Tonight, I wandered through many progressive news outlits, blogs, and campaign websites looking for answers on how we can win... and I have a confession: I'm on the verge of losing my mind. Over here, I read another de-construction of Lakoff's "nurturing" theme, and over there I read another call to "brand" our political cause; however, I'll be frank about my opinion: Lakoff, Brand Democrat, and all other efforts to repackage our message will lose. Now, my reader might be wondering, "what evidence do you have to say that?" Good question reader, let me explain:

George Lakoff has given us a much needed gift. During the fall of late 2003, he introduced many of us to the concept of cognitive frames; he educated us on how Republican think tanks had used framing to capture the congress in 94, and eventually the White House in 00' and 04'. However, there are two pink elephants in regards to Lakoff's theory:

1. While he cracked the code to the Republican "strict father" frame, his "nurturant family" frame lacks vitality and substance. For a cognitive linguist, one would have expected a better word for our frame than "nurture" -- a positivelty pink word that evokes images of lactating nipples, infants, and pregnant women. Don't misread that criticism, I'm simply saying that an overtly femine frame is disagreeable considering we need male votes as well as female votes.
2. The strict father frame developed by Republican think tanks took decades to pull off. They started with Reagan (about two years before I was born), and now, 24 years later, it is giving the Republicans their full returns. First off, we don't have 24 years to allow our seeds to grow in the public mind. Second off, the idea of crafting unified messages arose in an era of TV-age politics. Our success, if it is ever possible, is not going to come through televised sound bytes. We need to be thinking ahead of the Republicans: let them have there talk radio, and fox news. Let's get to work on using the next generation of communcation tools (hey guess what: we're using the prototypes of those tools right now)

Now in regards to "branding democrats". For Christ's sake: first off, 'Democrat' is a brand that is associated with losing. Second off, lets stop look at voters as consumers, or demographs. There is no lower form of looking at human beings than as mere demographs of religion, sex, race, age, and income. Perhaps we might begin by respecting our voters as being something more than empty consumer vessals; mere brains that deserve a good washing by method of incessent televised advertising. So, I have a frame, its simple, its too the point, and it will work.

Okay, its true: Nadar does speak out against
issues that most Democrats won't touch. His campaign speeches criticize
NAFTA, WTO, deregulation of the airwaves, and corporate welfare. And
yes -- he thinks we should have more than two parties. So, to recap:
Nadar talks and has opinions. He is also a shameless egoist who
exploits the idealism of young leftists, and old idiots.

Nader
claims that its "the Democrat's fault" if they cannot gain support from
the left-wing's most naive and stupid voters. Nadar says that Kerry
should "end the war in Iraq"," create a system of universal health
care", and enforce a "living wage" (which he left undefined). Indeed we
would all like to see Nader's dreams bloom into a world without war,
pollution, or poverty. Unfortunatly, those dreams are divorced from
reality.

To begin, all progressive minded individuals need to eradicate their faith in revolution, or as it is commonly called in the parlance of our times, "waking people up". Every time you think people are going to magically "wake up", follow this proceedure:

Go to the grocery store and look at the masses of dead-eyed, sleepwalkers contently waddling down the aisles. Those are your voters. Repeat the Following Mantra:Your political message is for them, not you.Your only Job is to turn your message into actual votes.If you think elections are won with reason, truth, or moralityThan dear lord my friend, politics is not for you.

The GOP and Karl Rove understand , and take advantage of this fact. As a result, those dolts keep winning elections. It's a sad fact that Republicans are yet to lose on account of overestimating the stupidity of voters.Notes on Language:Here's a few hints on crafting messages: don't bring up controversial social issues unless necessary. We should take back the language! Humor me, and contemplate the differences in your responses to these two sentences:

"It's a woman's right to have an abortion! We must stop these fundamentalists fromcreating their theological fascist regime!"