Democratic hopefuls could learn from Bernie Sanders and Pete Buttigieg

[mobeau69]

Longtime scholar Dan Nimmo, whose research has contributed to the disciplines of political science, journalism, and communication, was one of the first to define and analyze the various audiences to whom political candidates might address themselves. These audiences ranged from true believers (the base who must be motivated to work for the campaign), to those open to persuasion (voters who may not have made up their minds and/or don’t follow the campaign closely), to those who are weakly supportive and must be motivated to vote, to those firmly committed to the opposition candidate and who are beyond persuasive reach.

For Nimmo, the key question faced by all candidates is: Strategically, to which audiences do you want to allocate a finite amount of money and devote limited rhetorical resources?

What has become clear since Donald Trump became President is that politicians seem more inclined than ever to communicate primarily to their own tribe; there is a reticence to target the opposition’s audience.

Two notable exceptions to this trend are Vermont Senator Bernie Sanders and South Bend Mayor Pete Buttigieg. To be clear, I am not endorsing or recommending either as the choice of the Democrats for President of the United States. I have not made up my mind about who to support — and won’t until more is known about each candidate.

more: https://thehill.com/opinion/campaign/440973-democratic-hopefuls-could-learn-from-bernie-sanders-and-pete-buttigieg

[JI7]

1. but Sanders had trouble answering simple questions by WOC who are the base

of the party.

[AlexSFCA]

2. I would add Andrew Yang to that list

I just recently discovered this guy and he has very broad appeal and likely the most intelligent candidate.

[SMC22307]

3. Like Howard Dean's 50-state strategy...

which once upon a time was embraced on DU.

[sheshe2]

4. Well...

From your link.

A key principle in political communication is that candidates for public office may not be successful by exclusively preaching to the choir. Sanders’ decision to talk with Fox News shows that he and his handlers understand this principle. Moreover, moving outside his comfort zone — to speak to an audience comprised of many who do not share his political beliefs — appears to have been successful.

To the surprise — if not chagrin — of the Fox hosts, Sanders received enthusiastic applause from the town hall audience on several important issues; most notably, the audience expressed a clear willingness to give up their current healthcare insurance plan for a single payer provider

Interesting. Speaking outside his comfort zone(Faux snooze) was successful Yet speaking to WOC, which is also outside his comfort zone @ #SheThePeople (Our Democratic base) was not. He was booed.

One more thing I would like to add. His "handlers" so the article called them here:

Sanders’ decision to talk with Fox News shows that he and his handlers understand this principle. Moreover, moving outside his comfort zone — to speak to an audience comprised of many who do not share his political beliefs — appears to have been successful.

So his "handlers" understand the principle and when they do not like the results, then said handler Nina Turner, blasts not, Faux who roared their approval and instead blasted WOC for booing a non answer from BS.

Go figure.

[spicysista]

5. Spot on, sheshe2!

Where one invests his/her time says a lot about their priorities. BS should know the only way to the nomination (and beyond) will be with the help of black women. The future of this country isn't getting whiter. The future is female and all colorful! He needs to do better. Quickly.

[rusty quoin]

7. Yeah. That's old type politics. I like old school.

[murielm99]

8. Unfortunately, not many people realize

that the Faux audience that saw BS was not a typical Faux audience. It was composed mainly of BS' supporters.

There were several threads here offering proof of the composition of the audience and how they were chosen.

Comfort zone my ass.

[Celerity]

6. I would add Beto and Warren as well. They really are great reaching outside of their comfort zone.

I cringe when I see Bernie and Pete's names in same sentence, as many of the most virulent (I AM NOT TALKING ABOUT ANYONE HERE ON DU!) and rabid Sanderites (especially Twitter, regressive left journos, FB, radical websites/forums etc etc) have just been trying to say and do anything to bash Buttigieg and take him out. I am NOT talking legitimate criticisms about policy, etc. That is entirely fair game. I mean just dirty rotten lies and smears, utter distortions, threatening talk, etc etc. I have even seen casual (or not so casual) homophobia rear its ugly head (again, NOT on DU).

[Hortensis]

9. Well, every one of our major DEMOCRATIC candidates is doing this.

To various degrees of course, and I assume this person is saying some should expand their efforts.

To be liberal, though, is to be open to others who are different and to be inclusive, and this practically defines the Democratic Party. Because of that Democrats are a giant, liberally dominated coalition of dozens of different ethnic, religious, racial, and gender ID groups.

The Republican Party, OTOH, is conservative, segregated racially, and hostile to expansion of women's rights and non-Christian religions. HUGE differences. Trump did draw in those famous white working men Democrats, who were upset about losing their white male privileges, from the "other side," but he was still speaking within his tribe.

Which is why we need to notice when experts like this one hide behind talking about "politicians" instead of risking angering the right by too obvious truth, in this case, not pointing out that this "tribal" focus is much stronger among conservative politicians. Big no to failing to recognize false equivalency and the failure of understanding it creates, whether advancing a malicious political agenda or just out of genuine fear of being targeted by the right.