How To Rebuild Support For Democrats
by Gary Boatwright, Sat Jul 02, 2005 at 04:37:20 AM EDT
Indeed, what has been going on for the past six months is that progressives within the Democratic Party have been fighting tooth and nail, this has hurt Bush, and conservative empty Democrats have taken credit for the victories.And progressives - as seen in their support for Hillary Clinton and Bob Casey - are quite willing to let this happen. [. . .] As long insider Democrats insist on running on empty and mistake carping and whining for fighting, and as long as progressives seek to work with insiders instead of unseating them, the Democrats will not be in charge.
Oh sure the Republicans will screw themselves over, but that won't redound to our benefit. It will just help a different group of Republicans. They are good at the endless outsider thing. Americans can smell unprincipled corruption in the Democratic Party, and will accept the principled corruption of a McCain instead.
He also refers to a David Sirota post, Why the Public Believes Dems Stand for Nothing.
More in Extended Entry
The primary failure of the Progressive community and the Democratic Party has been connecting to voters and explaining how our policies benefit them personally and affect their every day life.
Benefits is the key word. Dave has identified not only the problem, but also the solution. I'll throw my two cents in here with an age old sales formula with the acronym F.A.B., Feature, Advanatage, Benefit.
The way this sales technique works is that you explain the Feature that your product or service has that makes it unique from what your competitors offer, then you explain the Advantage to your customer and how it will help improve his business, and last, but certainly not least, you explain the Benefit to him in his everyday business operations and how it will make his job easier and improve his profits.
In the political arena the formula would be P.A.B.: Policy (or Program), Advantage, Benefit. What liberals have been missing is explaining how the policies or programs we want to make into law will benefit voters in their everyday life. The standard question a salesman must answer for every customer is "What's in it for me?"
Your customer knows the primary reason you showed up to bother him and waste his time is that you have something to sell him and you want his money. Your customer already knows that you are only talking to him because you want your commission and will do or say anything to get it. All of your customers have better things to do than talk to salesmen. You better have a quick introduction and persuasive sixty second pitch for why he should give you ten or fifteen minutes of his valuable time to explain your product or service.
What struck me as I thought about this sales formula is how vacuous right wing policies are when this forumla is applied to them. Their technique is explaining their program or policy and bombarding the voter with propaganda to get their emotions boiling. Many conservative policies have absolutely no advantage to the voter.
Consider gay marriage. Legislation that bans gay marriage has absolutely no benefit to voters in their everyday life. It will not make their life easier or improve their marriage or their life one iota.
Consider abortion. Banning abortion offers absolutely no benefit to voters in their everyday life. It does nothing to improve their lives.
Consider conservative opposition to the minimum wage. Like many conservative policies, this one actually injures voters, but conservatives manage to convince them they will have to pay $9.99 for a Big Mac if McDonald's pays their employees another 75 cents an hour.
If progressives and Democrats start explaining the everyday benefits to voters for their policies the Republican party won't have a chance in 2006 and beyond.
I'll close with another reason Democrats and progressives lose. Their own so called pundits parrot Rush Limbaugh's talking points. In Friday's post Bob Sommerby covers Howard Dean's appearance on Whiffleball and how Tweety panders to religious conservatives. Bob also links to a story about how Tapped tells its readers the only reason Clinton won the 1992 election is because Perot's third party candidacy.
Garance Franke-Ruta must surely be a pretty smart guy, because everybody at Tapped is a pretty smart guy. Why do "liberal" scribes keep getting their facts wrong?
Tags: (all tags)







0 Comments