The best takes (imo) on what happened all center around the same thing. A working class that has been left behind, and is tired of losing.
They feel like no one is speaking for them, so they fall for the guy who's Superpower is "getting away with pretending to always win and never lose."
If he can do it, maybe we can too. (Or some such.)
Here's my question:
From what I've personally been able to learn, the solution to climate change, economic inequality, energy independence etc. is all the same solution. A working class, all hands on deck, cooperative effort to build. Millions of new jobs building new infrastructure, resulting in community wealth building and a booming economy.
This is what all of these disaffected working class folks are praying for!
But how do we communicate that to them? What's the message?
Haha! Nice of you to say! Yes, I love the way you express it. Are we "the people" making the decisions (using government) or is our government to be used by moneyed interests to exploit us.
The keys to MAGA’s success was riding on the coattails of the “conservative” movement initiated by Lewis Powell in 1972. The advent of massive advertising funding created Fox “News” and Citizens United created massive amounts of dark money fuel for the “conservative” engine. Trump co-opted their machine for his exclusive use.
You're welcome! There are some great books out there about the Powell memo and what came of it. Given all we know about their overwhelming dominance in the public space, it's a wonder people still think that just because we can find the truth, anyone can. We have the time.
The Master Plan podcast is well researched as well. The part I’m baffled by is that the Democrats have failed to mount a similar effort and never band together with a single unifying polar opposite view about protecting and defending the People. It’s not a populist perspective I’m referring to, it’s about a counter balance to corporate control and monopolies. The D’s seem to get themselves involved in petty fights that diffuse any central overriding message. (BTW, I was a registered Republican for more than 50 years prior to Trump so I have relatively clear eyes to watch what and how they do things.)
What people call populism now isn't the real thing. It's demagoguery, faking populism to gain power for those with all the money. Real populism is exactly what you said: protecting and defending the people and counterbalancing corporate control and monopolies. I'm struggling to find the right terms!
Real and original populism is a worker-based movement for basic rights and voices. In the US it became a kind of split when the lefties began splitting from each other and towards the University elite, thus propelling the Dems into all the permutations we see today many of which are pretty off-putting to actual working people not in universities or offices necessarily. So even when talking about the actual proposals which would help the working class there seems to be not much linking up with language and perhaps presentation. Because Dems have been distant for a while.
So, my question about a lack of sustained focus. Any thoughts? Is it that each of the separate D factions feel their view is more correct than all others and the D leadership allows them to splinter because “that’s how D’s roll?” Or, is it the D’s simply kowtowing to the “Powell conservative movement” for their dark money and splintering to follow the money?
I want to say all of the above? There is a certain hesitancy to stand up against corporate interests due to the relentless need to raise funds for increasingly expensive campaigns. There is also the perception that we disagree on issues, but most of the time, we agree on the core values behind the issues, we just fight over priorities or whether to push for faster change or slower. Perhaps more importantly, our lack of a core message and brand identity is more the inadvertent result of the committees of the Democratic Party (DNC, DCCC, DSCC) seeing their role as strictly supporting candidates, so they do not feel they have either the responsibility to brand the party or the permission. Then candidates have the mistaken assumption that they have to run to the center or "against the party" which turns out to be absolutely bad strategy. It adds up to nobody taking responsibility for the Party brand, and the brand becoming an albatross that shaves 10-20% off of our performance in every election. We have no infrastructure for long term messaging, but I'm working on that!
Thank you. I appreciate that you took the time to help me, and others, see how things have been working. The results are clear to see, but the how, why, when and by whom elements involved to get there are a lot murkier.
My gut instinct is the branding and singular focus issues need to change very soon, if it’s even possible. I said earlier today that dealing with the old baggage may be too much to accomplish quickly and a do over with, say, something like “The People’s Party” may make more sense. Others have said that the “old guard” needs to jettisoned in favor of younger more energetic voices. Both require time which is a scarce commodity currently.
Either way, it appears there is a very good chance that there may not be sufficient time to make those changes at this point. Trump intends to take a wrecking ball to literally everything using the P2025 and T45 roadmaps, with the license and impunity granted by the current ultra right biased very self serving SCOTUS supermajority.
The Harris loss was a spectacular failure. Is the “old guard” prepared to deal with Trump in the manner required to stop him? If so, how will that work? If not, what’s the plan? Or, is the specter of losing the corporate donors too much for them to handle? Or..?
Again, thank you for your very insightful response.
We’ve met all requirements for the Equal Rights Amendment to be part of the Constitution. (I realize some of you may not even be old enough to remember it.)
Now it’s time for President Biden to cement his legacy as a champion for gender equality and do everything he can to make sure it’s published before the end of his presidency. Call the White House at (202) 456-1111 and demand that the ERA becomes reality.
You can also help us spread the word about this campaign via social media here
I'd like to get your take on this. Those of us who are grounded in truth and integrity value claims that are rooted in facts. People who buy into disinformation don't know how to find valid information. That's not new. How do we get there? How do we lead them to real gold instead of fool's gold?
MAGAs use outrage and anger far more than progressives do. I default here to George Lakoff's invocation of strict father family values vs. the progressive nurturant family metaphor. But Lakoff sees people sometimes using both metaphors in different domains. How does that play here? Also, does science hold the place of discipline for us versus a strong father for them? Many MAGAs are religious fundamentalists, where faith is unquestioned. Science advances when we question the assumptions of the current paradigm.
When people use the "strong father" talk to appeal to swing voters, they simply activate strong father thinking which caused more conservative voting. Plus we look inauthentic. When we advocate for empathy based vales, we tend to do it weakly and apologetically, which is unconvicing. What we need to do is take a strong stand for basic human decency. Only then will peolle listen to our facts.
Facts seem to actually turn people off who weren't already tuned into them. We gotta rethink, or more basically reconsider the language factor as human feeling interaction. Something that a factory worker would express that would still get his or her everyday take on reality. It's the kind of talk you recognize if that is the way you too live it and can trust it. In other words nudge the elites aside please. They tend to be tiresome and over languaged. Yes it's a cultural thing, and no you can't pretend you're talking for somebody if they're not there too.
I'm so grateful for the explanation here of the way Republicans used ordinary journalistic habits to their advantage. By accusing us of exactly what they were doing, they played into the "both sides" with absolute success. The example that stands out is their insistence that Trump's trials were politically motivated. So when they scratched up their vindictive prosecution of Hunter Biden, we were (or at least felt) powerless. Media was thrilled to have two sides, and in addition to tormenting Biden, Republicans could act as if the accusations against Trump were just as thin as those against Hunter.
Yes, the right-wing tactics were so successful because they gave the legacy media exactly what they wanted! I wish I had a better idea of what we do about this. I'm working on it but will need all the help I can get!
I feel that there was another element in this race and it was emotional identification. This goes beyond the mere strength of the appeal of change argument that has been present in every election since 2008 with the possible exception of 2012 when let’s give him another chance came into play. The change argument works because of forty years of policies that did nothing for the working class and little for the middle class. This time Trump added to the argument for change a few elements: squeezing 40 years of deprivation into four years of Biden, even though the reality was that Biden did more to reverse the residue of Reaganism than any predecessor in that time period. But more importantly, he added in a vernacular brand of anger that was not nearly as present in his 2016 campaign and which resonated - coupled with his complaints of mistreatment - with people who were also angry - at their economic lots whether experienced over decades or from the realization of not doing as well as their parents. They responded emotionally to his anger and feelings of being abused. Though not true, it felt like theirs.
Thank you! Yes, branding is key to the problem. Dems have let right wing media drill negative branding into voters' heads for decades, conditioning them to believe any lies they want to tell.
Here's some great data from Pew Research on Americans' news consumption, including the fact that only 38% of Americans follow the news all or most of the time.
I am well aware. I worked with Lakoff for more than a year to develop my training program. I very much appreciate the extent to which Anat has helped to bring George's work to a larger audience! Framing is absolutely critical to our sucess moving forward.
Politico is a right wing news Outlet - I'm not ready to believe that 15% of registered voters would have just voted for Trump - I want to see more data points on this
Here's the PDF of the actual poll. 15% of respondents (registered voters) didn't follow political news. Of those, it was 53% Trump, 27% Biden, almost 2-to-1.
Do you really think Harris would not have won if she were white and had a penis?
They are still counting all the votes...... he's going to end up less than 2% of the popular vote.
Many states had Blue Wave wins...... North Carolina for example.
Are we to believe that they elected a bunch of Democrats....... then all turned around and voted for Trump? Apparently so - so that means that it's sexism or racism.
America has been dumbed down for 50 years, these people bathe and saute too much in right-wing propaganda like Faux news, which has been a massive cancer on this country. Now we know why Elon bought Twitter, as a right-wing disinformation propaganda arm for the Republican Party.
Yes, the Democratic Party needs to build out its big tent of candidates and they learn messaging, but also social media algorithms.
That I can't say, but I suspect that most of those people were already in Trump's 47%. Those that got him over 50% were the ones who just know about him from The Apprentice. Also, IMHO, it's not about algorithms. It's about real relationship building! Another thing we don't do well.
I work in Corporate America so I understand and certainly appreciate the values of relationship building.........but, relationship building seems to be overrated given all the stupid Americans we have. We are dealing with people that don't know how tariffs work nor do they understand that immigrants work our meat packing Industries and pick our produce.
Do you think we would have won the election without cancerous lies & disinformation from Elon, Fox and Twitter? I do......maybe.
We have to get our people and policies in front of them......if they're not going to the rallies, if they're only going to watch Fox and play on Twitter and FB pages......then that is partly where we need to be. We bring the policies to the. I thought it was great that Harris went on Fox.
Anyway, I'm not campaigner or professional in this area, so I could be full of shit.
I think you would call it customer service. You know how a bad experience can lose a customer, and vice versa. I hate to admit it, but I do regularly have to remind us to not insult the people we're trying to persuade!
Would we have won without the right-wing media? For sure.
Which leads to the critical path for preventing a repeat being both greatly expanding the channels through which we communicate with the electorate and employ messaging frameworks based on the concepts you discuss here.
You are completely overthinking this. Skip the GOP constituents altogether. Consented to nothing less than good governance from the Democratic Party, improving the lives of the 80 to 100,000,000 eligible voters in a statistically significant way, who don't bother either vote or register, and you will never lose an election.
Good governance wins elections.
I can't fucking believe I have to explain that to supposedly adults!
This is very interesting & likely completely true. Americans absolutely believe that Republicans are better on ‘ the economy’ despite the facts showing otherwise. The GOP have done a remarkable job branding job. The question is - why have the Democrats with all the money in the world not hired the best marketers in the world to change their image. Biden had great practical policies to benefit the working and middle classes but he didn’t just not communicate them . He never marketed them. Why not?
Great post.
The best takes (imo) on what happened all center around the same thing. A working class that has been left behind, and is tired of losing.
They feel like no one is speaking for them, so they fall for the guy who's Superpower is "getting away with pretending to always win and never lose."
If he can do it, maybe we can too. (Or some such.)
Here's my question:
From what I've personally been able to learn, the solution to climate change, economic inequality, energy independence etc. is all the same solution. A working class, all hands on deck, cooperative effort to build. Millions of new jobs building new infrastructure, resulting in community wealth building and a booming economy.
This is what all of these disaffected working class folks are praying for!
But how do we communicate that to them? What's the message?
Reframing Master, do your thing!! 😃
Haha! Nice of you to say! Yes, I love the way you express it. Are we "the people" making the decisions (using government) or is our government to be used by moneyed interests to exploit us.
Have you read this post? https://reframingamerica.substack.com/p/the-american-deal
It took a long time to develop but I think it says what needs to be said. Would love to know what you think.
I have read it. Pretty sure I restacked it. Another great post!
But specifically I'm trying to figure out how to frame a specific communication.
Maybe we can chat about it?
I'm happy to pay for your time if you can help me figure it out.
Cool. I do consult and I enjoy a challenge. Email me at antonia@antoniascatton.com and we can set up a call!
The sad thing is that this is what Joe Biden was attempting to give them!
So true!
Great article. Thank you.
The keys to MAGA’s success was riding on the coattails of the “conservative” movement initiated by Lewis Powell in 1972. The advent of massive advertising funding created Fox “News” and Citizens United created massive amounts of dark money fuel for the “conservative” engine. Trump co-opted their machine for his exclusive use.
You're welcome! There are some great books out there about the Powell memo and what came of it. Given all we know about their overwhelming dominance in the public space, it's a wonder people still think that just because we can find the truth, anyone can. We have the time.
The Master Plan podcast is well researched as well. The part I’m baffled by is that the Democrats have failed to mount a similar effort and never band together with a single unifying polar opposite view about protecting and defending the People. It’s not a populist perspective I’m referring to, it’s about a counter balance to corporate control and monopolies. The D’s seem to get themselves involved in petty fights that diffuse any central overriding message. (BTW, I was a registered Republican for more than 50 years prior to Trump so I have relatively clear eyes to watch what and how they do things.)
What people call populism now isn't the real thing. It's demagoguery, faking populism to gain power for those with all the money. Real populism is exactly what you said: protecting and defending the people and counterbalancing corporate control and monopolies. I'm struggling to find the right terms!
Real and original populism is a worker-based movement for basic rights and voices. In the US it became a kind of split when the lefties began splitting from each other and towards the University elite, thus propelling the Dems into all the permutations we see today many of which are pretty off-putting to actual working people not in universities or offices necessarily. So even when talking about the actual proposals which would help the working class there seems to be not much linking up with language and perhaps presentation. Because Dems have been distant for a while.
So, my question about a lack of sustained focus. Any thoughts? Is it that each of the separate D factions feel their view is more correct than all others and the D leadership allows them to splinter because “that’s how D’s roll?” Or, is it the D’s simply kowtowing to the “Powell conservative movement” for their dark money and splintering to follow the money?
I want to say all of the above? There is a certain hesitancy to stand up against corporate interests due to the relentless need to raise funds for increasingly expensive campaigns. There is also the perception that we disagree on issues, but most of the time, we agree on the core values behind the issues, we just fight over priorities or whether to push for faster change or slower. Perhaps more importantly, our lack of a core message and brand identity is more the inadvertent result of the committees of the Democratic Party (DNC, DCCC, DSCC) seeing their role as strictly supporting candidates, so they do not feel they have either the responsibility to brand the party or the permission. Then candidates have the mistaken assumption that they have to run to the center or "against the party" which turns out to be absolutely bad strategy. It adds up to nobody taking responsibility for the Party brand, and the brand becoming an albatross that shaves 10-20% off of our performance in every election. We have no infrastructure for long term messaging, but I'm working on that!
Thank you. I appreciate that you took the time to help me, and others, see how things have been working. The results are clear to see, but the how, why, when and by whom elements involved to get there are a lot murkier.
My gut instinct is the branding and singular focus issues need to change very soon, if it’s even possible. I said earlier today that dealing with the old baggage may be too much to accomplish quickly and a do over with, say, something like “The People’s Party” may make more sense. Others have said that the “old guard” needs to jettisoned in favor of younger more energetic voices. Both require time which is a scarce commodity currently.
Either way, it appears there is a very good chance that there may not be sufficient time to make those changes at this point. Trump intends to take a wrecking ball to literally everything using the P2025 and T45 roadmaps, with the license and impunity granted by the current ultra right biased very self serving SCOTUS supermajority.
The Harris loss was a spectacular failure. Is the “old guard” prepared to deal with Trump in the manner required to stop him? If so, how will that work? If not, what’s the plan? Or, is the specter of losing the corporate donors too much for them to handle? Or..?
Again, thank you for your very insightful response.
Dear All, The ERA is still alive.
We’ve met all requirements for the Equal Rights Amendment to be part of the Constitution. (I realize some of you may not even be old enough to remember it.)
Now it’s time for President Biden to cement his legacy as a champion for gender equality and do everything he can to make sure it’s published before the end of his presidency. Call the White House at (202) 456-1111 and demand that the ERA becomes reality.
You can also help us spread the word about this campaign via social media here
https://eracoalition.org/the-legacy-we-deserve-call-on-biden-to-put-the-equal-rights-amendment-in-the-constitution/
Amazing post, Antonia!
I'd like to get your take on this. Those of us who are grounded in truth and integrity value claims that are rooted in facts. People who buy into disinformation don't know how to find valid information. That's not new. How do we get there? How do we lead them to real gold instead of fool's gold?
MAGAs use outrage and anger far more than progressives do. I default here to George Lakoff's invocation of strict father family values vs. the progressive nurturant family metaphor. But Lakoff sees people sometimes using both metaphors in different domains. How does that play here? Also, does science hold the place of discipline for us versus a strong father for them? Many MAGAs are religious fundamentalists, where faith is unquestioned. Science advances when we question the assumptions of the current paradigm.
When people use the "strong father" talk to appeal to swing voters, they simply activate strong father thinking which caused more conservative voting. Plus we look inauthentic. When we advocate for empathy based vales, we tend to do it weakly and apologetically, which is unconvicing. What we need to do is take a strong stand for basic human decency. Only then will peolle listen to our facts.
Facts seem to actually turn people off who weren't already tuned into them. We gotta rethink, or more basically reconsider the language factor as human feeling interaction. Something that a factory worker would express that would still get his or her everyday take on reality. It's the kind of talk you recognize if that is the way you too live it and can trust it. In other words nudge the elites aside please. They tend to be tiresome and over languaged. Yes it's a cultural thing, and no you can't pretend you're talking for somebody if they're not there too.
I'm so grateful for the explanation here of the way Republicans used ordinary journalistic habits to their advantage. By accusing us of exactly what they were doing, they played into the "both sides" with absolute success. The example that stands out is their insistence that Trump's trials were politically motivated. So when they scratched up their vindictive prosecution of Hunter Biden, we were (or at least felt) powerless. Media was thrilled to have two sides, and in addition to tormenting Biden, Republicans could act as if the accusations against Trump were just as thin as those against Hunter.
Yes, the right-wing tactics were so successful because they gave the legacy media exactly what they wanted! I wish I had a better idea of what we do about this. I'm working on it but will need all the help I can get!
Anything I can do, just ask. This is all so scary.
Thank you. This maps perfectly onto what I heard from many "undecided" voters over 7 weeks of persuasive canvassing in Lehigh Valley, PA.
Thank you for this feedback from the field. It really helps!
I feel that there was another element in this race and it was emotional identification. This goes beyond the mere strength of the appeal of change argument that has been present in every election since 2008 with the possible exception of 2012 when let’s give him another chance came into play. The change argument works because of forty years of policies that did nothing for the working class and little for the middle class. This time Trump added to the argument for change a few elements: squeezing 40 years of deprivation into four years of Biden, even though the reality was that Biden did more to reverse the residue of Reaganism than any predecessor in that time period. But more importantly, he added in a vernacular brand of anger that was not nearly as present in his 2016 campaign and which resonated - coupled with his complaints of mistreatment - with people who were also angry - at their economic lots whether experienced over decades or from the realization of not doing as well as their parents. They responded emotionally to his anger and feelings of being abused. Though not true, it felt like theirs.
Exactly! He showed people that he understood how they felt. More on this later!
Thank you! Yes, branding is key to the problem. Dems have let right wing media drill negative branding into voters' heads for decades, conditioning them to believe any lies they want to tell.
Here's some great data from Pew Research on Americans' news consumption, including the fact that only 38% of Americans follow the news all or most of the time.
https://www.pewresearch.org/short-reads/2023/10/24/americans-are-following-the-news-less-closely-than-they-used-to/
I am well aware. I worked with Lakoff for more than a year to develop my training program. I very much appreciate the extent to which Anat has helped to bring George's work to a larger audience! Framing is absolutely critical to our sucess moving forward.
*people
According to the article below, as much as 15% of registered voters say they do not follow political news, and they favored Trump by nearly two-to-one! https://www.politico.com/news/magazine/2024/11/09/social-media-traditional-news-elections-00188548
Politico is a right wing news Outlet - I'm not ready to believe that 15% of registered voters would have just voted for Trump - I want to see more data points on this
Here's the PDF of the actual poll. 15% of respondents (registered voters) didn't follow political news. Of those, it was 53% Trump, 27% Biden, almost 2-to-1.
https://s3.documentcloud.org/documents/24614251/240126-nbc-april-2024-poll-4-26-2024-release.pdf
Do you really think Harris would not have won if she were white and had a penis?
They are still counting all the votes...... he's going to end up less than 2% of the popular vote.
Many states had Blue Wave wins...... North Carolina for example.
Are we to believe that they elected a bunch of Democrats....... then all turned around and voted for Trump? Apparently so - so that means that it's sexism or racism.
America has been dumbed down for 50 years, these people bathe and saute too much in right-wing propaganda like Faux news, which has been a massive cancer on this country. Now we know why Elon bought Twitter, as a right-wing disinformation propaganda arm for the Republican Party.
Yes, the Democratic Party needs to build out its big tent of candidates and they learn messaging, but also social media algorithms.
That I can't say, but I suspect that most of those people were already in Trump's 47%. Those that got him over 50% were the ones who just know about him from The Apprentice. Also, IMHO, it's not about algorithms. It's about real relationship building! Another thing we don't do well.
I work in Corporate America so I understand and certainly appreciate the values of relationship building.........but, relationship building seems to be overrated given all the stupid Americans we have. We are dealing with people that don't know how tariffs work nor do they understand that immigrants work our meat packing Industries and pick our produce.
Do you think we would have won the election without cancerous lies & disinformation from Elon, Fox and Twitter? I do......maybe.
We have to get our people and policies in front of them......if they're not going to the rallies, if they're only going to watch Fox and play on Twitter and FB pages......then that is partly where we need to be. We bring the policies to the. I thought it was great that Harris went on Fox.
Anyway, I'm not campaigner or professional in this area, so I could be full of shit.
I think you would call it customer service. You know how a bad experience can lose a customer, and vice versa. I hate to admit it, but I do regularly have to remind us to not insult the people we're trying to persuade!
Would we have won without the right-wing media? For sure.
Which leads to the critical path for preventing a repeat being both greatly expanding the channels through which we communicate with the electorate and employ messaging frameworks based on the concepts you discuss here.
You are completely overthinking this. Skip the GOP constituents altogether. Consented to nothing less than good governance from the Democratic Party, improving the lives of the 80 to 100,000,000 eligible voters in a statistically significant way, who don't bother either vote or register, and you will never lose an election.
Good governance wins elections.
I can't fucking believe I have to explain that to supposedly adults!
They knew he separated children from their parents as policy. No excuses!
This is very interesting & likely completely true. Americans absolutely believe that Republicans are better on ‘ the economy’ despite the facts showing otherwise. The GOP have done a remarkable job branding job. The question is - why have the Democrats with all the money in the world not hired the best marketers in the world to change their image. Biden had great practical policies to benefit the working and middle classes but he didn’t just not communicate them . He never marketed them. Why not?