There is a political party in the USA today that is flying the banner of God, Family, and Country. Very reasonable, albeit vacuous, but implicit in the statement is that those of the other party are against these things. To the contrary, it is difficult to imagine anybody who does not support their own religious faith, their families, and a strong and pleasant country to live in. For whatever reason, the other party has not explicitly defended their beliefs in these things. It would be simple to do so.
The proponents of this slogan seem to have in mind a very narrow view of what a religion, a family, or a country is. The obvious retort would be support for “The Peoples of All Religions, All Families, and All Nations”. Given that the claim is made, at least in part, on religious grounds, the response can also be given a religious slant. What keeps going through my mind is the adage WWJD (What Would Jesus Do?). His response, to me anyway, seems obvious. He would choose to Love Peoples of All Gods, to Love All Families whatever their make-up might be, and to Love the Peoples of All Countries throughout the world.
The coming election is, at least in part, a referendum on whether our values are exclusive to a specific segment of the population or inclusive, extending to the Universal!
I think the electorate is much more volatile that most commentators realize. Their readiness to jump ship and change position may account for the difficulties in prognosticating elections that will take place several months in the future.
A few reasons why and a few examples:
1) In part, I think that it is hard to predict an election, several months into the future, because a very sizable proportion of the populace knows next to nothing about politics, can barely define words such as liberal and conservative and will be unduly swayed by superficial nonsense, stupid "scandals," and the prevailing headlines in the last two weeks of an election:
Examples:
A) Studies show that a large proportion of white supporters of RFK in the Spring of 1968 supported George Wallace in the autumn of 68 notwithstanding their diametrically opposed stances on the issues. Some observers said that both candidates had a high measure of emotional intensity that certain voters considered a sure sign of authenticity and honest pain.
B) Tracking polls show that George Bush lost a lot of fundamentalist supporters to Gore in the closing days of the 2000 election owing to reports of a drunk driving incident
2) Consider the incredible chasms between poll numbers and results:
January or February of 1991: Bush has an approval rating of 91 percent
November 1992: Clinton beats Bush 43 to 38 (Perot got a sizable share of the vote)
Most of 1971: Nixon's approval rating is in the low to mid 40's
November 72: Nixon gets about 60 percent of the vote
Between Now and election day 22, political operatives can cook up lots of disgusting scandals
This is an excellent interview and analysis of the upcoming 2022 midterms. I do have one correction to make: It's Mark Kelly of Arizona, not Scott. Scott Kelly is the twin brother of Mark but I think Scott lives in Houston, Texas.
Our the Dems numbers really that good? What about Gallup reports like in January 17, 2022?
"On average, Americans' political party preferences in 2021 looked similar to prior years, with slightly more U.S. adults identifying as Democrats or leaning Democratic (46%) than identified as Republicans or leaned Republican (43%).
However, the general stability for the full-year average obscures a dramatic shift over the course of 2021, from a nine-percentage-point Democratic advantage in the first quarter to a rare five-point Republican edge in the fourth quarter."
Is there an organized voter registration drive to get Democratic voters registered?
As any magician knows, the success of the spectacle relies on perception and its opposite, deception. The Democratic Party must now magnify the voters' PERception of the party as a jobs creation machine, as you have described. At the same time the party must hammer the truth that Republicans are masters of DEception, with no sense of the process of governing. The contrast between the generic brandings is the key, as there are now stark behavioral differences to highlight and exploit.
Another message missed by Democrats?
God Family Country
There is a political party in the USA today that is flying the banner of God, Family, and Country. Very reasonable, albeit vacuous, but implicit in the statement is that those of the other party are against these things. To the contrary, it is difficult to imagine anybody who does not support their own religious faith, their families, and a strong and pleasant country to live in. For whatever reason, the other party has not explicitly defended their beliefs in these things. It would be simple to do so.
The proponents of this slogan seem to have in mind a very narrow view of what a religion, a family, or a country is. The obvious retort would be support for “The Peoples of All Religions, All Families, and All Nations”. Given that the claim is made, at least in part, on religious grounds, the response can also be given a religious slant. What keeps going through my mind is the adage WWJD (What Would Jesus Do?). His response, to me anyway, seems obvious. He would choose to Love Peoples of All Gods, to Love All Families whatever their make-up might be, and to Love the Peoples of All Countries throughout the world.
The coming election is, at least in part, a referendum on whether our values are exclusive to a specific segment of the population or inclusive, extending to the Universal!
I think the electorate is much more volatile that most commentators realize. Their readiness to jump ship and change position may account for the difficulties in prognosticating elections that will take place several months in the future.
A few reasons why and a few examples:
1) In part, I think that it is hard to predict an election, several months into the future, because a very sizable proportion of the populace knows next to nothing about politics, can barely define words such as liberal and conservative and will be unduly swayed by superficial nonsense, stupid "scandals," and the prevailing headlines in the last two weeks of an election:
Examples:
A) Studies show that a large proportion of white supporters of RFK in the Spring of 1968 supported George Wallace in the autumn of 68 notwithstanding their diametrically opposed stances on the issues. Some observers said that both candidates had a high measure of emotional intensity that certain voters considered a sure sign of authenticity and honest pain.
B) Tracking polls show that George Bush lost a lot of fundamentalist supporters to Gore in the closing days of the 2000 election owing to reports of a drunk driving incident
2) Consider the incredible chasms between poll numbers and results:
January or February of 1991: Bush has an approval rating of 91 percent
November 1992: Clinton beats Bush 43 to 38 (Perot got a sizable share of the vote)
Most of 1971: Nixon's approval rating is in the low to mid 40's
November 72: Nixon gets about 60 percent of the vote
Between Now and election day 22, political operatives can cook up lots of disgusting scandals
This is an excellent interview and analysis of the upcoming 2022 midterms. I do have one correction to make: It's Mark Kelly of Arizona, not Scott. Scott Kelly is the twin brother of Mark but I think Scott lives in Houston, Texas.
Our the Dems numbers really that good? What about Gallup reports like in January 17, 2022?
"On average, Americans' political party preferences in 2021 looked similar to prior years, with slightly more U.S. adults identifying as Democrats or leaning Democratic (46%) than identified as Republicans or leaned Republican (43%).
However, the general stability for the full-year average obscures a dramatic shift over the course of 2021, from a nine-percentage-point Democratic advantage in the first quarter to a rare five-point Republican edge in the fourth quarter."
Is there an organized voter registration drive to get Democratic voters registered?
As any magician knows, the success of the spectacle relies on perception and its opposite, deception. The Democratic Party must now magnify the voters' PERception of the party as a jobs creation machine, as you have described. At the same time the party must hammer the truth that Republicans are masters of DEception, with no sense of the process of governing. The contrast between the generic brandings is the key, as there are now stark behavioral differences to highlight and exploit.
TERRIFIC CONVO. tom cronin