Messaging

The republicans have one great ability; to keep their support base on track and without any other options. They have one simple message that is easy to get out and easy to understand. While of course republican politicians have different stances on issues or at least differing degrees of opinions on an issue. However, during the primaries, only one republican voted against the war, and that was Ron Paul. Only 2 candidates supported a pro-choice stance, Ron Paul and Rudy Giulliani. So, on the whole, I think we can agree that the republicans’ stance is easy to understand and static.

It would make sense, then, for the democrats to be the same way on the opposite end of the spectrum. However, the democrats tend to be more divided on issues or just have too many people with a stance on just one different issue, and the two therefore cannot come together on anything. Not to mention, there is generally at least one candidate on the ballot from a third party who has generally liberal views. While this candidate wants his or her outlooks heard, they don’t take into account that the democratic candidate has the same general outlooks, albeit to a different degree or wants to promote them in a different way, but by putting two candidates on the ballot with the same issues splits the vote.

When polled, the majority of Americans’ political views coincide with those of the democrats, but many continue to vote in solidarity with the republicans. Why does this happen? Is it simply because the republicans have managed to come up with a more concise message? George Lakoff seems to think so. His ‘essential guide for progressives’, Don’t Think of an Elephant proclaims that were the democrats to put together a slogan for their campaigns that was simple and catchy, people would be better able to understand the message and the values and stance of the democrats.

Another problem the democrats have is that the republicans originally developed the frame for arguments, and the democrats just have to play into it. For instance, the republicans are pro-life, democrats had to go pro-choice. On paper, pro-choice looks like it is the antithesis of pro-life, which many can skew as pro-death. Were the frame to change to pro-choice versus no-choice, the democratic stance would look stronger. George Lakoff makes a strong bid for a ten word philosophy that would define the democratic ticket, which goes as follows: strong America, broad prosperity, better future, effective government, and mutual responsibility to combat the republican’s strong defense, free markets, lower taxes, smaller government, and family values.

In my opinion, the views of the democrats are the views of the majority of American people. They just need to learn how to articulate their views to the people better. Speaking solely from values, the democrats do have many; they are just hard to see immediately when the democrats have no one word responses. Values get lost in long explanations. The republican views tend to be simpler in consistency, and it is unfortunate that that garners them more support. If all the democrats have to do is make a catchy slogan to attract as much support as the republicans and then some, they will have no problems in the upcoming elections.