The Winning Frame has Emerged

In the wake of John McCain's 'pig' ploy scandal, I wanted to draw attention to a new frame that is taking shape at break neck speed in the debate.

I call this the 'Solve Real Problems' frame and it has the potential to set the stage for Democrats to win the election.

Sometimes, people think of framing in Presidential elections as a tug of war. We set our frame, they set theirs -- whichever side pulls the hardest wins.

In fact, the more accurate metaphor is that of a chess game. Each side sets out to establish a broad, opening frame, but through a series of middle ground debates, the election ultimately arrives at an end frame--a final, compelling way to re-establish one side's opening frame, and which ultimately captures enough people's imagination to win the most votes.

In 2004, we saw this when Bush's 'Ownership Society' emerged as the 'It's Your Money' frame.

'Solve Real Problems' is a pragmatic end frame emerging right now (for a full discussion of 'pragmatism' see the conclusion of Outright Barbarous). If activists recognize it and push it hard, we have the potential to turn the gains in this campaign into an election victory in November.

Opening Frames: 'American Dream' and 'Hope'
The 2008 election started out with multiple competing frames from Democrats and Republicans. The largest opening frames, however, came from the Clinton campaign and the Obama Campaign.

From the start, Clinton set the idea of restoring the 'American Dream,' and idea that was fundamentally economic. During the course of the primary, Clinton arrived at a new way to express her opening frame by talking about 'the invisible.' It was a very convincing idea, particularly as the economy went south. Despite the ideological statements of the Republicans, a majority of Americans felt that the economy had left them behind and that nobody cared about their troubles. The 'American Dream' frame became 'the invisible' and Hillary Clinton won millions of votes as a result.

The Obama campaign offered a different opening frame in the idea of 'Hope.' In many ways, 'Hope' was a much stronger frame than 'American dream' because it spoke to larger questions about the future of the country as a whole. By talking about 'Hope,' Obama was talking about American idealism beyond the mechanics of building family wealth. 'Hope' was also a more forward looking frame because it implicitly acknowledged new challenges that Americans face--such as global warming, conservation, technology, international interdependence, and so forth. The 'American Dream,' was more nostalgic. The problem with 'Hope' as we discovered in the primary, was that it was difficult to re-emphasize in terms of the economy when that became the key issue in the primaries. The middle ground framing of 'more people participating' that was so successful for Obama in Iowa, New Hampshire, and South Carolina, became less successful for his campaign in Pennsylvania. The better frame in idealistic terms, 'Hope' did not readily present a way to ground that idealism in the concrete issues that contingency was forcing into the election.

Obama won the nomination, but the sense coming out of that long contest was that he was left with a very big challenge of finding an economic foundation for his 'hope' frame. And even by the time of the DNC, it did not seem like that new frame had emerged quite yet.

McCain's 'Warrior' becomes 'Culture War'
In the aftermath of the RNC and the firestorm surrounding the nomination of Sarah Palin, the McCain campaign made it clear that they had no real middle ground frame to advance their opening 'warrior statesman' frame that they had unrolled early in the Republican primary.

Instead of unrolling a new frame that re-emphasized some aspect of McCain's militaristic logic, the McCain camp used the RNC to revert back to other Republican framing efforts that sought to frame 'conservative' in terms of 'small town values.' As a result, the McCain campaign went into the RNC pushing a strong militaristic theme, but they emerged pushing most of the old framing associated with the 'culture war.' The theme of 'war' remained, but with Sarah Palin on the ticket, the idea of a military warrior had officially given way to the old concept of a social or cultural warrior.

The key sign that this new middle ground had eroded the gains made by McCain's early framing were obvious. Suddenly, the media was obsessing over topics like Sarah Palin's church, pregnancy and abortion, and book censorship. All of these topics emerged at some point in the pre-convention primary, but they were always overshadowed by the McCain campaign emphasizing 'experience'--by which they meant 'military experience in a time of war.'

The culmination of the RNC framing switch happened this week when the McCain campaign accused Obama of 'sexism.' Many people hear this and they get confused because they think that this kind of attack is similar to late 1980s critiques of sexist language by liberals. In fact, it has nothing to do with that liberal thinking. Calling Barack Obama a 'sexist' was the first attempt by the McCain campaign to re-emphasize their new 'culture war' frame that they set in the RNC.

Right after the accusation of 'sexism,' McCain unleashed an ad accusing Obama of wanting to force young children to learn about sex in school--the familiar 'liberal debauchery' frame used for a decade by right-wing pundits to develop the 'culture war' frame.

'Hope' Becomes 'Solve Real Problems'
What is fascinating about McCain abandoning his initial 'warrior' frame for the older 'culture war' frame is not just the high level of smears and cynicism it introduced into the media, but what new language it sparked in the Obama camp.

Right from the start, the reaction to the 'culture war' framing from McCain was not to fight on the 'culture war' grounds, but (1) to accuse the McCain campaign of telling 'lies,' and (2) to emphasize that the McCain camp was impeding a more important conversation about 'solving real problems.'

Now, in general, the first step did not make much sense on its own in terms of framing for one Presidential campaign to accuse another Presidential campaign of telling 'lies.' To take that route is not really framing so much as announcing that there is a campaign (e.g., it's like saying 'I disagree with my opponent's campaign against me.'). But, when connected to the second step, it did make sense. By defining the McCain 'culture war' attacks as 'lies,' the Obama camp deflected those points and stepped immediately into the act of re-stating their opening 'hope' frame in new terms germane to the moment: 'solve real problems'

In one sense, 'solve real problems' is just old fashioned American pragmatism. In a much more profound sense, however, 'solve real problems' is a restating of the initial themes of the Obama campaign, but in quantitative, rather than qualitative terms.

Keep in mind that one of the initial themes of the Obama campaign is the transcendence of party allegiance in favor of facing solutions that we all face--a basic 'unity' frame. Also keep in mind that one of the obstacles the Obama camp faced after the Democratic primary was an inability to connect with voters primarily concerned with economic issues--primarily taxes.

Suddenly, following a week of relentless 'culture war' attacks form the McCain campaign, the entire media is shifting to a new line of discussion: the idea that these attacks from the McCain campaign impede the pragmatic conversation about getting things done.

Conclusion: Pragmatism is a Fundamentally American Idiom
As for the McCain campaign, having invested 100% of his framing in the old 'culture war' concept--particularly by his nomination of Sarah Palin--McCain has embraced ideological attacks over pragmatic problem solving. And from now until November, if McCain continues to re-emphasize the 'culture war' frame, by the debates the electorate will be so tired of squabbling over cultural issues that they will be clamoring for discussion of 'real' problems and 'real' concerns.

What I emphasize in the conclusion of Outright Barbarous, and what I also see in this phase of the 2008 Presidential election is a re-voicing of 'pragmatism' as a central concern amongst American voters. Pragmatism--a desire to understand and 'solve real problems'--is always present in the minds of Americans, but it quickly gets buried by violent and salacious rhetoric in the debate. Now that pragmatism is upon us again, and Democrats would be smart to see it, and really run with it from now until November. 'Solve real problems' is not just a theme du jour in the media. It is the core America worldview and the full realization of the early framing of the Obama campaign. It is the rhetorical path to victory for Democrats in November.

Follow Jeffrey Feldman on Twitter: www.twitter.com/JeffreyFeldman

Comments

[Ofactor]

I think this is very interesting and makes a lot of sense. I agee that MCCain seems to only have the old style of polotics in mind. It seems that they have not added any new plays to the play book, at some point you would thik they should know that. Duh? even my sons pop warner team knows to switch up the plays, take some of the old ones out, and put in some new plays... so the team will not know what route we are running. What happened to all Carl Roves brilliance on this one? Americans are tired of that same old play book, and all of us are not sleeping this time around.

The sad part is that they thought that they could just continue to do this to us year after year after year... I beleive that the truth is far more powerful then the lies, and if the intent of the one carrying the truth is good...... then he will not be able to be stopped!!!!! I DO BY THE WAY BELEIVE IN OBAMA'S INTENTIONS!!!!

[jacqmac]

IT's NOT ABOUT HIM--It's about YOU, and ME, and everybody else in AMERICA. Small towns are NOT isolated pockets of 'Americana' anymore. 'Small towns' don't exist in a vacuum. That 'rural' image isn't about Ma and Pa Kettle buyin' new seed anymore. It's about trying to keep the FARM. It's not just a one church town. It may be SMALL in population. 5,000 compared to 2-3 million, but it's got a whole range of 'characters' and I'm NOT talking Mayberry either. WE have this idyllic image in our minds. The 21st century is happening EVERYWHERE and that's where Obama's strength lies. HE'S KNOWN THIS FOR YEARS!
It's nice to be nostalgic and to know about some things that our kids and grandkids think are 'weird'. But we're not in that little isolated 'small town' any more. That's what the Neo-Cons use to SCARE people with. Fear of the NEW, the STRANGE, the DIFFERENT, the 'Elitist', the OUTSIDER.
Obama/Biden have been TRYING HARD to offer the solutions. Unfortunately, WE get distracted by those 'shiny objects' thrown at us by the Media's attention to every detail. Analysis that borders on mind-reading. Creation of 'drama' where none exists. I STILL believe that the Obama-Clinton feud after the Primaries was 75% manufactured and 25% real, straight through the Convention and beyond. Small town-Big City. We ALL have brains. We can ALL THINK!

[karronna]

I agree with the Liars approach at least for awhile. It seems to me to be effective and allows for strong righteous indignation.

I also loved the lipstick on a pig approach - personally. Regardless of the origins or intent...h­ow can we ever hear her pit bull line and not have the other line in our head now.

Very effective.

[jacqmac]

But who is supposed to RESPOND to those lies? That's the trouble with any single approach-keeps on getting us away from the ISSUES and on to tangents. I've seen it happen at least TWICE from the 'other' side. A tangent is a 'rant'. Then what? There's still a problem. It's still not being addressed. A tangent isn't a solution. It's just righteous indignation. And--We're ALL TRYING TO SECOND GUESS A CANDIDATE WE SAY WE BELIEVE FIT TO DETERMINE THE COURSE OF THE NATION. '"To everything there is a season....­." after all.

[PaulAbrams]

Disagree. I bow to your expertise, but your message is very cerebral, and invites the Democrats to lose in exactly the way they usually lose--a belief that if voters agree with their solutions, they will vote for them.
The Obama campaign needs a) a narrative about McCain; thusfar, he has told his own narrative about himself, and that has been allowed to stand; and b) a visceral connection with voters.

I wrote today how Obama may have defined his theme, so long as he keeps it up, and accompanies it with anger/indignation, whatever word you wish. See http://www.huffingtonpost.com/paul-abrams/on-910-obama-found-his-th_b_125661.html.

Remember, 8% of communication is words. 35% is emphasis/t­one-of-voi­ce, etc. 57% is non-verbal. So, while message is important, emotion is far more critical. Obama cannot feign emotion, but the coverup the Republicans are attempting got his goat. Now, he can use that indignation along with addressing the issues (here's where I agree w you, and wrote about in the article), to show people that he is FIGHTING FOR THEM, and that John McCain is not. (McCain wrote in his book that his only interest in the Presidency is personal ambition--­i.e., it all fits).

[jashbowie]

I hear what you are saying, but I think there is a difference between a frame and the messages that support the frame. "Solve real problems" should of course be supported with actual, you know, solutions.­..but it can also be connected rhetorically with optimistic Hope as well as Anger over the Bush/McCain debacle. I see it as saying "Bush/McCain Republicans have really screwed things up, but we have hope that things can and will improve, and here's how we're going to do it." That's a pretty compelling message, I think.

I actually believe that the Obama team will be hitting harder as we get closer to November. McCain's "maverick" image is starting to crumble in the national awareness and his ubiquitous use of his POW history has opened him up to stronger blows that even a month ago Obama couldn't have landed without blowback. I hope so, anyway.

[syllepsis]

People feel strong emotions about the truth.
Lie to someone, and watch them become uneasy.
Tell them the truth, and the visceral connection is formed- slowly, but that's the only way.
Mr. Feldman's frame is 'Solve Real Problems,' not the one Democrats have often resorted to, 'Here Are Solutions.­' Being handed solutions is passive and seems like a con job, which it generally is. Problem-solving itself is something Americans (and all people) want to do, and requires cooperation. Cooperation requires caution- and trust.
This election needs to be cast as Hoover- albeit a far worse one than the original model- vs. FDR. Problem-solving is the Democrats' true frame.

[PaulAbrams]

I would like to think you are correct, that people respond positively to the truth. I suspect you are like that, and so am I. Unfortunately, however, the empirical data don't support it.

I am in the process of writing an article for HuffPo called: "The Political Psychology of Lying". I hope you will read it and comment (and certainly disagree if you do not accept the analysis of the information presented).

Again, I wish what you said were true.

[Thereandback]

From the article: "''Solve real problems' is not just a theme du jour in the media. It is the core America worldview.­.."

This strikes me as so true. Problem-solving as the heart and soul of middle America. Pragmatism as the recurrent American theme.

It strikes a chord in popularized words and phrases from history and popular culture:
"sticktoitiveness"
"Make it so"
"Make it work"
(Ohmeegee ... Obama is the Tim Gunn of the political runway! That's a good thing, by the way.)

It's the successful inventor (from Franklin through Edison), who America appreciates more than the theoretical scientist. It's the the bridges and the dams that that play alongside the images of the prairies and mountains when the patriotic songs are shown on film.

It really is an American core.

[milo9]

I agree with you. One of my reoccuring thoughts over the last eight years is what happened to America can do spirit. Suddenly we seemed to be unable to do squat.

[Eoin45]

The can do spirit was supplanted by the f**k you spirit coinciding roughly with Reagan's rise and the rise of right wing radio. The Republicans are masters of the divide and conquer methodology. While the red and blue fight with one another the Repubs steal us all blind. Obama is trying to help us recognize that red and blue have more in common than not. If we open our collective eyes and see who the real enemies of the can do spirit are it may yet return.

[jashbowie]

Obama is the Captain Picard of politics!

[seeker1of2truth]

"It's the successful inventor (from Franklin through Edison), who America appreciates more than the theoretical scientist. It's the the bridges and the dams that that play alongside the images of the prairies and mountains when the patriotic songs are shown on film.

It really is an American core."

This comment really brought a vivid image to my mind from the movie "How the West was Won"
where they show the mountains, plains, etc - and roll into the large cities, freeways, etc. It's such a
powerful image of what America is.

[brief candle]

It's time to judge them by their deeds. They lied about a war. They use 9/11 as a campaign tool. Why aren't the people asking why they didn't prevent 9/11 from happening in the first place? They put out false ads. They even lie about a bridge to nowhere. This is insanity. I hope the people will take off their blindfolds and look at reality.

[Camel54]

Wouldn't it be great to hear "They are liars" as the new Democrat talking point. Surrogates say it repeatedly, "They are liars, George. Look they said they were against Bush's tax cuts and now that it's expedient to be for them, they're for them. They're liars. They said they were against the bridge in Alaska when they were for it until it became unpopular. They're liars, George."

A non-stop barrage of calling them what they are and pointing out why. Of course follow it with the "Enough. Solve real problems" mantra and that would just be swanky.

[milo9]

Agreed, that should be the Republican Brand: LIARS. Every lefty with a mike should work it in.
And if called out on lies from the left, just stick to the brand. Comparing Democrats lies with Republican lies is like comparing eating with gluttony. (Sorry. bad simile)

[bootcamp]

The Obama-Biden campaign must get serious.

McCain-Palin have nowhere to go now but down, and I will tell you exactly how this will happen. They can run away from President Bush, but they can't run away from the Republican Party. The Republicans will be regarded from now on as "the party that wrecked America." Over the weeks ahead, as carnage in the economy and the financial markets ramps up, it will become increasingly clear. It is important that this meme be spread through the internet. I urge all commentators to adopt and spread the idea that the Republicans are "the party that wrecked America." It will work because it is the truth. Use it freely Get the meme going.

[AshevilleVoice]

The Solve Real Problems frame is useful. I'm not sure that the wording is the best.

When you said that it " did not make much sense on its own in terms of framing for one Presidential campaign to accuse another Presidential campaign of telling 'lies."

- I don't get it. Are you saying that Obama also lies to the same degree as McC? I disagree and think that a "Betrayal of Trust" frame is essential, and that this conversation about presenting phoney Orwellian credentials, such as 'maverick' and 'reformer' needs to kept alive.

Cesna's blog today had the makings of a relevant frame. "Won't Get Fooled Again."

It's important because in our guts, Americans can tell we are being lied to, have been lied to by the Bush admin, for a long time. Obama's 'hope' is his wildly successful voter registration drive with new and previously cynical voters. If you only think of 'framing' his message, you might miss how powerful it is that he might actually mean it.

[jeanrenoir]

Up with pragmatism, for sure! If Obama clues his campaign into Carville's winning "it's the economy, stupid" pragmatism, focusing on solving real world economic problems for the Reagan Democrats, and "gives the Republicans hell," a la Truman, he will win going away. It's up to Obama, however, to get his rear in gear and EXECUTE.

[lovethesinner]

Excellent analysis, Jeffrey. Your frame turns McCain's cynical use of culture war politics against itself when Obama compares it to problems we face. If there was ever a time when we needed a speech like Abe Lincoln's "A House Divided" speech, it's now.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lincoln's_House_Divided_Speech

Barack Obama has spent the last four years publicly fighting this division in our politics, and if he can convince America that this DIVISION which is being opportunistically, even recklessly, used by John McCain to retain power for his party is ONE OF THE MAIN IMPEDIMENTS TO SOLVING OUR PROBLEMS, he will win this election.

Obama-Biden '08

[DiscoEv]

Interesting reading of the frames portrayed by each campaign. I do hope that people tire of this ugly cultural rhetoric soon and refocus on the issues at hand. Great on-line Time.com poll today shows that at least 80% of those who voted on-line believe McCain is running a more negative campaign.

Obama / Biden 2008!

[Gib]

People may recognize, and even decry, a campaign as negative - but they are still influenced by it. The Rovians know this very well. On the (serious) prospect of a McCain victory, I can't help thinking of the biblical line "what shall it profit a man to gain the whole world and lose his soul?" Talk about a Faustian contract.

[Sintex]

you're correct. and i think that one reason for McCain's embarrassing and clumsy mistakes in his most recent interview are indicative of the fact that he's lost his soul. he no longer knows what he believes or what he's about...ho­w can he speak sensibly about anything anymore? i think the debates are really going to drive this point home.

[ReaderTeacherCitizen]

This post deserves wide-spread attention.

[Lorijen]

I agree with foothillsg­al...Obama should name his cabinet. Conventional ways of doing things are out the door this election, Telling who with and how OBAMA WILL SOLVE REAL PROBLEMS is a checkmate move!

[ella52]

Exactly what we were talking about at work today. How to get the Obama campaign to do something cool, of course, that would just suck all the attention back to him. He doesn't have to name his cabinet, he just has to put teasers out.
Nobody would give a pig's eye about lipstick..­. or pigs...

[proveit2me]

Joe Biden's line, "What do you talk about when you have nothing to say?" seems more relevant now then when he uttered it. It could be the basis of an effective ad.

[mexamerican]

everyone blogging for obama needs to include something like the following:

mccain/palin '08: No Ideas, Just Lies, Smears, and Distraction
ENOUGH!