Mind Melt
This is fascinating. “Democrats are losing the battle for voters’ hearts because the party’s message lacks emotional appeal.” I thought it was because the party’s message was essentially made up of unappealing emotionalism. Things like “Surrender Now!” and “Your Money, Their Pockets” and “White Males Repent.”* But apparently it’s got more to do a failure to engage the amygdalae of the electorate. The Hill:
Democrats are losing the battle for voters’ hearts because the party’s message lacks emotional appeal, according to a widely circulated critique of House Democratic communications strategy.
“Our message sounds like an audit report on defense logistics,” wrote Dave Helfert, a former Appropriations spokesman who now works for Rep. Neil Abercrombie (D-Hawaii). “Why are we defending [the State Children’s Health Insurance Program] instead of advocating a ‘Healthy Kids’ plan?”
Helfert sent the memo this week to an e-mail list of all Democratic press secretaries and communications directors after staffers met on Monday to discuss rolling out the Democrats’ latest message.
He said the meeting left him cold because it focused on what polling shows voters want rather than how to present persuasive messages. Republicans have done a better job by developing poll data into focus group-tested messages like “culture of life” and “defending marriage,” along with attacks like “cut and run” and “plan for surrender” in Iraq, he argued.
… another Democratic aide said Helfert’s memo reflects the frustration of many of those with a role in getting the message out. Several hundred of them assembled for Monday’s meeting in the Ways and Means Committee room.
“I don’t agree with every point he’s making, but the sentiment of exasperation I totally agree with,” said the aide.
As a case in point, he cited Democrats’ frustration over the likely showdown with President Bush over supplemental spending for the Iraq war. Democrats are discussing not sending a supplemental spending bill to the floor until Bush changes course on the war. But that makes many Democrats nervous that Bush will use the tactic to say Democrats aren’t supporting the troops.
“Are we any more prepared to deal with the threats that are going to come about cutting off funds to the troops?” asked the aide.
But he also noted that the number of the memo’s readers might have been limited by the fact that the memo was a long attachment, which makes it less likely to be read by BlackBerry-wielding aides.
Republicans were amused. Brian Kennedy, spokesman for House Minority Leader John Boehner (R-Ohio), said, “House GOP communicators would take his remarks as a compliment.”
No kidding. Helfert credits Republicans with exercising a form of chemical thought control.
His memo is sharply critical of Republican policies but also suggests a neurological explanation for Republican message success: By using emotional appeals and warning of dire threats, Republicans can trigger neurons called “amygdalae” in the temporal lobe, which is the seat of the “fight or flight” response in the brain.
Muahaha! Evil Republicans have mastered the long-sought ability to control people’s brains, while Democrats are still trying to figure out how to count votes: “216 … 217 … 218 … 218 … what the heck, let’s try it again anyway!”
Michelle Malkin: “We Must Stimulate The Amygdalae!”
CQ: “They just don’t tickle the Amygdalae.” Not since the Clinton administration, anyway, Crit would add. Says the Captain, “Yes, and I can see why a treatise on the amygdalae would help get Democrats to sound less wonky.”
* OK, that’s not exactly what they said, but lacking evidence of any further substance to their positions, I’m afraid that’s pretty much what we’re left with. If fairness, there is some nuance to the above messages: “War, Harder Than We Thought,” ”Because It Makes Us Feel Better About Ourselves,” and “Blaming You Is Easier.”
Topics: pols
Posted by Jules Crittenden at 11:01 am on Friday, October 26, 2007
14 Responses to “Mind Melt”
Leave a Reply
Trackback URLYou must be logged in to post a comment.
October 26th, 2007 at 11:28 am
Cluelessness heaped upon stupidity.
It’s all about a pretty name on a pile of squat with these tards.
October 26th, 2007 at 11:45 am
Apparently the Dhimmicrats are still addicted to mind altering drugs.
October 26th, 2007 at 11:58 am
By using emotional appeals and warning of dire threats, Republicans can trigger neurons called “amygdalae” in the temporal lobe, which is the seat of the “fight or flight” response in the brain.
Good lord, just a few days I was reading about the Amygdala response and that lawyers may soon be arguing that a client wasn’t responsible for the (mayhem) because his Amygdala took over.
It’s the: My brain made me do it>/i> dee-fense.
As common sense continues its demise and the culture continues its downward spiral into a burning ring of fire.
October 26th, 2007 at 1:53 pm
“Why are we defending [the State Children’s Health Insurance Program] instead of advocating a ‘Healthy Kids’ plan?”
Could this question be any more condescending toward the public? And this exactly why the Democrats are losing.
October 26th, 2007 at 2:09 pm
It must be Rovian mind control, because people just naturally desire elite redistribution policies, cradle to grave welfare, class warfare and semi annual terror attacks just to remind us why they hate us.
October 26th, 2007 at 2:26 pm
From bumper stickers to amygdalae: Democrats try to figure out voters
Last year I blogged about the Democrats’ attempts at getting to know voters by checking out the bumper stickers on the back of their cars. It would appear that their strategy has shifted to an examination of neurons:
Democrats are losing the ba…
October 26th, 2007 at 4:34 pm
Boy, am I glad that you guys are reading what the progs write so I don’t have to. My logical imbalance overload receptors were severely damaged the last time I tried it. I now have a decided list to starboard because of the attempt.
October 26th, 2007 at 4:47 pm
Ya see, if we just say it isn’t what it is, if we make it sound like a trip to Disneyland, the voters will buy it. Words don’t really have any meaning anyway, so using words that name what we’re doing might needlessly turn people because they don’t realize this. Or something like that. How else would we have gotten away with calling ourselves “realists?”
October 26th, 2007 at 11:36 pm
So do they figure that if they change Hillary’s name from Hillary Clinton to Cate Blanchett all the guys who thought Cate was so hot as Galadriel will vote for Hillary?
The Democrats’ economic policies date from 1932, their foreign policies from 1972, and their defense policies from 1864 (the Copperheads). How about if they think about the problems of the new century and what is happening in the world today, and what we’ve learned over the last few decades (socialism and appeasement don’t work guys; they’ve been tried and the jury has reported: guilty as charged)? The Jackasses need new ideas, but have none. They are reduced to trying to fool all the people all the time.
October 27th, 2007 at 4:51 am
I’m beginning to feel really good about 2008.
October 27th, 2007 at 8:10 am
Exactly my thought, Rebecca. It’s amazing that they are so open about their contempt for us.
October 27th, 2007 at 9:34 am
Wasn’t there some linguistic guru the Democrats were consulting a while back who was making this same point about lavish lipstick application to the pig will bring victory? If I recall correctly, it was about time Al Gore was talked into wearing earth-tone colors to pump up his alpha male quotient.
October 27th, 2007 at 11:08 am
…lavish lipstick application to the pig
A couple of truisms the Left might keep in mind when trying to figure out exactly which post-modernist verbal constructions will “appeal” to the base…(aka “how to pitch it”)
“You can put lipstick on a hog and call it Monique, but it’s still a pig.”
“Don’t piss on my boots and try to tell me it’s raining.”
October 27th, 2007 at 2:34 pm
Banjo:
I remember something about that too. Then there’s the guy who said “He who controls the adjectives wins,” which I do think is true.