The Secret of Obama’s Success and Why He’ll Keep Winning — He Listens to George Lakoff

[babylonsister]

http://www.pensitoreview.com/2008/02/20/the-secret-of-obamas-success-and-why-hell-keep-winning-%e2%80%94-he-listens-to-george-lakoff/

The Secret of Obama’s Success and Why He’ll Keep Winning — He Listens to George Lakoff
Trish | Feb. 20, 2008


snip//

Lakoff lists 12 traps that progressives often fall into, and Hillary and her supporters exemplify many of them.

The Laundry List Trap. Progressives tend to believe that people vote on the basis of lists of programs and policies. In fact, people vote based on values, connection, authenticity, trust, and identity.

The Rationalism Trap. There is a commonplace — and false — theory that reason is completely conscious, literal…, logical, universal, and unemotional. Cognitive science has shown that every one of these assumptions is false. These assumptions lead progressives into other traps: assuming that hard facts will persuade voters, that voters are “rational” and vote in their self-interest and on the issues, and that negating a frame is an effective way to argue against it.

The Policies-Are-Values Trap. Progressives regularly mistake policies with values, which are ethical ideas like empathy, responsibility, fairness, freedom, justice, and so on. Policies are not themselves values, though they are, or should be, based on values. Thus, Social Security and universal health insurance are not values; they are policies meant to reflect and codify the values of human dignity, the common good, fairness, and equality.

The Centrist Trap. A common mistaken ideology has convinced many progressives that they must “move to the right” to get more votes. In reality, this is counterproductive. By moving to the right, progressives actually help activate the right’s values and give up on their own. In the process, they also alienate their base.

Those calling for more steak and less sizzle from Obama should give it up. The senator’s instincts are perfect, and there’s only one thing better than perfection: hope.

[Radical Activist]

1. Yep.

Its time to get away from the failed Clinton approach that might get you through the next election but always hurts the party in the long run.

[CJCRANE]

2. It's hope vs fear.

The Republicans had cornered the market in using the technique of "the appeal to emotion" with their Rovian and Pavlovian beating people over the head with 9/11.

The dismal showing of Giuliani shows that that strategy has run its course.

[Hydra]

3. So people are stupid?

Makes as much sense as anything else I've heard...other than diebold.

[paulk]

11. people make their voting decisions for trivial reasons

who they want to have a beer with, etc

Lakoff is right - nobody cares about issues, boring stuff like that.

The other day someone posted a bit from two independent voters in VA, I think it was.... who called into c-span to announce that they had voted for Ron Paul in the primary, but were going to vote for Obama in the GE. How, in any rational world, does a person go from Ron Paul to Barrack Obama?

Obama has understood this. He's transcended all that political stuff and has crafted a winning image. I just hope that "image" can actually do the job of being President.

[Hydra]

12. That's depressing

We've seen this show already for the last 7 years- If we get a singing and dancing figurehead again, I'm worried about who will play Cheney this time. At least with HRC, I know it will be people like Rupert Murdoch.

*sigh*

I guess it will take the coming great depression to get some people to start caring about where our country is going.

[Recursion]

15. Character is far from "trivial"

And, yes, I would prefer someone I trusted but disagreed with to someone I didn't trust.

[paulk]

24. character can be scripted

and in today's world of politics as product, who knows what any of these people are really like?

[Hekate]

18. It's not stupid to choose a candidate based on "values, connection, authenticity, trust, & identity"

...as Lakoff says people do. It is counterproductive to call people stupid and expect them to vote for your candidate.

Dr. Lakoff is very important to helping Dems understand how we can be more effective in communicating with the majority of the electorate -- and since it takes a majority to win (unless you rig the vote, of course) that's very important indeed. If Democrats are not communicating how our policies are better than the Republicans, then we will continue to lose elections.

For some sense of who Lakoff is and to find out what books he's written, Google is your friend.

Hekate

[DemzRock]

4. Excellent Article!

Good stuff, thanks!

As a mega-skeptic, I'm still uncertain about Obama, but he appears smarter and smarter as time goes by. Hey, if you can beat a Clinton, you must have something, eh? And I am tired of the "Centrist Trap," that the DLC has fallen into big time.

Um... I hate to say this though... This all points to the fact that the majority of humans are not... Shall we say... logical in their thinking. Many smart leaders assume that everyone thinks or should think the way they do, but huge groups of humans don't think that way, apparently. Sad, but true.

[Forrest Greene]

23. Logic And Intelligence

...are overrated.

[aquart]

5. You're right. Sizzle is all we're gonna get.

How foolish of Hillary to offer steak.

[katty]

6. yeah,that's what I want after 7yrs+ of nuthin'-sizzle-that will last

[Hekate]

7. Obama gets it! -- can you please cross post this to GD for a wider audience?

:hi:

Hekate

[babylonsister]

8. I can try, though mods might lock it. I'll give it a shot. nt

[Larkspur]

9. I like Lakoff but don't find Obama inspiring

He's just the lesser of 2 evils (Hillary being the other choice) for me.

[babylonsister]

10. Different strokes; I find him extremely inspiring. nt

[depakid]

13. The centrist trap

From what I've seen, Obama can't seem to keep his foot out of that one....

[Name removed]

14. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. 
[link:www.democraticunderground.com/forums/rules.html|Click
here] to review the message board rules.

[babylonsister]

16. Huh? In with Alquada? What do you mean? nt

[Hekate]

17. Troll. Or did you forget your sarcasm smilie along with spell-check? nt

[Schema Thing]

19. Wes Clark told me I should read and understand Lakoff

so I did, and now I'm an Obama supporter.

For whatever reason, Clark's reasons for endorsing Hillary are different than his reasons for recommending Lakoff. That's ok, he's still one of my few heros, but I think his instincts are much better on the Lakoff thing than the Hillary thing.

[mrbluto]

20. Hope? Let me tell you a bit about that word.

There are a few things to consider about the reliance on the word "hope".

I'll have to check it out more thoroughly, but at first blush it looks like Lakoff's list could be called the "why it's troublesome to actually make the rubber meet the road" list. Maybe the "It's easier to sell people a pig-in-a-poke" list.

Sounds like one candidate is much better at using the non-rational, impulsive nature of people to an electoral advantage.

How does will that work for actual governance?

Seriously - maybe that's what we need at this point.

[Qutzupalotl]

22. Hope is what inspires work.

True, you don't just hope your way to the moon, but you don't get there at all without it.

A laundry list of policies does not connect with voters as well as explaining or showing what you believe and value, and how your policies follow from there. That will help people trust your capacity to make decisions and policies in the future.

[Skittles]

21. alright, time for IGNORE

enough is enough