Politics requires appeals to emotion. It just does.

[phantom power]

Politics requires appeals to emotion. It just does. There are very few people who sit down and read the campaign platforms of the candidates and the parties, set up a spread sheet and analyze the issues pro and con. And frankly, they don't need to. Humans have highly developed systems to evaluate other humans based on a whole lot of sophisticated, subliminal criteria. A good politician's appeal is partly based upon policy, to be sure, but largely people vote for them on tribal identification and personal attraction.

It's complicated but when you boil it down, in American politics, you have two political tribes --- the fear and resentment tribe and the inspiration and progress tribe. I think it's obvious which are which --- it's no accident that the last two Democratic presidents both ran with "hope" as their slogans. People respond to the parties based largely on their own temperament and sense of belonging in that particular tribe. (I had a relative who told me that she didn't really think too much about politics, she just felt that if she voted for a Democrat it would feel like she was a cat having her fur brushed backwards.)

Obama brought out a huge number of people, particularly idealistic young people and African Americans, because of idealism. Although we political junkies were all impressed with his "cool" and his brains, that wasn't the main thing most people found attractive about him. What they saw was that he was the inspirational, living proof of progress and it was a powerful symbol and message.

All successful presidents find ways to keep their own tribe happy while appropriating enough of the other sides' heuristic identifiers to appeal to a few who would normally go with other tribe. But they have to make sure that their own followers maintain their identification with them as well. So Democrats have to keep hope alive. Obama is flirting with failure on that count and I think it's dangerous. His success, and the party's future, depends upon maintaining an enthusiastic base of young and idealistic people long enough for their attraction to Obama to gel into long term political commitment. Because Democrats depend upon inspiration and optimism, it's imperative that they deliver progress. Cynicism, anger and fear either demobilize the base or send some of them to a third party or even the other side. It's a danger that Democrats don't seem ever see and I don't understand why, especially after what happened in 2000. We've seen that it can be fatal.

http://digbysblog.blogspot.com/2009/09/keep-hope-alive-by-digby-i-understand.html

[FiveGoodMen]

1. Sad but true.

[phantom power]

3. I used to think it was sad, but I have changed the way I think about politics.

I now think of politics, or leadership, as the art of aligning people's emotions with policy goals. Republicans are good at this. Democrats seem to hide from it. But you can't hide from it. It's like saying their plan is to hide from human nature.

People out there are scared, and for good reason. All this insane behavior -- guns at presidential appearances, parents demanding to "protect" their kids from a presidential speech about getting a good education, the existence of Glenn Beck, etc -- is people's emotion, finding the first available outlet: like lightning to a radio tower. If leaders are not willing or able to channel that raw emotion and align it with their policy goals, the best possible case is that it strikes out randomly and dangerously. The worst possible case is some demagogue takes the reins.

We are entering the winter of history's seasons. The order of the last hundred years is falling apart. It is also the witching hour -- the time when anything can happen, and humanity is being forced to change. If nobody shows up to play the role of FDR, then there is a real danger of somebody appearing to play the role of Hitler, or Stalin.

[FiveGoodMen]

4. "If [there's no] FDR [we may get] Hitler or Stalin"

That's why I'm bothered by the need for the emotional appeal.

Reasonable people wouldn't follow a Hitler or Stalin, but emotional ones could do anything.

[TxRider]

2. Hmm..

"Cynicism, anger and fear either demobilize the base or send some of them to a third party or even the other side."

Did it have that effect when it was cynicism, anger and fear about Bush during this last election? Obamas foundation for his campaign was change after all, specifically change from Bush.

Hmm thinking back it might have, McCain did start to take a lead after the conventions up until the economic crash..