Unfortunately I know a good deal of people where the "words" alone make a huge difference. When the Health Care Act was being set up a read, yes 465 or so pages, would have enlightened so many yet, Fox made more sense in much simpler terms. It's laziness Matt. We all receive dozens of forwards with all sorts of lies and propaganda in them by folks (in my circle of friends kids so this is not an across the line statement) that are ignorant of issues, how they are being presented and what the result could or could not be because they are too damn lazy to get the facts and think for themselves. So yea, when one of those folks hear, "another great depression." or " the eliminating Medicare." they run scared and angry and have no idea why. It's a scary phenomenon that's always been there and always will be. God help us all.

On issues alone, I agree, Dee. And I agree that laziness is a problem, but so is the language of lawyers. Even if I tried to read all 465 pages (which most Congresspeople skipped, too) I'd probly be left in the dark trying to interpret the legalistic gobbledygook that even learned judges (some aren't, as we know) can disagree over. Issues, yes. But when it comes to picking someone to represent or lead us, it comes straight from instinct - which is often, if not usually, more accurate than "just the facts."

Let's hope that Romney/Ryan and the Republican Tea Party Congress continue to lie and push the limits of "dog whistle" politics and Obama benefits in the same way as Clinton did in his 1996 bid for re-election.

I'm primarily id driven unfortunately, Matt. It gets me in all kinds of trouble, but it has kept me out of a lot too. I think you're right about looks and body language.

I'm thinking about some of the reactions to the characters on camera at the RNC that I've read here in the last few days. A lot of them have to do with things much subtler than words.

I generally feel that people use their words to bolster what their gut reaction is, no matter what the issue.

I'n the acting lessons I'm taking, I'm becoming all too aware that if the body language doesn't match the words, your performance rings untrue.

You say "jackbooted thugs" as if it's a bad thing.

(Excellent counterpoint, Matt.) r.

I can only think of my mother and others who believe whatever they see in print or hear on TV if the proper words and phrases are used. I'd read about how the GOP spends far more time crafting words than they do working on a plan that works for everyone.

Mac ~ I think it'll come down to the debates. Barack will reduce Mittsy to a wimpering stumblebum.

I am, too, Emily. The gut can mislead, of course, and be manipulated, but I'd rather trust that than buzzwords, half-truths and outright lies.

Jon ~ As usual you've completely misread my point. Jackbooted
thugs are only bad when they're their jackbooted thugs!

Gary ~ No doubt words are powerful, but I think for them to work most effectively the viscera must be stirred by subtler means. If Romney poops his pants during the debates (which I predict he will) those words will lose their power.

Both sides have used words to trigger the desired responses from the electorate since the first election...nothing new there. What I find disturbing is the insistance that anyone not agreeing with one side's choice is labled as "weak minded" or "soft minded".

As you probably know, Matt, I am conservative in most of my leanings but this time around I plan on voting for Obama. I am able to wade through the key-words, the buzz-words and make my own decision and I promise you I am the most common of the common mob which I see derided on OS by many pundits. So you see, maybe there is hope after all. Maybe enough of those "weak-minded" folks will be able to make an intellegent and informed decision. Ain't democracy fun!

Which set of jackbooted thugs do you fear most? I fear the DEA, The BATFE and Homeland Security ( We are going to repeal the Patriot Act first thing, Right? Oh and we would never use drone strikes to solve a standoff with federal agents in the US, (Would We?) I prefer the deadlock of the Feds grinding to a halt, and dealing with the Local Jackbooted Thugs - I can get to where THEY live ( said purely in an "editorial" sense of their Political Lives - Little Ms Deeds is still embarrassed/Furious at her comic debut- and can do nothing about it when she is snickered at )

What equally disheartens me is a recent Gallop poll that showed the majority of Americans condoned lies from their own Party's politians to get elected. People from all Party affiliations answered this way.

First, David, you do yourself a huge disservice saying things like you're the most common of the common mob, which if you truly believe it you're hurting the feelings of the many many people on OS (me included, despite our occasional disagreements) who consider you an inspiring, intelligent and big-hearted friend. When I use a broad generalization like "soft-minded proletariat" I'm using it to describe my impression of people who allow themselves to be swayed by ignorant, self-centered fears and appetites, people who wouldn't vote for Obama if he could part the sea, simply because he's black, people who depend on Social Security and Medicare but will vote for a couple of doofus demagogues either because they're white or because they are too damned lazy to look beyond the buzzwords and cheap rhetoric tossed at them by slogan mills paid for by billionaires who would just as soon convert those slogan mills to Soylent Green processing plants once they're ensconced in abolute power. Else why do they spend fortunes on slogan mills and ad agencies? They're counting on the mentally lazy, passive white voters to bring home the real bacon.

Rudolphus the Rude ~ We're indeed stuck between a rock and a hard place, I agree. But I believe we buy time and have more wiggle room voting for politicians who might be bought a paid for (aren't they all?) but who must depend on fooling a more diverse and intelligent constituency than their counterparts of the Southern Strategy. Supposedly Rove's in the wings trying out a new hooded robe to celebrate the anticipated coups he's helped arrange.

I know, Sharon. It usually comes down for me to a choice between repugnancies. My vote is usually tactically intended to keep the worst of the worst out of power.

Good piece, Matt. Republicans have always been better than Dems at using effective keywords, which is odd since most of them are only semi-literate. Take Global Warming -- that was such a boneheaded description of the problem, we had to RENAME it Climate Change. Why didn't we get it right the first time? -- the Republicans would have.

John, maybe that's because their constituents for the most part feel comfortable and are too complacent to do their own thinking. More important than anything else is the candidate must look like them, talk like them and hate like them.

Don't underestimate spin. I'm amazed at how the Republicans spun medicare against Obama and for Ryan. It boggles the mind. But faces matter too, as does tone of voice. I see Romney's sneer every time he gets negative,and a certain simper to his mouth and whine to his voice. Every time I see Obama, I see the warm eyes of a deer, and hear calm in his voice. None of this has to do with their policies.

Pam, on issues I agree spin is key. The GOPers had a couple of things going for them right off the bat with Obamacare: Obama and mistrust of government in general.

a cogent argument as usual. if we re define ''cogency''.

then again , why redefine ''cogency'', goddammit?
i know what it meant.

it was: meant to be ironic. cuz pointyheaded intellectuals
would NOT say that this is cogent.

Yet: it WAS.

hm.

a paradox.
~
when i run into all this truth in a post i cannot respond,
obviously, for it would take away from the glory
of the words..

"The words are easy rationalizations for emotional adolescents who've already decided who they want to be their daddy. The words are most effective when they trigger those instinctive associations."

yes .

~
uh wait. i kind of like to add onto intellectual arguments
now and again...

instinct is encoded.
with words.
in a damn conditioned reflex kinda way.

we gotta...put all these coded words together, for the Masses,
and make a good cogent argument
they gonna swallow
viscerally............

Matt, absolutely right! Body language and visual signals often outweigh the words, particuarly in the speeches I watched last night. As Mitt was speaking, all I really heard was "USA, family, God, jobs, love my wife, USA, family, God, love my kids . . . "

Emmerling, if you are fixing to become The New Goebbels I'm gonna hafta tell Rena to whip you back in line. Hear?

Erica, I haven't watched any of the GOP convention and will probly catch precious little of the Dems'. Obama's speech will probly do me fine.

All this is the exact reason why Ross Perot (remember him?) got my attention. His main purpose seemed to be to get his points across. He was derided for his flip charts and pointer, but by using such basic tools, he was able to say what he meant and meant what he said. I think "spinning" is one of the most dishonest professions in the world, and for a lot of years, that is exactly how I earned my comfortable living. If I am ashamed of anything in my life, that is it.

These word games, sub-conscious imaging, and lies by omission are on the same par as brain-washing, IMHO. The "truth" has been so long missing from the political equation, I doubt that any of those clowns would know it if they saw it.

Lezlie

I kind of agree with both you and David Green. David's point seems to be that certain words are coded language and evoke a visceral reaction. At least that is my interpretation and belief.

As far as the "id" - I tend to use the word "gestalt" alot. I think you capture that well and pundits tend to ignore it in place of detailed analysis of optics or specific lines.

For example, I think the overall gestalt of the RNC this week was mean, petty, jingoistic and very, very white. Romney comes across as a scold - compare him to Reagan 1980 - the words/tone were very similar but Reagan protects genuineness, that winning smile, and then goes into scold/cold war mode in a way that is so much more effective than Romney.

The real question is whether anyone is paying any attention at all or whether voters have already made up their minds that they aren't going to vote for the black man this time around.

"We want a daddy figure..."

bull. we want a mommy figure. that's what both these effete neuters are.

Lezlie, I'm almost ready - hell, I am ready to vote for a zombie for president - Truman or Ike. Either one of those men had more sand in their groins than Obama, Biden, Mittsy and Lyan Ryan put together. They'd be better presidents as the undead, too.

lpsrocks ~ I doubt if any gen-yew-wine bigots voted for Obma in '08, but I suspect a bunch of them couldn't bring themselves to vote for McCain, because they thought he was a closet liberal, and, even tho they would have loved to go moose hunting with Palin they couldn't really see her as president. But I doubt also they thought Obama had a chance of winning. They've eaten a lot of crow since then (no apologies) and you know damned well they'll all be eager to vote for the closet liberal this time around.

Stu Pot ~ Maybe you're right. A mommy with a whip. Yeeeeha!

When Majority Leader McConnell said he was going to spend the next four years taking Obama down, did anyone really think he was joking? The Party of No, along with those fuckin' Teaparty Blue Dog Democrats did nothing in 4 years except name post offices and airports and do the opposite of everything Obama wanted. They have a 12% popularity rating, but I think that is way too high!