WORDS TO WIN AN ELECTION

Scheiber, Noam (2005) Wooden frames THE NEW REPUBLIC, 5/23, 2005. 14-20.

Lakoff appears to be a genius in approaching the voter with an old paradigm but with a new frame or spin. However, the author takes exception with this.

Although he sees the merit in reframing a debate, facts still matter. Lakoff contends that the Democratic Party can win on a Liberal platform. The Republicans win on a compassionate conservative one. That means that they know how to reach out to the center. The Democrats don’t know how to do that.

Layoff suggests that words matter. So do his critics, however substance matters too. As an example, Clinton ran on a strong crime control, keeping abortions rare, little gun intervention, education spending and protecting the environment and the family. That reads like centrism.

He also used the right words. Both Gore and Kerry had populist messages. Gore had to indirectly defend Clinton’s sex life and Kerry on his position with Iraq. Bush’s message was consistent. He barely won the first race and won the second with 3 million votes.

Perhaps, Layoff’s view that Liberals envision a nurturing family and conservatives a strong patriarchal family is helpful. However, words alone do not make a victory.

The Dems need to support a big tent on abortion. Soften anti-gun rhetoric, and start talking religion and the kitchen table.