans are the perps. The revolution is indeed the internet.

Another Excellent!!

Vote economic growth. Vote Democratic.
Vote fiscal responsibility. Vote Democratic.
Promote the general welfare. Vote Democratic.

Record profits aren’t enough, vote more oil company subsidies. Vote Republican.

BTW-I have previously posted as mbraymen

Rayne @ 136

Although I understand Adie’s dislike of “branding”, the concept works. There’s a reason it’s taught in business school as part of marketing.

But there’s another approach: Tangible results. It requires no nuanced sentence structure, wordsmithery or catchy pronunciation. It speaks for itself.

perris @ 60

wow, GREAT post, our “brand” has not only been under attack, it is already considered a dirty word…”liberal” is a perjurative when talking politics

we can reclaim the word and the dialogue…the neo cons have ruined the republican “brand”, we can “rebrand” “republican” as “corporatist”, we can rebrand “concervative” as “screw everyone but themselves”

we can make the brand “concervative” a pariah on the middle class, we can point out liberals are the REAL concervatives and this is true by the way

we can point out that the founding fathers were LIBERALS, the bill if rights is a LIBERAL document, the constitution of the United States of America is a LIBERAL document, DEMOCRACY IS A LIBERAL PRINCIPLE OF GOVERNMENT

and “concervative” government is a government FOR CORPORATIONS

we need to reclaim our legacy as the protectors of our constitution, the protectors of democracy AND THE LEGACY OF THE FOUNDING FATHERS OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA

I rest my case

attaboy!!

The Achilles Heel of the Goopers is the ‘impossibility’ of them being Right 100% of the time.

It’s why they ‘run like hell’ away from getting tagged with crimes and responsibility for national failures – it’s kryptonite to their ‘message.’

Once Bush caves on a Single brick in the Wall of Fantasy – ‘winning’ in Iraq, the ‘USAs weren’t axed for political reasons,’ domestic surveillance is nothing to worry about if you’ve got nothing to hide, etc – the whole house of cards is coming down.

When Bush is no longer the clever ‘wonderboy’ who never gets caught and held responsible for his lies – the show’s over for BushCo.

His ‘base’ will desert him like the audience of a bad storyteller – once they know he’s lying to them – but before the possibility of nightmares gets too real – they’ll be gone like they never knew him.

open italics tag in aisle 167…

dakine at 198 — it was closed ages ago — try refreshing your whole screen and not just hitting the comments button. Should clear it right up for you.

Rayne @ 80

dakine01 @ 46

Government CAN and MUST work for us. We can make it so together.

That’s another important shift that should be reversed; the Republicans have for a very long time now encouraged the public to see government as something foreign, remote, separate from ourselves.

But this country is singularlyu differentiated from the rest of the world by three words: We, the people. This was and should be a government of, by and for the people; there should be no daylight between us and the representatives we choose to effect our decisions. It is this separation based in perception that allows the right-wing to co-opt our government and take it from us, as evidenced all too clearly in the response of government to the needs of the victims of Katrina, in the extensive corruption of the Department of Justice and other government offices.

They’ve also widened the gap between us and the Fourth Estate, completely owning the media so that it no longer responds to our demand for information. While the Fourth Estate is not a government function, it is supported by our Constitution and our publicly-owned airwaves; they use these resources against us.

The internet allows us, though, to watch closely and with great immediacy what our representatives are doing. We can literally whisper in their ears as they work for us. It’s time for us to use that to further reduce the perceptual gap between us — there shouldn’t be one. And we Dems and progressives are much better at using this technology.

The good ones keep piling up!

Notice that Bush in 2000 ran as a moderate- not as the conservative radical that he in fact turned out to be.

The far right grumbles and mumbles and makes a general nuisance of themselves- but goopers know that in order to win the White House- they need to thread the needle- they need to get a candidate past the mouth breathers in their own primary- and then position him/her–well really HIM- as a moderate for the general election.

That’s another way of seeing the unimodal distribution of political opinions.

aki @ 195

Rayne @ 136

Although I understand Adie’s dislike of “branding”, the concept works. There’s a reason it’s taught in business school as part of marketing.

But there’s another approach: Tangible results. It requires no nuanced sentence structure, wordsmithery or catchy pronunciation. It speaks for itself.

If you have the media — correction, if you OWN the media, this is true.

For example, look at the case for Social Security, the most successful program we have. The media doesn’t shout out how great it is that a Democratic program like Social Security provided a safety net for so many Americans.

What we hear instead is that Social Security is going broke, that Republicans believe it’s broken, that Republicans think they can fix it, that Americans should be able to control their own slice of the pie, that we should want an ownership-society and so on.

All because we don’t have the mouthpiece in spite of the success. It isn’t enough to walk the walk. There must be a way to break through the boycott by right-wing-owned media and promote those successes.

Christy Hardin Smith @ 199

dakine at 198 — it was closed ages ago — try refreshing your whole screen and not just hitting the comments button. Should clear it right up for you.

Christy I’ve both refreshed screen AND moved back and forth between threads and still have the italics starting at point mentioned and forwards from there…

Mr. ReddHedd and I were talking about this yesterday afternoon. His theory, and I think he is right on this, is based on a variation of Wizard’s First Rule: most people are stupid. They aren’t going to do the work to really understand things as they are, only as they are sold to them.

Okay, what if it’s not stupidity, but just pure laziness? (almost wrote ‘peer’ laziness).

Teddy- interesting examples. Chrysler first introduced extended warranties- during a period when it was having quality control problems. Ditto the Korean car companies.

The reaction to an extended warranty is probably “Shit- these things must really be pieces of shit or they wouldn’t offer that warranty- but at least I won’t have ta PAY to fix it- so maybe I’ll buy it”

I always figured that they threw a cheap vitamin pill into every loaf of Wonder Bread. Don’t know if they did or not.

Look at all the posts on this thread, that blame the right for the failures of the left.

Here is what is NOT a winning campaign slogan. It’s Bush’s fault. We can do better.

STOP BLAMING THE FEAR MONGERING RIGHT by doing so you have already lost the game.

What do people want. Authenticity. A government that works. A government that is not afraid.

I would like to see the firepups hold a brainstorming session on this every day.

At this time it is the most important thing we can do.

Rayne @ 202

aki @ 195

But there’s another approach: Tangible results. It requires no nuanced sentence structure, wordsmithery or catchy pronunciation. It speaks for itself.

If you have the media — correction, if you OWN the media, this is true.

For example, look at the case for Social Security, the most successful program we have. The media doesn’t shout out how great it is that a Democratic program like Social Security provided a safety net for so many Americans.

What we hear instead is that Social Security is going broke, that Republicans believe it’s broken, that Republicans think they can fix it, that Americans should be able to control their own slice of the pie, that we should want an ownership-society and so on.
.

Um, Social Security is going broke. Slowly yes, but going broke. Democrats should be fixing Social Security so it remains solvent rather than trying to spinning it as a success.

Late to this dance, but this post r4eminded me of John Kerry standing under a sign which read
“We can do better”
And thinking, Damn straight we can
Dean, Kucinich, my dog Hugo, the list of better alternatives was long.

A lot of the “branding” experience occurs in product groups that are otherwise fairly undifferentiated- american lager beer- toothpaste- soap-balloon bread.

In many ways brand power is fading. Costco is a huge success and so is Trader Joes- both are selling many private label and “no name” products marketed upscale.

Christy Hardin Smith @ 11

jeannefisk at 5 — See, I disagree there on the clear, concise answer thing, but only slightly: I am sick to death of sound bite politics. But it is the way things are at the moment. And Democrats suck at it. So we need to (a) figure out a way to beat the GOP at this so that we can (b) use a win at this to change the dynamic. But we can only get there once we have done (a) — which we are NOT doing.

And it is frustrating the hell out of me.

Is this the same thing as FRAMING?

dakine01 @ 203

Christy Hardin Smith @ 199

dakine at 198 — it was closed ages ago — try refreshing your whole screen and not just hitting the comments button. Should clear it right up for you.

Christy I’ve both refreshed screen AND moved back and forth between threads and still have the italics starting at point mentioned and forwards from there…

There are no open tags in that comment that I can see. You may want to close your browser and then reopen the page.

rwcole @ 209

…..In many ways brand power is fading. Costco is a huge success and so is Trader Joes- both are selling many private label and “no name” products marketed upscale.

Costco has ‘their brand’ Kirkland, as well as other brands that are name brand (especially in foods). I mean, I shop at Costco purely because of the way the company treats its employees. And gas is always – always – the cheapest at Costco.

One of the serious problems is that the Republican message has been based on lies.
No Child Left Behind
The Patriot Act
The Global War on Terror
The Coalition of the Willing
Operation Enduring Freedom
…
The challeng is to frame an issue without boldfaced lying about it.
The Republican strategy worked for a while (too long) but the lies eventually bubble up.

The Democrats are not so good at lying about complex and incomplete solutions to serious problems.
And I am not entirely certain that that is a weakness.
The problem is that the party structure seems to recognize the Rahms and Carvilles as valid spokespeople, when their brand of snake oil is just not up to snuff compared to Rove and Matalin.
THe old adagae about wrestling with a pig comes to mind.

Trader Joes is very much a brand.
Their brand just does not include mass media marketing.

Wordsmith- and the gas is unbranded.

aki @ 207

Um, Social Security is going broke. Slowly yes, but going broke. Democrats should be fixing Social Security so it remains solvent rather than trying to spinning it as a success.

Um, it wasn’t broken until somebody messed with it…deliberately. There’s time to salvage the future. And if a few nativist-types actually took the time to think it through, we have a massive untapped revenue stream out there working but not paying into the tax base, who’d be extremely glad to pay into the tax base if they could both make a living and go home.

Don’t drink the Kool-Aid.

Wordsmith @ 212

rwcole @ 209

…..In many ways brand power is fading. Costco is a huge success and so is Trader Joes- both are selling many private label and “no name” products marketed upscale.

Costco has ‘their brand’ Kirkland, as well as other brands that are name brand (especially in foods). I mean, I shop at Costco purely because of the way the company treats its employees. And gas is always – always – the cheapest at Costco.

But that is exactly part of Costco’s branding. Quality products, priced competitively, served by respected associates.

Speaking of broken things, did aznyone else

And how about this — good idea or bad?

No Democrat should ever be an “anonymous” source for the press.

sorry ’bout the last incomplete comment – it was stuck in browser cache

My understanding is that eventually social security will need some adjusting- either more comin in or less comin out. It’s still in fine shape today. The “squeeze” is much less significant than Clusterfuck made it out to be when he was out sellin his snake oil. For example, reducing the rate of benefit increase to the actual rate of inflation as opposed to the more volatile “wage rate” would take care of the whole problem..

Medicare- on the other hand- has more serious problems- particularly the unfunded drug benefit Clusterfuck gave us.

rwcole @ 215

Wordsmith- and the gas is unbranded.

Smarty pants….

Hope someone’s thinkin ahead to the boomer retirement thing comin up. They are going to make up a large part of the population for a fairly long time- and they vote- and most of em haven’t saved enough for retirement- and they will all be struggling on fixed incomes.

Just a quick additional two cents to add to everyone else’s spare change:

Repeatedly, studies of human cognition have shown that first impressions (especially those made early in life) are used by humans as templates through which we interpret subsequent sensory information. So while many of us are taught that you can’t tell a book by its cover, all of us make those kinds of snap judgments at least some of the time. (I like to think that those of us to the left of center do that less than those on the right, but I can’t dismiss the possibility that that assumption is shaped by the templates through which I interpret experience.)

It follows, therefore, that images do play an important role in the process of forming opinions. I’d certainly prefer a reality in which we all reflexively delved into content before forming our ideas & attitudes, but there it is.

80% of Americans get all of their news from television. Sit with that one for a while & consider just how little info the vast majority of the public is getting (while thinking, in many cases, that what they’re getting is The Story on a given subject).

Of course, many people are also quite busy with their own lives and those outside academia have a far narrower range of data available than do those on the inside (something that many on the inside tend to overlook when developing their own analyses of these phenomena). So getting “the facts” is not the same thing for all people or groups, and it’s a safe bet that for most, it’s a pretty rare thing.

Television is overwhelmingly an affective medium; i.e., it’s much more effective at conveying emotions than ideas.

As has been remarked on this thread and others, the Democratic Party is primarily text/discourse/policy oriented. This mismatch between the properties of the medium and the chosen method of using it is a major reason why Dems so often seem to get swallowed by the TV screen.

There is an argument screaming to be made in this election, it seems to me. It goes something like this:

1. The GOP has become a party of dangerous extremists. When this party is in power, the constitution gets shredded, the rich get richer while the poor get poorer, public discourse is reduced to mud wrestling, a war has been started on false pretenses, the whole government is available to the highest bidder, etc. [LIST SHORTENED DUE TO SPACE & BANDWIDTH LIMITATIONS] ;-)

2. This is not just because of individual personalities (although they clearly do matter). Instead, it’s because the GOP has been taken over by crazies. The core constituency of that party is barking loons & should be identified as such.

3. Because this is the core of the party, whoever leads it will be beholden to that core & its loony concerns.

4. Therefore, the only way to avoid having the country run by bullgeese is to vote against Repuklicans whoever & wherever they are.

And let’s not be shy about naming the creeps who argued vigorously for this war & now are trying, a al Richard Perle & Newt Gingrich, to position themselves as “reasonable” Republicans.

Surely there must be a Madison Ave. ad agency willing & able to put together such a theme & spread it across all media channels, yes/no? Surely someone in the Democratic Party must be thinking about this already?

Our top priority – the 99% of Americans who have been ignored, and not the super rich or the Iraq war

Peterr @ 6

“of the people, by the people, for the people”

Sure, it’s been used before, and by a republican at that. But I don’t think Lincoln would recognize today’s republican party.

Hmmm . . . got to think more about this one, but you picked the wrong morning for me to have lots of free thinking time! ;)

Good post, and from the standpoint of the Democratic party, long overdue.

I’ve been thinking of this for some weeks now, and made it even shorter: Of, By and For the People.

As long as we’re talking about pitches and encapsulating ideas, try this one I’ve been refining for the past couple of days: “A crazy man with a gun is dangerous – but not as dangerous as a crazy man with a billion dollars.”

Thompson is standing in the wings, waiting to be the next “Ford.”

He wouldn’t make a run on his own. His ‘backers’ see the best GOP ’survival strategy’ as:

- Cheney out, VP Thompson in
- Bush out, President Thompson pardons

Thompson runs as the ‘annointed’ GOP candidate (which was McCain’s for the taking, but he can’t seem to read the script.)

We’re at a point, imvho, where Bush will ‘take’ a “Wolfie” settlement – gets to leave ‘under his own terms’ and with a pardon.

It would be so Bush to ‘duck out’ the back door to escape responsibility while others suffer, but it does look like the best ’self-interested’ move he could make.

Just sayin’…

signSansSignified @ 224

Excellent. But we do have a problem right now with consultants; don’t know that Dems are willing to take an extremely risky gamble on marketing consultants when they’ve had such incredibly bad results for years from idiots like Bob Shrum.

And how do we trust any marketing firm to do the right thing, when they consistently make their living serving the corporate sector (read: strongly right-leaning)?

I tend to believe this is a matter for open source development across the Democratic community for these reasons.

radiofreewill
Ideally we would end up with a Democratic president in ‘08, but hopefully a better communicator than JC

Al Gore did fine with his consultants- he won.

PeteCo; you’re right; people don’t want to talk about. I think that’s because most of us, whatever side of the aisle we’re on, have this visceral certainty that the denouement of this little Bosch-painting is going to be so horrible and wretched for nearly everyone involved, that we just want it to pleaseGod go away.

For the repubs and the war supporters, they, of course, just don’t want to have to admit how wrong they were, and to have to take the blame for what is going to happen; and to avoid doing that, they will lie, cheat, and steal. And they will continue, as they have done all along, to leave our troops there, almost as hostages. What’s coming in Iraq is NOT going to be explicable to the voters. It is not going to be forgivable.

If the carnage and mayhem take an exponential jump, and they almost certainly will, and when the new “Shiastan” in the south starts exchanging ass-rubs with Iran to make for more petro-power than the Saudis have, the american electorate will NOT say:

“That’s cool. We really admire the democrats for triggering the endgame that brought us $5 a gallon gas, and the ongoing crisis between “Kurdistan” and the Turks. That was very courageous of them.”

Guys, these are the same people who DID elect george bush in 2004, when a drooling idiot could see what a miserable, unending, clusterfuck he had dragged us into. Does anyone seriously think that if the dems force troops withdrawals by themselves, that the republicans won’t point to what follows, and shreik:

“Lookit! It’s ALLLLL their fault!!!” And do we want to take the chance that enough of the voters will be honest enough and intelligent enough to scorn that bullshit?

For a lot of us who oppose it, for some reason we’d rather bash the democrats who are ALSO shitting green nickels at the prospects for what follows a troop withdrawal, than point out the simple, unspinnable truth that the man who sent the troops, can pick up a pen and start pulling them out tomorow.

For not waving some magical mid-term wand to creat and apple-pie ending, the congressional democrats are being HAMMERED by the progressives in their own party. They are also catching it from the republicans, who, desperate with a lunatic’s desperation, know a good, Rovian, taking point when they see one, no matter how insane it may be.

Since the GOP’ers in the blog world, and in the letters-to-the-editors, fer God’s sake, are ALREADY pissing and moaning about the democrats not “ending it”, that should tell us just what they will do if the democrats ARE stupid enough to force troop withdrawals without having republican names on the legilation that does it.

It IS a “PR game” and unfortunately, I think we have to play it.

radiofreewill @ 227

Thompson is standing in the wings, waiting to be the next “Ford.”

He wouldn’t make a run on his own. His ‘backers’ see the best GOP ’survival strategy’ as:

- Cheney out, VP Thompson in
- Bush out, President Thompson pardons

Thompson runs as the ‘annointed’ GOP candidate (which was McCain’s for the taking, but he can’t seem to read the script.)

We’re at a point, imvho, where Bush will ‘take’ a “Wolfie” settlement – gets to leave ‘under his own terms’ and with a pardon.

It would be so Bush to ‘duck out’ the back door to escape responsibility while others suffer, but it does look like the best ’self-interested’ move he could make.

Just sayin’…

you really think Cheney is going to let anyone run w/o him as veep?

I figure he’ll just declare that he’s the veep regardless of who wins the presidency, repub or dem.

Look back to the 2000 debates. Gore clearly mopped the floor with ol Clusterfuck- but he got battered for “pilin on” the poor pathetic little momma’s boy…too aggressive! How things have changed!!

Rayne @ 216

aki @ 207

Um, Social Security is going broke. Slowly yes, but going broke. Democrats should be fixing Social Security so it remains solvent rather than trying to spinning it as a success.

Um, it wasn’t broken until somebody messed with it…deliberately. There’s time to salvage the future. And if a few nativist-types actually took the time to think it through, we have a massive untapped revenue stream out there working but not paying into the tax base, who’d be extremely glad to pay into the tax base if they could both make a living and go home.

Don’t drink the Kool-Aid.

Read Ron Suskind’s book “The Price of Loyalty”. Former Secretary of the Treasury in the first Bush Administration Paul O’Neil reports that he and Greenspan had plans to take a sizeable chunk of the surplus (after Bush fed his tax sharks their promised tax cuts) left over after the Clinton administration and roll the surplus over into the upcoming SS shortfalls during the upcoming boomer retirement years.

We know that surplus is gone. Yet the sharks got their tax cuts, and the Bush administration still hopes to privatize Social Security after they made sure the surplus was spent on a “war of choice”.

Tanbark

Yep- you’re right on the thing. Dems problem is that they ain’t gonna do anything for two years- so they’ve gotta turn nothin inta sumpthin come election day.

(”Imagine what the goopers would have done if we hadn’t been there doin nothin!”)

First, don’t confuse “brand” with a slogan.

I think the Democratic brand should be “Security”.

This plays into several sub-brands – “Financial Security” (protecting Social Security, other worker’s issues…); “Security in your Healthcare”; “Environmental Security”; “Energy Security”; “Security in Foreign Policy” (What Gen. Clark spoke about in post 170 above); “Security from Government in your Private Life”

Rayne. if you’re still around…

Thanks for your patience. I think we mostly have a language problem. I’ll take a look at that website. Always been fascinated by how people make up their minds/advertising theory & its uses. We ethologists have our own jargon too. Don’t get me started… ;->

“Elect a Democrat. It’s common sense.”

Common sense is a radical departure from the status quo right now. The Dems can’t do much better than advocate that. Anything else — you know, policies — is too distant from the 3-ring circus that passes for news.

Universal health coverage is common sense.

Getting out of Iraq is common sense.

Preparing for hurricanes is common sense.

Rolling back tax cuts for very wealthy people is common sense.

Protecting the environment is common sense.

Shutting down Guantanamo is common sense.

Restoring habeas corpus is common sense.

Appointing competent rather than heck-of-a-job administrators is common sense.

Following the UCMJ by not torturing people is common sense.

I could go on…

Kathleen- Yep- of course Greenspan and O’Neil wanted to convert to a “privatized” social security plan and needed the whole surplus to fund the transition. Clusterfuck ignored em- and then- after SPENDING the surplus- decided to make the transition anyway- and put it on the card.

Another vote here for dropping stupid and lazy as brands for the average American. Not least because it reinforces the right’s branding of Democrats as elitists.

Psychologists use the term “cognitive miser” to describe the very normal human tendency to use the least mental effort necessary to process information and pick a course of action. It’s innate and everybody does it because nobody has an infinite amount of time to consider every implication of a decision. They use automatic processes (mental shortcuts, formally referred to as cognitive heuristics) that simplify complex problems just so they can get on with their lives and get to the next decision.

Seth Godin summarized how people are influenced brilliantly in this post a year ago:

People don’t believe what you tell them.

They rarely believe what you show them.

They often believe what their friends tell them.

They always believe what they tell themselves.

So, you want people to listen? You have to be perceived as their friend, or your message has to be something they think of themselves. Calling them stupid is unlikely to help in either case.

Bush and Cheney have very little time left to maneuver before they risk getting cut down – with so many scandals lapping at their feet, they can’t be sure where the dam is going to break, at this point.

Once a law abiding AG gets put in place at DoJ – it’s over for BushCo.

Once the RNC e-mails turn-up – it’s over for BushCo.

If one ‘insider’ defects and starts spilling the beans on all the carefully coordinated lying and deceit – it’s over for BushCo.

Anything could happen – right now – that might take ‘control of outcomes’ away from Bush – he’ll negotiate a deal and fold before he ‘loses.’

“brand image” ain’t what you want it to be- or what you say it is. For an old established “product”, it’s what the public says it is. You can throw slogans at em tryin ta change the image- but it won’t do much good in the short to medium time frame. Turnin that kind of battleship around take a generation or two.

Suppose you wanted to change the image of “cadillac” from a big old car driven by people over eighty to a sporty, youthful, upscale euro roadster?

It would take a good twenty years- they’ve been tryin for at least that long- and have made only minor inroads.

rwcole @ 223

Hope someone’s thinkin ahead to the boomer retirement thing comin up. They are going to make up a large part of the population for a fairly long time- and they vote- and most of em haven’t saved enough for retirement- and they will all be struggling on fixed incomes.

Milan River @ 137

Hi Christy-

A few weeks ago I had a conversation with an 80 plus year old couple. They are both registered Rs. The gentleman said that his perception of the Dem party is that it began as, and is comprised of, “all the fringe groups that did not fit into the R party.” He specified “Jews, Negros, and unions”.
His R-centric view, and his dated R-social views were interesting, but not surprising.

I have not heard this same perception from younger Rs, or from Dems. From both groups (mostly 58 and below), taxes, social programs, war, business vs environment, immigration, wages, outsourcing, lessening of regulations on business, and degree of freedoms have been most of the main differences that I can see.
The Democratic brand would be more in the realm of financial, social, freedoms, and health well being for all Americans. We are more about sunlight and statesmanship, and less about secrecy, oppression, and bombing.

David Robinson @ 157

I am craving honesty from the Democrats — for instance, I would really like to know, without any spin, why the Democrats gave the money to continue funding the occupation of Iraq without any restraints. I don’t want to know what tv pundits think is the reason, or what they hope is the reason, or what sounds like the least offensive reason. But it can be applied to any and every discussion or debate or decision. They have to establish trust and being open and honest is the only way.

Be blunt and honest. Sometimes the truth hurts but in the long run it’s for the best.

Lat night I went to a Democratic event (in Athens Ohio) where Congressman Zack Space(took Ney’s 18th congressional district spot) was the guest. I was able to have a 45 minute conversation with Congressman Space and asked him about his vote for the war funding (Space was one of the 45 freshman to vote for the funding). He explained that his decision (as a citizen he was against the invasion) was based on the timeline for the withdrawal. That the most recent bill requiring troops to begin deployment in 90 days was too soon, “precipitous” and that they did not have the numbers to over ride a presintial veto. Space also said that he does not think that Iraq is going to get better over the summer.

So my question to him is why wait any longer to start the deployment. (we are only going to witness more violence, more deaths) He did not give a clear answer.

Space also shared that there are endless discussions, tears and anguish over this issue on both sides. I let him know that many of the people that I had convinced( I worked hundreds of hours for Space) to donate sizeable amounts of money to his campaign and Rep. Charlie Wilson’s campaign (the district I live in, Charlie took Stricklands spot) wanted their money back sense they had donated hoping that these new reps would make a stand against this illegal and immoral war.

Space also shared that he had made it onto Karl Rove’s list along with two other candidates who Rove believes are the most vulnerable Democratic house members. I would say Space gave Rove another easy reason to pick him off.

Do folks believe that the Democrats had any logical reasons for rolling over, (”precipitous withdrawal dangerous for the Iraqi people” “do not have the votes to override a veto”) or are they just making excuses for rolling over?

My $.02. without reading through comments: I would change Wizard’s Rule from “stupid” to something between brainwashed and lazy. I don’t believe people are stupid. I think they are capable of understanding but especially in the last few decades, critical thinking, truth and civics have been left out of people’s basic educations.

Have you spent any time looking at public school textbooks lately? Every subject is a congealed mass of summary parts. Most kids never read source material in school anymore, just the easy stuff that school boards order for their districts. How can they think with mush for basic material? Remember all those Christians and conservatives running for school boards over the last two decades? Aha. At least, that’s how it is in CA and in Texas and most southern states.

I’ve seen a lot more “why I’m a democrat” paragraphs over the last couple of months. This is good. We’ll find our way back, soon.

rwcole @ 239

Kathleen- Yep- of course Greenspan and O’Neil wanted to convert to a “privatized” social security plan and needed the whole surplus to fund the transition. Clusterfuck ignored em- and then- after SPENDING the surplus- decided to make the transition anyway- and put it on the card.

I did not catch that O’neil and Greenspan were pushing for privatizing SS in that book. I did read tht they were preparing for the upcoming shortfalls. I am sure I could have missed something.

“Security”

It’s a page right out of Rove’s playbook. Take something that the opposition thinks is a weakness, and make it your strength. Frame the discussion. Redefine the word. Every time a GOP’er tries to refute it, they will be repeating the mantra, “Democrats” and “Security”

Democratic Message?

Take a cue from our next President.

“Return of Reason”

How about this-

“Together We Couldn’t Possibly Do Worse Than The Fucking Republicans.”

Oklahoma kiddo @ 85

Democrats at one time had a brand. A political brand is what the party stands for. We need a brand.

Oklahoma kiddo says:

I think Kennedy’s “Ask not what your country can do for you ask what you can do for your country” was the Democrats last strong “brand”

I think in this statement lies the core/the secret to compassion, liberty and true freedom.

This statement/brand taps into that no matter what circumstance that you are in, (on welfare, a struggling single parent, middle class and crazy from driving the kids to dance classes and sports events, living on Park avenue) you can tap into a higher state of being that all humans have the potential to tap into. That statement carried us beyond our own individual circumstances and challenged us all to give. To remember that there is always someone struggling more than you that you can help if you are only willing to “walk in someone elses shoes” or imagine that some people can not even afford shoes.

That if you find some way to give, someone to give to who is struggling more than you. When you exercise this part of human potential you are tapping into the real compassion that lies within all of us. Compassion and true empathy are the path to true freedom. This higher need to give (and all Religions talk about) taps into the source which feeds the people when they can not feed themselves, provides health care and access to a solid education.

When we stop giving and spend our time thinking about getting true compassion and altruism seizes up and turns to rust. Our nation ends up in a state of “greedlock”.

Who ever wrote that line “ask not what your country can do for you, ask what you can do for your country” tapped into a source of inspiration that Americans are starving for.

The Democrats can do it again. They can call for all Americans to operate out of a sense of the greater good, (not just comfort and greed) and not just for our National interest (oil). Americans are hungry for a brand a message with substance and inspriration.

How about this “brand”. “Let go of greed go green”

Or remember this one by Gandhi

“Live simply so others can simply Live”

Lat night I went to a Democratic event (in Athens Ohio) where Congressman Zack Space(took Ney’s 18th congressional district spot) was the guest. I was able to have a 45 minute conversation with Congressman Space and asked him about his vote for the war funding (Space was one of the 45 freshman to vote for the funding). He explained that his decision (as a citizen he was against the invasion) was based on the timeline for the withdrawal. That the most recent bill requiring troops to begin re-deployment in 90 days was too soon, “precipitous” and that they did not have the numbers to over ride a presidential veto. Space also said that he does not think that Iraq is going to get better over the summer. More death and destruction

So my question to him is why wait any longer to start the re- deployment. (we are only going to witness more violence, more deaths) He did not give a clear answer.

Space also shared that there are endless discussions, tears and anguish over this issue on both sides. I let him know that many of the people that I had convinced( I worked hundreds of hours for Space) to donate sizeable amounts of money to his campaign and Rep. Charlie Wilson’s campaign (the district I live in, Charlie took Stricklands spot) wanted their money back sense they had donated hoping that these new reps would make a stand against this illegal and immoral war.

Space also shared that he had made it onto Karl Rove’s hit list along with two other candidates who Rove believes are the most vulnerable Democratic house members. I would say Space gave Rove another easy reason to pick him off.

Do folks believe that the Democrats had any logical reasons for rolling over, (”precipitous withdrawal dangerous for the Iraqi people” “do not have the votes to override a veto”) or are they just making excuses for rolling over?

oddball @ 247

Democratic Message?

Take a cue from our next President.

“Return of Reason”

“Return of Reason” not Treason!

(lies about WMD’s,outing of an undercover agent, toss the Geneva treaty off to the side, withhold intelligence documents from our reps etc. etc

Kathleen

Do they have a good reason?

Yeah- they didn’t have the votes to insist on a withdrawal schedule and if they had cut the funding they think that they would lose congress in 08 because of the attack the goopers and the Pentagon would jointly subject em to.

Don’t know if they are right- but that’s what they think.

America used to be a beacon for the world. The protesters in Tiannamen Square built a model of the Statue of Liberty for a reason. The world came to our side after the 09/11 attacks.

But we now have become just another country that tortures prisoners, waives habeas corpus, spends the taxpayers money to enrich selected friend, and sneers at the idea of using diplomacy to achieve political goals.

Relight the beacon, vote Democratic.

The point I most agree with in your post is that Democrats must stop using Republican talking point slogans altogether. Language is power. Democrats must substitute EVERY Republican Talking Point with strong language of their own.

They must equate the new Green Economy with the promise of vast wealth and opportunity for the innovative American. They must equate an “oil-based economy” with the dinosaur and make freedon from Mideastern oil an issue of economic future power and national security.

WE ARE NOT AFRAID TO EMBRACE THE FUTURE. THE DEMOCRATIC PARTY IS THE PARTY OF OPPORTUNITY! DEMOCRATS KNOW WHAT OPPORTUNITY MEANS TO REAL, HARDWORKING AMERICANS– ACCESS– to education, to healthcare, to future markets– For too long the Republican Party has been holding us back, underfunding our infrastructure, our scientific advancement, denying the American people the best opportunities for clean air, clean water and the quality educational system a great country like ours deserve. If we hope to compete in a fast changing global marketplace we need CHANGE. We need a government and a party that SERVES OUR NATIONAL INTERESTS INSTEAD OF THEIR OWN INTERESTS! We need to remove the cloak of secrecy over the functioning of our governmental agencies, we need to know how our hard earned tax dollars our being spent, we want a responsive government! The foundation of our form of resillient, hopeful Democracy depends on the active participation of all its citizens–of the people, for the people, by the people– and opportunity for all those who work hard and play by the rules. Democrats stand for the principle of OPPORTUNITY FOR ALL not just opportunity for the few.

OPEN, HONEST GOVERNMENT.

OPPORTUNITY.

FUTURE PROSPERITY.

DEMOCRATS.

Go 92!
I agree that the party “brand” is in part a function of the candidates which they put up.
I now have the opportunity to write somewhat about “Team of Rivals”. If I posted a diary, Raybin, who knows more about Lincoln than I have forgotten, would show up and laugh at it. In any event, during the 1860 campaign the “Secession Noise Machine” was trying to make Lincoln out to be more radical than he actually was(for abolishing slavery on the spot and equal rights for blacks). Goodwin writes with great point that if Lincoln said anything on his own behalf, it would be relentlessly compared to his speeches in the public record. So he chose to say nothing and let those speeches speak for him. Of course now presidential candidates are expected to campaign on their own behalf, and TV does not allow you to be represented by a 2-hour speech (or even an article in Foreign Affairs :)) But this strategy shows that “branding” could both help and hurt a candidate. Everyone knew that the Republican Party was against slavery in the territories. However, Goodwin also points out that the Republicans could not be a one-issue party and expect to win. They had to talk about a homestead bill, internal improvements, and traditional Whig themes.
Although the Democrats’ record has been distorted by the Republicans for 40 years, everyone knows what the Democrats are supposed to be for. You can go down the list of issues on which Democrats are trusted more than Republicans. These issues encompass domestic themes and themes of caring. What is missing is the notion that Democrats trust the people to know that the constitutional balance is wrong and they will not surrender until it is fixed. The Democrats cannot leave “steadfastness” and “resolve” to Bush or the Republicans.
“Protect America, as it should be?” Something like that.

I like 253 and 254.

I think part of it is that we Dems tend to move on after something is completed and the Goopers are able to do “backwards/after the fact” framing. As witness:

“the election of 94 was won by the Goopers because of the Contract” or
“Saigon falling was becuz Dems lost the war” or
“Ray-guns beat the Soviets in the Cold War” or more currently
“Clenis was distracted from going after Bin Laden becuz of Monica I”.

HE WHO CONTROLS THE PAST CONTROLS THE FUTURE??

Well, actually the Dems do have a marketing plan and it’s – “Republicans are playas, we can be playas too, everybody long and throw a hail mary pass down the middle”.

rwcole @ 252

Kathleen

Do they have a good reason?

Yeah- they didn’t have the votes to insist on a withdrawal schedule and if they had cut the funding they think that they would lose congress in 08 because of the attack the goopers and the Pentagon would jointly subject em to.

Don’t know if they are right- but that’s what they think.

But they did not cut the funding; they sent a “perfectly good” funding bill to POTUS and he took it upon himself to veto it. And THAT is when the Dems ought to have been able to present themselves as the sensible adults and POTUS as the spoiled youngster. And the “spoiled kid” image ought to have resonated with even 28%-ers.

The Dems in Congress need to take this as their summer homework: “How do we win the public relations contest (which currently frightens us) when we defy POTUS? Because unless we gain confidence that that can be done, we never will defy this POTUS … or the next one or the next one and we will have become The Supreme Soviet or the Duma.”

I like the
Of the people, for the people, by the people.
With reminders of why the Dems are that and the Reps are not.
Not only a good motto, but a good scoring mechanism.
GWB is not of, for or by me
Rudeee ” “
Dennis Kucinich is all three
Edwards and Gore are 2 out of three.
Clinton – 1 for three , maybe

I like 253 and 254 as well, but they’re campaign-type speeches and slogans, not a brand.

Geez, do only Republicans take Marketing classes?

4jkb4ia hit on it in 255 – Democrats cannot leave “steadfastness” and “resolve” to Bush or the Republicans. In that sentence, “steadfastness” and “resolve” are part of the GOP brand. Not because they appear in slogans, though they might, but because they are repeated words and themes that pervade everything BushCo does. They don’t say to themselves, “Did we put in the slogan?”, they say “Does everything about this appearance give the impression of steadfast resolve?” It’s the speech, the podium, the backdrop, the venue…

Security. ;)

btw – nice to see vitality in a thread so deep in EPU land

carefulwiththatAXEeugene @ 257

HE WHO CONTROLS THE PAST CONTROLS THE FUTURE??

No question about it — We see the past changing every day…Just recently the country’s first quarter GDP was revised so far down as to be barely positive. I believe the headline was “Economy almost stalled in first quarter.” This is the way we are controlled — lie at the moment, revise when it is too late to matter. If the future seems alot like an extension of the past…it is! Now that Congressional oversight is gaining traction, oh my how the past will be re-written. That is the point where the future becomes ours as well. It is nigh.

Thanks to Firepups everywhere, we’re back!

Something bart at http://www.bartcop.com has been saying for some time. He has been very critical of John Kerry’s complex answers to simple questions. Something Al Gore was guilty of in 2000.
It’s not that the public is stupid, more that they are ignorant thanks to the old media and pressed for time.

Twisted Martini @ 10

Their brand is “not the Republicans” which can only go so far. To me it should be something like “common sense solutions to complex problems.” Everybody know the stroy about all the disparate groups that make up the Democrats and how hard they are to bring together. To me, that is a cop-out; we just need to work harder in creating a storyline that the other things can be hung off of.

Real solutions to real people’s problems.

Complexity is threatening. But the idea of directing government to the problems of ordinary people is good.

I’m no Hillary fan, but “shared prosperity” is a good line too. Liberty, opportunity and justice for all is ok too.

(Opportunity for all sells much better than equality.)

Has no one actually read the book Wizard’s First Rule except me? Because in the book, the rule actually is “people are stupid.” Hence the use of the phrase above. It was a bestseller in SFF — figured more folks than just me would have picked it up at some point. Next time — I’ll be more clear on the origin of phrasing like that instead of thinking that folks would be familiar with it.

Shooting fish in a barrel:

It’s teh Country, stoopid.

Vote Democratic to restore our planet and our children’s future.

Vote Democratic to restore our Constitutional rights and the American middle class.

Vote Democratic to bring some sanity, accountability, and balance back to our government.

An economy that works for everyone.

Christy Hardin Smith @ 266

Has no one actually read the book Wizard’s First Rule except me? Because in the book, the rule actually is “people are stupid.” Hence the use of the phrase above. It was a bestseller in SFF — figured more folks than just me would have picked it up at some point. Next time — I’ll be more clear on the origin of phrasing like that instead of thinking that folks would be familiar with it.

I haven’t. Fantasy/science fiction would be the one genre I read other than nonfiction. Nonfiction usually takes precedent. I’ll check it out because I’m curious.

If that’s the first rule – people are stupid – then I would still ask, uneducated? Lazy? Stupidity indicates some kind of inherent unwillingness or a natural quality to not be able to learn, create, explore, whatever, anything different than what’s placed in front of them or given (presented) to them. I certainly have no problem thinking people can be willingly or willfully stupid.

Like Mommy brain above, my $.02 without having time to read all of the comments. Company dinner coming up.
You are missing the point — at least those of you complaining that Dems are using Rethugs talking points. They’re all the Dems have. They don’t have any talking points, they no longer have a base that they recognize. The party needs to be upended for awhile.
For my money, the people are not stupid. They are way ahead of their leaders. Not good.

Probably EPU’d (you guys are so tough to keep up with!), and I apologize if this counts as blogwhoring, but Christy’s question required a longer answer than I dared to post here. So I used my time to post it on my blog. Any who are interested, can click through my handle.

Again, I respectfully apologize for any perceived self-promotion, as I am not in the habit of doing that.

Okay, from teh “Meetings: Best Practices” seminars I’ve attended, we need to sum it up.

Here’s what I’ve got:

DEMOCRATIC BRAND ATTRIBUTES
Inclusive (”of the people…”; “Community”; “…work for everyone”; “…general welfare”)
Competence (”Common Sense”; “Solutions to complex problems”; “Government working for us”; “Return on investment”; “Potholes”; “Fiscal responsibility”; “Reason…”)
Constructive (”Building…”; “Making America Work…”; “Solving problems”)
Hopeful (”Hope”; “…of the Future”; “Green economy”; “Opportunity”; “Restore the planet”; “…children’s future”)
Security (”Police”; “National Security”; “Protect America”)
Old-school Patriotic (”Liberty”; “Fair elections…”; “Re-light the beacon”; “Open government”)

What do people think of those?

Christy — likely you’re right, most of us have not read Wizard’s First Rule. But perhaps many of us have heard these lines:

Lewis Rothschild: You have a deeper love of this country than any man I’ve ever known. And I want to know what it says to you that in the past seven weeks, 59% of Americans have begun to question your patriotism.

President Andrew Shepherd: Look, if the people want to listen to-…

Lewis Rothschild: They don’t have a choice! Bob Rumson is the only one doing the talking! People want leadership, Mr. President, and in the absence of genuine leadership, they’ll listen to anyone who steps up to the microphone. They want leadership. They’re so thirsty for it they’ll crawl through the desert toward a mirage, and when they discover there’s no water, they’ll drink the sand.

President Andrew Shepherd: Lewis, we’ve had presidents who were beloved, who couldn’t find a coherent sentence with two hands and a flashlight. People don’t drink the sand because they’re thirsty. They drink the sand because they don’t know the difference.

Emphasis mine.

This sound pretty accurate to me — but why is it the American people “don’t know the difference”?

Their media tells them only one side of the story, ad nauseum. Sure, the public could do a better job of validating this (and spend less time on freaking reality shows and American Idol), but what if the entirety of American culture reinforces NOT spending the time to validate anything? I look at my spouse, an educated man who should know better, and I see somebody running on the treadmill as hard as he can every day, all day long, and finally having to rely on arguments with me to round out those 30-second snippets he gets for news. What if people like my spouse don’t have someone like me, and spend their lives running so damned hard to pay the bills, take care of their kids, keep body and soul together and never hear the truth?

I think this is where we have to work simultaneously on multiple fronts, one of which is restoring fairness to broadcast media. We have to find ways to protect workers so that they don’t end up having to work multiple dead-end, crappy paying jobs with little down time (and I believe FDL does a great job chipping away at this, particularly with Tula’s posts). And we have to continue to build a brand that is so solid it cannot be hacked apart by the opposition.

Of course, what will also help is upending the misconception that Republicans can govern — and again, FDL does a damned fine job of this, although the Republicans have done an awful lot of heavy lifting what with screwing up every thing they’ve touched.

Maybe what’s missing is a comprehensive, easily digested road map, not unlike the 50-State Strategy. Something asymmetrical, too, that can’t be readily undermined by the wingers, not unlike Al Gore’s non-traditional campaign.

(p.s. and I’ll be adding Wizard’s First Rule to my reading list, thanks.)

guys, most important rule : KEEP IT SIMPLE. the message needs to be non-specific, but powerful.
like :

” YOU are the people. “

ths brand includes : a) don’t be sheep, b) pro-union, c) pro little-guy, d) less secretiveness, etc…

Happy EPU’ers!

I just saw this linked at Buzzflash and thought that “HOPE” is a biggie I would never associate with a ‘puke. Never.

http://pundits.thehill.com/200…..-optimism/

leinie @ 83

…
Rayne, talking about JFK, and hope – it wasn’t JFK who turned me into the liberal I am today. It was Robert Kennedy – that man of privilege who saw poverty and injustice as the MORAL issues they are, and wanted to end them.

… Because we’re only as strong as the weakest among us?

We have to find a way to remind this country how great it is. We need another “go to the moon”,…

We need leadership.

Gotta go read some RFK speeches.

I believe RFK, whether through accident or plan, formed a natural bridge between the Civil Rights Movement, which hadn’t come close to completing it’s work, to the next major Democratic Party movement in the area of Economics and Commerce. And, I think Jimmy Carter did a fair job of taking up that motion.

But, today, despite the very real need to continue in that direction, we need to solve a lot of different problems. There’s the war, of course. There’s Global Warming, no small thing as our very existence is involved. There’s medicine and our dramatically shifting demographics. There’s World relations and trade. There is, with Bush in power, the very existence and practice of our nation’s Constitution.

We have to make America work for everyone and there’s a lot to do. It might not look like a moral or Liberal crusade, but there’s probably a large majority in America who would favor fixing this larger set of problems.

What’s the common denominator? What’s the slogan? Well, as said above, it sure isn’t “Together we can do better!” Nope, that isn’t it.

Fix the election system.
Get rid of Bush&Co.
Take government.
Solve problems.

Don’t be afraid of working with willing Repubs to make progress. Don’t make the perfect the enemy of the good.

wgg: tokin lib’rul @ 123

…Gore Vidal: The US is governed by the Party of Property, which has two Right wings, a Right Wing and a FAR-Right Wing.

Vidal wrote well, with appropriate snarkiness, but he didn’t have all the answers. Sure, Americans of all stripes love their property. And, a small number have a lot more of it.

But, if we elect people to the right of Vidal it’s because Americans ARE to the right of Vidal. That doesn’t mean we’re all evil or stupid. It means Vidal was out of step with Americans. Perhaps it was because he lived in Italy a very long time.

Where I would agree with him is that even our Left tends to respond too narrowly to the interests of the very wealthy. If we would work for a nation where everyone benefits with at least opportunity, then it would be much harder for anyone to differ.

Dismissing Bush as an aberration, we certainly can’t afford to move further to the Right. Clinton or a Nixon (soley in terms of governance), IMO, is as far to the right as we should ever go. But, we can’t afford to move too far to the left either. We must remain true to our core American beliefs in Liberty, Freedom of Religious Belief and Practice, Freedom of Thought and Speech and (more recently learned) the Right to Privacy. [ I may be overlooking one or two. ] In short, we want to be Free and Safe and Prosperous.

In early days the Free was focused on rather a lot. Later, Safe and Prosperous grew in our minds. Of late (1950s-), Republicans have been focusing on renewing our fears, so we’ll be unable to apply Liberal ideas to the Prosperity issue. Instead they want us to relive the Civil War, World War II and the Cold War. Perhaps it’s partly sentimentality, but I think it’s a calculated tactic to distract us with Fear.

I think FDR introduced some amazing economic ideas during a time of great fear and he succeeded. But, I don’t think that was a concerted plan based on Idealism. It was just forced motion during a crisis. Of course, today you’d never catch even a Republican arguing that government should never do anything to interfere in or to help business in America. Instead, it’s their bread and butter.

Today we understand the Values discussion much better and we know the general direction we want to move. What we have to decide on, and this can probably only be decided in the framework of a political campaign and in Congress, is the specific tactics or techniques to use. I don’t believe any of us believes our current economy, however successful in toto, is the answer. It’s just a great start. We need to recall JFK’s argument that America is great in large part because the rising tide lifts all boats. We should recall that and the great speeches RFK made as inspiration. Then we can recall it was Carter who deregulated the trucking, airlines and communications industries and it was Clinton who got the budgets balanced again during the biggest Wall Street bull market in history. We can move in the right direction if we can gain the political power. We just need to remind people what we want to do and why.

RWCole at 235; thanks.

But I don’t believe they HAVE to do a lot.

In fact, what CAN they do that won’t be releasing bush and the GOP’s balls from the bench vise, and inserting their own?

Because EVERY single time we bashe them, for not waving the magic wand, we are saying:

“I believe that the result of pulling the troops out will be so inconsequential; even beneficial (for shit’s sake!) that Pelosi and Co. can do it by themselves, and then, “X” number of months later, receive the grateful plaudits of the voters, who will be totally uninfluenced by:

A: The exponential jump in the mayhem…

B: A “blame-assignment” campaign by Rove, etc, that would give Joseph Goebbels a hard-on that a cat couldn’t scratch.

I swear to you, if the funding plug IS pulled, and the only fingerprints on it belong to Pelosi and the dems, it will be worth at LEAST 20 percentage points to the republicans in the 2008 election.

We can call that “cynicism” or playing the blame game, or anything we want, but it’s also the stone fucking truth.

We don’t have a veto-proof majority. We’re not part of the party that drank the damn koolaid like it was their mother’s milk.

WE DIDN’T CREATE THIS HAMALAYAN SIZED FUCKUP OF A MOUNTAIN, made up of blood, bullshit, and bodyparts.

George Bush and the republicans did that. Yet for some reason, we are, collectively, screaming at the democrats as if THEY had paid Ahmed Chalabi $40 million dollars to let THEM give him a blowjob, instead of the GOP.

Arrrrghhh…

Haven’t read the full thread,but want to make two points.
(1) By definition, approximately half the people are less intelligent than half the people.
(2) Go back to the very basics, and pretend you’re writing a new Declaration of Independence, a renewed pledge of allegiance. I suggest looking at a Declaration of Expectations.

the only way to circumvent the repug blather machine is to *directly* stick the Iraq war to the GOP. possible direct connection : follow the money. find war profiteers / party donors, expose direct-to-customer by doing ads in local newspapers etc.

Some branding is already lying around ready to use. Why re-invent what’s already worked?

Clinton got a ton of mileage out of identifying us as the party for people who “work hard and play by the rules”. We’ve just had eight years of governance by those who not only have zero respect for people who work hard and play by the rules – but who sat on their lazy behinds while an American city drowned, who make up the rules to suit them as they go along when they aren’t busy breaking every rule in sight.

So resurrect Clinton’s formulation.

Or go back further, to Ben Franklin. We’re the party of “We must all hang together, or assuredly we will hang separately.” (I’d go further and say, “We must all hang the party that’s devoted itself to hanging us separately,” but then I’m among the 35% paying attention.)

And if we’re going to resurrect FDR, of which I am all in favor, let’s truthfully say that Republican governance has been stacking the deck against ordinary Americans for thirty years. To unstack it, we need a Re-deal.

Finally, part of harking back to FDR should be a matter of taking a leaf from Ronald Reagan’s book. He surrounded himself with FDR imagery in order to appear more progressive and bi-partisan than he was. That was a trick, but we can legitimately claim to be the proper heirs of both Lincoln and TR, whose ideals have been abandoned and pilloried as the Republican party got hijacked.

People. Listen.
I have a lot to say about this but I am afraid I am too tired to make sense.
It seems that there have been a lot of Democratic operatives, political people who went to work for corporations, for PR firms and for lobbying shops. We are always ever again horrified at Mike McCurry and the rest of them working for AT&T to destroy our democracy. A lot has been written recently on the Hillary pollster Penn and his strong corporate ties in PR.
And that is why we don’t trust them, and that is why we are right not to trust them. I want to say that this change in sides on their part has perhaps been gradual. It may be that the corporations have always been as corrupt as they are today, and as against us — by which I mean — as against the free exercise of democracy in America — as they are today.
But on another plane it seems that the situation has intensified by lightyears in the past six years of Bushite rule, because there has been no oversight, no critical press, no voice for Democratic values in the media, and etc.
And so the PR effort on the part of corporations with anti-Democratic values has been an unqualified, wild success for these people.
What I want to say now is that we can invite our people to come back. We can invite the Democrats to come back to our side, and to work side by side with us to save democracy instead of destroying it.
In the names of corporations and for big salaries they have invented these atrocities–
push polling, astro-turfing, fake consumer oraganizations, 15 percent commission off of huge network TV boilerplate advertising.
I want us to ask these people to come back and work with us, side by side, to use all their lobbying and PR skills, placing real stories instead of faking the news. I want to ask them to start using their media skills to save and to renew Democracy. I want to say, take a year or two off of your big salaries, and go to work with us to create meaningful health care reform, the kind of reform that will save manufacturing industries like GM, and will save people’s lives. Single payer universal health care.
I want them to join us in overseeing the drug industry and forcing them to cut their profit margines, and lower their costs to the government, I want them to join us in cleaning up the environment, in blowing the cover on the rape of the earth by Chevron and Exxon Mobil.
Let’s ask them to come back, and get honest again about Democratic values. Maybe some will be ready to take us seriously.