DU'ers Who Don't Think The GOP Since Reagan Have Excelled At Controlling Public Perception

[KittyWampus]

and framing the debate to their favor are a drag on the Democratic Party and preventing progressive ideals from being implemented.

You can't just have a wonderful group of public policies. A purely rational debate over policies doesn't win people over.

You need to be able to package those policies using symbolism so they appeal to a majority indirectly through their subconscious. Like it or not, getting people behind you to implemente change is largely like advertising for soap.

You can either use symbolism to shape public perception and charge public emotions towards the negative and have fear move the populace towards policies against their own interest.(Example, mention myth of 'Welfare Queen" to appeal to racism).

Or you can use symbolism to engender positive perceptions and emotions and move people toward policies FOR their own interest. (Example, "We have nothing to fear except fear itself").

The Republican party have managed to sell their message to American workers even though their policies HURT those same voters. And because the GOP understands social psychology and the importance of packaging they've been able to implement their policies with few really big failures.

It took the devastation of Katrina to really throw back the curtain on how little GOP policies further the Common Good.

The Democrats, meanwhile, SUCK at framing their message.

We can bitch all we want about how the Liberal (see how successful the GOP have been) Media is really corporate media, but there is no disputing the fact the Left has not engaged in any successful attempts to shape policy by coming up with a workable message.

[LoZoccolo]

1. Recommended. n/t

[yourout]

2. Because they have no conscience and will lie at will while smiling there ass off....

they have been able to get the average under-educated joe to blame all his problems on the "Liberals".

[ananda]

3. Actually, the message is controlled by corporations.

It's the corporations which decide -what- message gets out there.

It wouldn't matter what kind of message Dems, or any particular
Dem has.. if it doesn't align with corporate wishes, it won't be
allowed to take hold.

Look at Dennis Kucinich as an example.

[xchrom]

4. recommend

[Benhurst]

5. The Republicans have the corporate mass media on their side, which makes

it easier for them to frame their message.

The Republicans will continue to have an unfair advantage until the Fairness Doctrine is restored and the monopolies broken up.

[1776Forever]

6. Exactly - Isn't it time to look at what has moved this thought in the Rove world of deceit !!!!!!!

It is vision and using in some cases psychological maneuvers that make the masses agree with these unreasonable and often horrendous moves to the very middle class they are a part of! We need a transformational leader right now! Just as JFK, Roosevelt, and others were in their times. It is time!!!!!!:kick:

[jasmine621]

7. Would you rather have someone in office who might have SOME

influence over corporations or someone who the corporate powers would cream?

[snot]

8. K & R'd --

I agree with your basic point, which is an important one. But according to "The Century of the Self" by Adam Curtis, Bill Clinton took the lesson from Reagan and started using marketing techniques after his presidency's initially rocky start.

It must also be remembered that owning the media gives the Republicans a powerful leg up in shaping the agenda as well as popular perception, whether subliminally or otherwise.

[ladjf]

9. The Republicans have been masters of propaganda for

many years, perhaps dating back to the former Nazi propagandists that were hired by the Republicans during the Nixon administration to help with the writing.

[KittyWampus]

10. yes, propaganda is the black art of persuasion. one can use it for good or ill. Democrats seem to be

ignorant of its very existance and forget how it works or (heaven forbid) using it to our (and the country's) advantage.

[ladjf]

11. This may label me as being very old fashioned but I believe

that if the real "truth" could be known, it would be the very best information to influence people.
I am saying that ultimately, there should be no need to have propaganda, rather, there is a need for people to become educated with regard to the best, objectively obtained information.

When one visits a doctors office for a health check up, they want and expect an accurate diagnosis and effective therapy. In politics, the wise and ethical politician should be doing the same. I am aware that by today's practices, that would not be successful. Why is that? Because propaganda specialists have learned how to obscure the real situation with cascades of phony information, designed for the benefit of whoever is paying for the propaganda.

I don't think that it is a good idea for the Democratic Party to emulate the propaganda successes of the Republican Party. Rather, they will need to develop the ability to tell the truth without losing the elections. No easy task.

[Kurt_and_Hunter]

12. I appreciate that you believe this, but you happen to be wrong

As explained at length by many here, Ronald Reagan has nothing to teach the Democratic party because his political skills were those of division, not unification.

Reagan as unifier is an historical illusion. His "unity" was actually driving a wedge between white voters of moderate education and people of color.

Since the resulting white mass was a big majority, that politics of division is recalled as unifying.

It was not.

[NoBorders]

13. But didn't he nonetheless unify a certain group of people?

What if the group of people to be unified were those who sought greater individual dignity, economic fairness, equality, etc., against the neo-con, corporatist, power-mongers? I would be ok with that kind of 'division'.

[unc70]

17. "Unifying" a majority against minorities is the Reagan way,

but also the Hitler way and the way of every dictator around the world.

I now invoke Godwin's Law against myself. Sorry Mike.

From long experience, I will not support nor condone anyone on "my side" who would denigrate others on "my side" and supposedly also on "their side", in an attempt to gain the support of those who seek to destroy us. Similarly, if a candidate I might otherwise support promotes bigotry of one segment against another segment of our Party, or against our core values, I will use every resource available to expose them and thwart all efforts by them to gain power or influence.

[KittyWampus]

15. how can you be so obtuse? It has to be deliberate. YOU PROVE MY POINT

Reagan got cross-over voters it matters not one whit the results.

THE FACT IS HE AND THE GOP WON.

They got a majority of Americans to vote for them.

Against their own interest. By understanding human psychology and USING it. And it was not all about racism.

Carry on with your wishful thinking. Pretend the GOP haven't been able to kick the Left's ass when it comes to marketing their policies and pols.

But YOU and Du'ers like you are a big part of the problem.

[OneGrassRoot]

20. I don't get it...

Is there truly a "win at any cost" - including extrreeeeeeeme pandering - contingent here at DU?

That's what I'm reading a lot here tonight about this issue. Many posters really don't care HOW they are getting the cross-over votes. What goes around always comes around.

We need to be strong enough to be clear and strong and know we can win with integrity and truthfulness.

Forget about all of the candidates' pasts - this is about the message they are putting forth about NOW. The concern isn't about whether or not they will ACT upon the message (though obviously that's part of the candidate selection process)....the message ITSELF they're conveying is pertinent here.

[Kurt_and_Hunter]

21. It sounds fun to be in a cult, but I don't have the time. Sorry.

Another one ignored.

[DrFunkenstein]

14. That's Why I am So Thrilled With Obama's Ability to Frame The Issues

He has moderates and conservatives nodding their heads at how great progressive policies are.

Bill Clinton was a great speaker, but used triangulation instead of framing. In the course, he allowed "liberal" to become a dirty word (for his own benefit as a "third way" guy, naturally) and tossed out alot of key liberal - let alone progressive - principles.

For all his undeniable talent, I always wished he used it in service of liberalism generally, rather than his own benefit (and to force liberals to defend some of less savory character problems).

[unc70]

16. Reagan convinced many that we were the enemy (those now at DU)

He followed in the tradition from the beginning of this country, to paint his political opponents as not being like the "majority". In his case, his opponents were the progressive Democrats now found at DU. Remember how wonderful it felt when we caused all those problems from the 60's on, when Reagan united the silent majority against us, when we were "they" :

"They" want to destroy America, those long-haired dirty hippies, shiftless n***ers, uppity women, godless commie elites -- they hate America, spit on our soldiers and betry them to our enemies, burn the flag, burn their bras, and they can burn in Hell -- All they ever do is tell us what to do: buckle up, slow down, exercise, wear a sweater, freeze your ass.

Those militant feminists demand that you pay some woman as much as man who has a family to support when we know she will just get pregnant and have to quit her job -- some want to make us re-hire them, let them even nurse their babies, exposing themselves in the office - disgusting -- what next? Pay their hospital bills?

We must unite to protect American from those who say our best years are behind us, those naye-sayers who only want something for nothing, those spoiled whiners, those flower children who refuse to grow up, who think they're above working like the rest off us -- who only want to smoke pot, make love, make babies, and make you pay for it. These pinko deadbeats want to take your rights, your guns, and your money and give it to welfare queens and draq queens.

The time has now come to turn our backs on those who only complain, who see America as defeated, those who riot in our streets, sue for special rights, and seek to destroy our way of life. So it is time to lower our voices for a new day is dawning in America.
A new day, a new way, for a new America. Restoring our traditional values of faith and family, of respect for our institutions, of obeying the law, of personal responsibility and not a handout, of respect in the world backed by superior military strength, and finally, tax cuts for all.


That's how I remember Reagan and his supporters. Now there I go, those were not his words. He communicated much better, with a twinkle, a flourish, a joke, to inspire and to restore hope to his many followers.

Unfortunately, hope was being snatched from millions of others.

[robbedvoter]

18. Well put!

[NYCGirl]

19. Recommended! NT

[HughMoran]

22. Ah Jeez,

[Bread and Circus]

23. /agree 100%

but this type of sound logic is usually countered by:

Amurkins are stupid
STFU FREEP
If people don't want our policies they don't deserve us
Amurkins are sheeple

and other such derogatory, head in the sand, phrases.

[politicasista]

24. K&R

:kick: