No matter what you think of the ideology, you have to respect the art of the video. It seems as though we as a people, have lost the art of politics. We have descended into a place where the only message is negativity. We continually point out the negative of our opposition, and fail to put forth a positive view of anything, or anyone.
Is it any wonder the people of America are angry, when so often the message is one of hopelessness. Even a message of “HOPE AND CHANGE”, sends the message there is a reason, a need, to hope for change. The message of, “MAKE AMERICA GREAT AGAIN”, sends the message America is no longer great.
I went to the RNC site to see if I could find anything comparative to this DNC video, the closest I came was this.
And while this video has a positive message, it is more about trying to disprove the idea the GOP is a bunch of old white men. So as the Democrat video shows exactly who they are, and pride in being so, the GOP video is more about saying, this is who we would like to be, but we need leaders to get there.
Strictly on the point of the art used, and the likelihood it will cause people to have a positive reaction, I have to say the Democrats are better at branding.
I did find this video from sometime around 2007, or before, which is more of a generic message of hope, but still falls short of saying who the Republicans are as a party.
This is just an observation of the art of politics, and how the GOP is losing the battle of winning hearts and minds. Yes, you can inspire people who are already angry, to be more angry, by repeating angry slogans. But have we given up on trying to inspire people to see the good in all people? Have we given up trying to win people over to our views, with reason and logic, in favor of simply defeating them, with insults and name calling?
Have we given up trying to deliver the message, we are all Americans, something even the Democrat video failed to touch on. Until that is the message, we as a nation will continue to grow further and further apart, based upon politics, religion, race, economics, even based on gender of all things.
There is definitely an art to the political ad, and currently it is being squandered, wasted for simple political gain. What we need are politicians, and there campaigns, which are concerned with more than the win, we need people who are concerned about the future of this nation, not just slogans, but real ideas and goals, not just rhetoric, but articulation of those ideas and goals.
From Chapter 6., “The Arts of Selling,” Brave New World Revisited, Aldous Huxley:
The political merchandisers appeal only to the weaknesses of voters, never to their potential strength. They make no attempt to educate the masses into becoming fit for self-government; they are content merely to manipulate and exploit them. For this purpose all the resources of psychology and the social sciences are mobilized and set to work. Carefully selected samples of the electorate are given “interviews in depth.” These interviews in depth reveal the unconscious fears and wishes most prevalent in a given society at the time of an election. Phrases and images aimed at allaying or, if necessary, enhancing these fears, at satisfying these wishes, at least symbolically, are then chosen by the experts, tried out on readers and audiences, changed or improved in the light of the information thus obtained. After which the political campaign is ready for the mass communicators. All that is now needed is money and a candidate who can be coached to look “sincere.” Under the new dispensation, political principles and plans for specific action have come to lose most of their importance. The personality of the candidate and the way he is projected by the advertising experts are the things that really matter.
In one way or another, as vigorous he-man or kindly father, the candidate must be glamorous. He must also be an entertainer who never bores his audience. Inured to television and radio, that audience is accustomed to being distracted and does not like to be asked to concentrate or make a prolonged intellectual effort. All speeches by the entertainer-candidate must therefore be short and snappy. The great issues of the day must be dealt with in five minutes at the most — and preferably (since the audience will be eager to pass on to something a little livelier than inflation or the H-bomb) in sixty seconds flat. The nature of oratory is such that there has always been a tendency among politicians and clergymen to over-simplify complex issues. From a pulpit or a platform even the most conscientious of speakers finds it very difficult to tell the whole truth. The methods now being used to merchandise the political candidate as though he were a deodorant positively guarantee the electorate against ever hearing the truth about anything.
As Americans become more and more dumbed down (a planned event), look for even more crass campaigning as “entertainment.” The average person knows nothing of CS Lewis, Chesterton or even Huxley, but they sure love Hillary the Drama Queen and the buffoon Trump squeezed-in between Kim Kardashian and Kaitlyn Jenner. You see, a showman and a career liar with an inclination toward criminality are the two best candidates available in a nation of 320 million people.
Socialist-Democrats like Hillary have spent a lifetime pigeonholing Americans into groups; the LGBT community, African Americans, Hispanics, single mothers, the disenfranchised, criminals and so on. Yet, through this Balkanization, we are supposed to believe that their candidate is “bringing Americans together.” Who cares if such an absurd aphorism is inconsistent with reality?
It sure sounds good.
Sort of like Gore’s Freudian slip from years past- “e pluribus unum– out of one, many.”
When you have a winning brand, you don’t worry where all the pennies are going. Your focus is on accepting more and more new business and having resources available to handle them.
When you are no longer the winning brand, that is when you double down on what resources you have. Don’t spend anything unless I tell you to.. Do this, don’t do that, we can save a nickel here, a dime there if you do it this labor intensive way.. And no raises.
it is really about branding; who you are, what you project, and how well you sell yourself… A really bad car with a slick advertising campaign can only sell until the customer reviews start coming it… A really good car, sells itself…
Interesting how conservatives so hate education, universities, scientists, artists and educators. It’s quite telling
It is unfair to actual conservatives to call the free-floating agenda of anger and negativity and general rejection of government “conservative”.
“He must also be an entertainer who never bores his audience.”
Which is kind of surprising, since the only presidential candidates of whom I’m aware in recent memory with actual careers as entertainers were Ronald Reagan and Donald Trump.
Unlike Trump, though, Reagan had experience as a union official and a governor of a large state.
Trump is not boring, I’ll give you that.
“The great issues of the day must be dealt with in five minutes at the most…”
You mean like taking a complex issue such as immigration reform and reducing it to “I’m going to build a wall and make Mexico pay for it”? That sort of thing?
You “liberals” are so defensive. Huxley’s piece applies to all politician of all parties. It has been that way for at least since the Kennedy-Nixon debate. The campaigns are orchestrated by social engineers or all sorts, straight from Madison Avenue. The only thing missing is Otto Poetzl’s subliminal suggestions, and I’m not even sure about that.
Push up bra..