Mouse rant blog vent mouse.

Monday, August 02, 2004

We can take the tool of fear away from them

There's going to be a lot of alarm over this story that argues that as long as people can be kept in a state of fear they are going to feel positively towards Bush. The finding is that if people are reminded of terrorism and death, they are more attracted to Bush and/or the more charismatic candidate. Of course, the odds that BushCo will do the right thing and refrain from using government resources to whip up a frenzy of fear right before the election are little to nothing. The Democrats and their supporters must treat terrorist alerts and fear-mongering right before the election as inevitable.

Luckily, we're on the right track--people like Michael Moore are out there doing everything in their power to humiliate the President and tear down the alpha-male image that Karl Rove has carefully built around him. The more fear they generate, the more we need to counter, strangely enough, with images of Bush stuttering, losing his temper, and otherwise getting caught being his actual, non-stage-managed self. On the positive side, pushing Kerry as a war hero is going to be very effective--you can tell that it's our side's best weapon because the Republicans are doing everything they can to attack his war record, even though that's going to be the most difficult thing for them to attack effectively.

I know those are the two strategies that drive wonky liberals nuts. Showing off Bush's moronic side is a cheap shot and emphasizing a war record of 30 years ago instead of policy decisions is exactly the sort of thing that wonky types hate about modern campaigning. But what choice do we have? A last-ditch emotional manipulation of terrorism fears by BushCo is a certainty--anything they can do to make sure people vote with their fears instead of their minds they will do. Unless we set up a series of images to dismantle these emotional pleas, we are screwed. I just don't see how we have much of a choice.

Through South Knox Bubba, a tool of Bush mockery that you can use at home.

8 Comments:

Blogger Earnest said...

What policy? I went to John Kerry's senate website and couldn't find any major policy that he'd speareaded and passed. I'm voting for John Edwards, but no dusting off of a war record from decades past is going to make me support John Kerry.

It's easy to deride the terror alerts, but when you actually live in New York, it's a little more present and real. At least for me. This island is so dense. Whenever I venture into the Times Square subway stop, I can't help but think of the chaos that just a minor disruption would cause. I'm going nowhere near Wall Street for a couple of days.

8/02/2004

 
Blogger Amanda said...

Nice dodge--before buying the "undistinguished record" line the RNC is doling out desperately (begging, just begging the Dems to bring up Iran-Contra), read Kerry's actual platform.

http://www.johnkerry.com/issues/

8/02/2004

 
Blogger Jason said...

"I know those are the two strategies that drive wonky liberals nuts."

No kidding. It's because it's wrong.

I certainly delight in Bush humiliation. He's got it coming. And I don't think Kerry's 30 year old war record is actually a non issue. So I mostly agree with you.

However, I also think that in the long run every time you use cheap or dishonest tactics, you make it easier for those tactics to work and you make it harder for people to engage with the actual situation at hand. It is therefore better in the long run--and more honorable right now--to always take the high road.

I'm going to try and come up with a better and more convincing way to say this.

8/02/2004

 
Blogger Amanda said...

I don't think those tactics should be used instead of discussing actual policy. But the Democrats are only losing because they are taking the "high road" and not speaking to the enviroment that actually is. The Republicans play dirty and get people to vote against their own interests.
I know what you're saying, but the cheap shots I'm talking about--not letting Bush have his false dignity, drawing attention to his AWOL crap, playing up Kerry's war record--none of these are really that bad. Certainly I'm not endorsing outright lying and invading the private lives of people who have never tried to use the arm of the law to invade others' private lives. But it's immoral on a certain level to allow the Republicans to continue to lure people into a trap because we don't want to get dirty and expose them for the rats they are. (Not all Republicans are rats, of course. But the one who do things like block polls or destroy inconvenient records certainly are.)

8/02/2004

 
Blogger Earnest said...

I'm not exactly chomping at the Republican bit here. I was just interested in learning more about Kerry because I am a John Edwards man, and I was unimpressed with John Kerry. A platform is one thing, but the ability to make good on that platform is entirely another. If you spend 20 years in the Senate, please have something to show for it so that I will believe you can get the job done in the Oval Office.

8/02/2004

 
Blogger Amanda said...

Okay, well if the fact that he is incredibly strong on two of Bush's biggest weaknesses--the enviroment and honesty in government--isn't enough to convince you that he's a leader with intergrity, nothing will. Go to Rox Populi's July archives--she has all sorts of reasons to vote for Kerry. Start with the enviroment.

http://roxanne.typepad.com/rantrave/2004/07/reason_to_vote_.html

None of the stuff that Kerry puts on his website about his record in the Senate is untrue. You may not think you've absorbed a RNC talking point--but where did you first hear that Kerry's Senate record was undistinguished?

8/02/2004

 
Blogger Earnest said...

I acknowledge that that's where I first heard the claim, but I went to Kerry's site and not a news site to find out the real deal, and I saw a big fat nothing. Even the link that you pointed me to doesn't show anything that Kerry has done, and that's my point. I am wondering about Kerry's results in the Senate, and I'm not seeing much.

8/02/2004

 
Anonymous Anonymous said...

What's this about losing now? You must have seen http://www.electoral-vote.com/ right?

8/03/2004

 

Post a Comment

Subscribe to Post Comments [Atom]

<< Home