The Democratic response to the Republican Pledge to America has been factual about its economics. The September 26, 2010 Sunday New York Times editorial goes through the economic details, and Democrats have been citing the economic facts from the Congressional Budget Office. As Dan Pfeiffer reports on the White House blog, the Republicans are proposing:
Their plan is also notable for what it doesn't talk about: protecting Social Security and Medicare from privatization schemes; investing in high-quality education for our nation's children; growing key industries like clean energy and manufacturing; and rebuilding our crumbling roads, rails and runways.
This is the same agenda that caused the deepest recession since the Great Depression...
The Democrats who have checked out the facts have echoed President Obama's judgment of the Pledge: It's "worthless."
I agree. And if the voting public voted on the basis of the economic details, plus the Democrats' system of values, the Republicans wouldn't have a chance in hell in the November elections.
But the polls show otherwise. What do we conclude? The voting public does not vote on the basis of the economic details, and the voting public does not fully accept the Democrats' system of values as they apply in this election.
I will make a bet. When the new polls come out next week, the Democrats' response to the Republican pledge will not have turned around the Republican lead in the polls.
In short, the Democrats' response to the Republican Pledge may well be irrelevant. Why? And why does the President have such a hard time defending his accomplishments?
Pundits have been looking for a simple answer. But the answer is complex and depends on understanding how the minds and brains of voters work. Here are ten basic principles:
First, all politics is moral. People vote for values they identify with, for what they see as right, not wrong.
Second, the facts alone don't set you free. Facts matter, but they must be understandable, that is, framed for normal human beings, and framed so as to be relevant to the moral views that define a voter's identity.
Third, there are two very different moral views at play in our country's politics. Liberal and conservative moral systems are inconsistent as they apply to most major issues. There is no neutral worldview, no worldview of the "center."
Fourth, there are, however, a significant number of voters --as many as 15 to 20 percent -- who have both worldviews, but may apply them to different issues in all sorts of ways. Some may be conservative on social issues, but liberal on economic issues, or conversely. Some may be "up in the air" -- not sure about given issues. I call these "bi-conceptual" voters. These are the voters who most matter in this election, as in most others.
Five, because people think with their brains, all ideas are physical. They occur in brain circuits called "frames." Bi-conceptual voters exist because inconsistent ideas can exist in the same brain due to what is called "mutual inhibition," in which the activation of one frame inhibits (that is, turns off) the other. The more a conservative frame is activated, the stronger it gets and the weaker the corresponding liberal frame gets. What activates frames? Language.
Sixth, what follows from all this is that liberals should never use conservative language (e.g., "tax relief" and "entitlements") because it activates conservative frames and weakens their own case. Liberals should not "move to the right" and adopt conservative positions since that will only make bi-conceptuals more likely to vote conservative. The reason is that conservative language and ideas just strengthen the conservative circuitry in their brains and weakens their liberal brain-circuitry.
Moreover, when you negate a frame, you strengthen it. When a liberal argues point by point against a conservative argument, he or she is repeating the conservative argument and hence strengthening its hold on the brain.
Seventh, in political discourse, numbers in themselves are meaningless. They can be made meaningful only in everyday terms and in moral terms. In themselves, numbers from the Congressional Budget Office don't mean much to most people. The facts alone, not properly framed, won't be convincing. This means avoiding policy-wonk talk, the kind of talk the Obama administration has been using nonstop.
Eighth, people tend to adapt their baseline expectations to what they already have. That is why the President gets little appreciation for what he has already accomplished. If he's done it, we take it for granted. People also tend to be risk-averse. That is why conservative attacks on the president and the Democrats can be taken seriously, even if they are not based on hard economic facts. The moral: Always go on offense not defense. Liberal morality means more than just empathy for one's countrymen. It means social and well as personal responsibility and it means excellence -- doing your best as a commitment to family, community and country. And it means framing in terms of such moral views and in terms of risk aversion, not just past accomplishments.
Ninth, there is no reason without emotion. Without emotion, you don't know what to want and what to avoid. Rationality requires the proper emotionality. Reagan knew how to connect emotionally without going into a tirade. So did Obama when he ran for President.
Tenth, repetition matters. The language that people hear most often repeated activates and strengthens the corresponding frames in their brains. Conservatives are better at marketing their ideas. They are better at framing, because they understand the primacy of morality, how their moral system works, and how to talk to bi-conceptuals. They have a much more extensive communication system, built over three decades, with think tanks, training institutes, recruited speakers, owned media, and booking agencies -- in addition to ads and bloggers. Their messages are affecting the brains of voters 24/7, every day in every electoral district.
We can now see why the Democrats have been failing in their communications. Their message system is inadequate. They need to build it up significantly, starting as soon as possible. They need to find and address bi-conceptuals. They need to speak from their own moral perspective. They need to connect emotionally with voters. The need to stop trying to be bi-partisan; that just helps Republicans, who know enough not to be bipartisan in the current electoral situation. And they need to understand how language activates frames in the brain.
The Democratic strategy so far has been to see each race as separate, with no overall Democratic vision. Bill Clinton sees this as a mistake and I agree. The Republicans have presented a vision, whatever one thinks of the detailed proposals. The NY Times editorial pooh-poohs the pledge's "breathless mimicry of the Declaration of Independence." But that is most of what their audience will read, not the 48 pages of proposals.
In his campaign, Barack Obama articulated beautifully the Democratic moral vision of America. America is based on citizens caring about, and for, each other. The values of empathy, social as well as personal responsibility, and an ethic of excellence lead to a government of, by, and for the people, with values like freedom and fairness, and a governmental responsibility to protect and empower the people. That is a Democratic view of America. It calls on Americans to come together in difficult times, and it characterizes the party's, as well as the President's, moral compass.
Finally, Democrats also need to understand what framing is and isn't. Framing is normal. You activate frames with every word you speak. Careful framing is needed to communicate effectively -- to get your values across and to get the facts out to voters in language they can understand at an appropriate level and appreciate morally. Can framing be used to manipulate and deceive? Yes, by unscrupulous people. Can framing be used to express our deepest values and to tell our most important truths? Definitely! There's no other way. If you use language, you cannot avoid framing. What matters is how you do it.
The usual pundits keep asking what's wrong with the Democrats' communication. As we have seen, it isn't one simple thing. It's complicated. But it all centers on understanding how the mind and brain really work.
Many Democrats work with a major disadvantage: They tend to have an inadequate view of human reason. Human brains work via frames, metaphors, images, emotions, stereotypes and narratives, all of which have their own "logics." Brains work by adjustment of baseline expectations upward in response to improvements, and by risk aversion. And brains use mutual inhibition, which allows them to hold contradictory moral views at once and apply them to different cases.
Every social science program in America should include a required course on how the cognitive and brain sciences shed crucial light on political and social issues. We cannot afford another generation of social scientists who don't understand how the brain works, and why that matters.
Robert Reich: Republican Economics as Social Darwinism
Drew Westen: The Two Stories of the Election of 2010: A Biopsy Before the Autopsy
Andy Ostroy: The Republican Tea Party's Real "Pledge to America"
Leo W. Gerard: Republican Pledge: A Rotten Egg for the Middle Class
We have become a society of the soundbite.
THEY CAN'T CARRY THE MESSAGE !
We can't even stay on top of it. We are always just playing defense, and damage control.
We are forever just trying to set the record straight. We are so bad at it that I tend to
drift into the conspiracy~theory territory and wonder if it’s intentional. Because letting
the opposition control the narrative, we are dying a de@th of 1,000 cuts, except it is
1,000 lies, 1,000 miss~representations, 1,000 miss~charactizations and so on.
When ludicrous ideas such as Obama's citizenship and "de@th panels" are remotely considered
even by the smallest of margin much less brought out as relevant subjects by the media,
then it is obvious who controls and carries the message.
When people vote, organize and rally against their own interest, future and well being
then it is obvious whose message got to them first and was drilled in.
Now think about the opposition. Even when they commit the biggest costliest, in people’s
lives and country's wealth, blunders based on lies and jingoism, they make the biggest show
and fanfare about how great an accomplishment it was and how thankful we should be. Thus
you get "Mission Accomplished" in an air-craft-carrier with a sunset in the background.
(continued)
on the other hand, because not controlling the narrative or just total lack of
it, we have to compromise to water~down, strip~down policies that leaves us
dissatisfied and just opens up more room for criticism.
Because not having a voice, the outright sale of our Government to the highest
bidder, the de@th toll to democracy, dealt by the Supreme Court has produced
scant comments instead of being shouted from every roof, being in the news 27x7,
and causing riots in the streets.
We have to think of how to change this and push the DNC and the party to do so,
because unless we do, we are going to lose the battle and will have to settle
for a simulacrum of democracy and 3rd world country.
I wish I had the money to send you to Washington and conduct intensive seminars
that our representatives should be force to attend or else leave office.
"The words and visuals you use are more important than ever in determining whether you win or lose at the ballot box, the checkout line, and the court of public opinion. We know the words that work. Do you?"
-Frank Luntz
http://www.theworddoctors.com/
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Frank Luntz has been an advisor to the GOP for many years now. His memos go out routinely to help the GOP "frame" a current event or an argument against the opposition party.
Additionally, the GOP put their young operatives and their candidates through extensive training and there is no doubt they are very effective.
The average voter does not pay attention. They only know what they've heard in the 9 second sound bite. If you haven't sold it in 9 seconds it fails.
Also, voters only know what they hear repeated over and over. The GOP have been consistently good at using identical language recommended by the Word Doctor. Over and over, you hear every GOP pol and strategist on every air wave and in every type of media outlet using the same language, while the dems are using their individual explanations. Voters will remember only what they've heard repeatedly.
Another effective tactic used by the GOP is how they use the daily memo to insert that language into each and every question and in each and every appearance. I think this is what their earlier training is for, how to memorize the message and how to insert it into every interview. It's called staying on message.
The dems are terribly deficient in framing their message and there is no longer any excuse for their lack of cohesiveness. It's going to cost this country dearly.
Wasn't Gingrich that pounded staying on message mantra to the GOPers?
The democrats don't seem to have the same discipline, or maybe its just that they don't have Faux News on their side.
Republicans are very good at delivering a simple message, quick to deliver and repeat and that people can grasp (whether or not it is true or even makes sense).
Democrats are far to "educated" in their responses - they need to be able to deliver a simple message, have Liberals stay on-point and hit the same message again and again.
Because being certain is better than being right.
I read you with interest. I'm a linguist of sorts with an interest in the limbic system, or what used to be called the limbic system. I appreciate your work with framing, which seems related.
But this concern with communication seems to be dwarfed by what I see as a lack of credibility in Democrats, who either have a dishonest agenda or a staggering disability to govern.
The hope which Obama communicated all too well has crashed and burned. Wars are proliferating, the nation is being systematically impoverished, social enterprises of law enforcement, education, health care and many more are being trashed in reality.
The rage of the dispossessed, even if poorly aimed, is real, and Democratic majorities in Congress and a Democratic President have done nothing to inspire confidence in the vast majority, who are the non-rich.
Democratic communication is faulty. Democratic governance is a catastrophe.
It's the Secret Formula, and it shouldn't be that hard to deliver!
I've been reading your articles for years and while I think yours is an astute analysis of language and communication, I find your recipe for success based solely around "frames" to be a one note samba -- and in the wrong note.
Sorry to say this, but your view of the "Democratic (Party) vision of America" is incredibly naive. Pundits "keep asking what's wrong with the Democrats' communication" because to ask what's wrong with the Party itself would threaten their cushy positions.
The problem with the Democratic Party is not how it poorly "frames" responses to a given issue and gosh darnit they are trying to do the right thing but simply not communicating it correctly. The problem is how the Democratic Party simply doesn't fight for the little guy. To "frame" the way you advocate requires a desire to be on our side against corporate power in a way they so very clearly aren't, and you can't "frame" what you don't believe.
So, tell them to frame away, but we're looking for deeds, not words. I need to see the Democrats are fighting for me, with passion, before I start supporting them -- even if they lose sometimes. I don't need to see them cleverly use language to "frame" but not change their actions.
The Progressive principles of the Democratic Party are under assault from within and without. From within, under the guise of “modernizing” our principles, they are being watered-down, redefined and hacked up by the DLC, The Third Way, the Centrists, the corporatists (whatever name you want to use).
As Dr. Lakoff points out, progressives believe the first responsibility of government is to PROTECT and EMPOWER its citizens.
However, here's what the DLCers, who are falsely reframing progressive values, running the White House believe:
----
"Unlike many on the left, the Progressive Policy Institute believes the free-market system has generally been a progressive force in our national life. PPI will continue to fight protectionism in all its guises as a barrier to innovation and a formula for economic stagnation."
http://www.progressivefix.com/growth-and-equity
----
The DLC masks what they’re doing by pretending they don’t have a doctrine or ideology, but they do. They pretend what they’re doing is practical, but it’s not. They also attack the importance of framing, while falsely framing what they’re up to.
http://firedoglake.com/2010/08/28/come-saturday-morning-media-priorities-and-the-kochtopus/#comment-2205464
We must defend our progressive principles against the DLC if we are to make any progress with the Democratic Party.
- Tom
Check out http://www.huffingtonpost.com/social/saltpeter/alan-grayson-republicans-dont-join-em-beat-em_n_740983_61873333.html
It's a post by a HuffPost reader commenting on how Alan Grayson uses symbols and marketing instead of abstract ideas to win in a historically republican district.
Grayson is winning lots of fans among progressives by acting differently. Maybe he read your books and actually understood them?
His latest quote is "You Can't Beat A Republican By Being One". Sound familiar?
How about getting one of your graduate students to analyze Grayson's communications to see to what extent they conform to what you're preaching. If they do, then all you'd have to do to convince progressives to do what you're preaching is to tell them to "do what Grayson is doing", and then tell them why it's working.