For all those undecided voters out there

[fedupinBushcountry]

I just came across this article by George Lakoff and you know I think he gets it, at least I see it exactly the same way.

What Counts as an "Issue" In the Clinton-Obama Race?

snip>

It is time to understand what counts as an "issue," to whom, and why.

In Thinking Points, the handbook for progressives that the Rockridge Institute staff and I wrote last year, we began by analyzing Ronald Reagan's strengths as a politician. According to his chief strategist, Richard Wirthlin, Reagan realized that most voters do not vote primarily on the basis of policies, but rather on (1) values, (2) connection, (3) authenticity, (4) trust, and (5) identity. That is, Reagan spoke about his values, and policies for him just exemplified values. He connected viscerally with people. He was perceived as authentic, as really believing what he said. As a result, people trusted him and identified with him. Even if they had different positions on issues, they knew where he stood. Even when his economic policies did not produce a "Morning in America," voters still felt a connection to him because he spoke to what they wanted America to be. That was what allowed Reagan to gain the votes of so many independents and Democrats.

There is a reason that Obama recently spoke of Reagan. Reagan understood that you win elections by drawing support from independents and the opposite side. He understood what unified the country so that he could lead it according to his vision. His vision was a radical conservative one, a vision devastating for the country and contradicted by his economic policies.

Obama understands the importance of values, connection, authenticity, trust, and identity.

But his vision is deeply progressive. He proposes to lead in a very different direction than Reagan. Crucially, he adds to that vision a streetwise pragmatism: his policies have to do more than look good on paper; they have to bring concrete material results to millions of struggling Americans in the lower and middle classes. They have to meet the criteria of a community organizer.


snip>

This nomination campaign is about much more than the candidates. It about a major split within the Democratic party. The candidates are reflecting that split. Here are three of the major "issues" dividing Democrats.

First, triangulation: moving to the right -- adopting right-wing positions -- to get more votes. Bill Clinton did it and Hillary believes in it. It is what she means by "bipartisanship." Obama means the opposite by "bipartisanship." To Obama, it is a recognition that central progressive moral principles are fundamental American principles. For him, bipartisanship means finding people who call themselves "conservatives" or "independents," but who share those central American values with progressives. Obama thus doesn't have to surrender or dilute his principles for the sake of "bipartisanship."

The second is incrementalism: Hillary believes in getting lots of small carefully crafted policies through, one at a time, step by small step, real but almost unnoticed. Obama believes in bold moves and the building of a movement in which the bold moves are demanded by the people and celebrated when they happen. This is the reason why Hillary talks about "I," I," "I" (the crafter of the policy) and Obama talks about "you" and "we" (the people who demand it and who jointly carry it out).

The third is interest group politics: Hillary looks at politics through interests and interest groups, seeking policies that satisfy the interests of such groups. Obama's thinking emphasizes empathy over interest groups. He also sees empathy as central to the very idea of America. The result is a positive politics grounded in empathy and caring that is also patriotic and uplifting.

For a great many Democrats, these are the real issues. These real differences between the candidates reflect real differences within the party. Whoever gets the nomination, these differences will remain.

It is time for the press, the pundits, the pollsters, and the political scientists to take these issues seriously.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/george-lakoff/what-counts-as-an-issue_b_84177.html">read it ALL here

Please read it and THINK about what he is saying. I really do believe that is what most of us here want a new and true progressive party. So just take time to read it and THINK from your heart and your gut and it is only you that can make a decision on who you want to support, not me or anyone else, I thought this may help.

[aquart]

1. "Streetwise pragmatism"???

I LOVE a subtle distortion. Obama grew up in Hawaii and Indonesia, the only streets he knows are tropical paradise streets. He went to private schools, and from there to the Ivy League. THEN he became a "community organizer." So he was fully adult when he found out the first thing about the streets the rest of us grew up on. "Streetwise." Well, they say he's a quick study.

[NoBorders]

2. Rockridge rocks

The framers of 'Framing' know what they're talking about.

[southern_dem]

3. interesting article

Thanks, still trying to make up my mind. :)

[fedupinBushcountry]

4. Your very welcome

:-)

[fedupinBushcountry]

5. Kicking

so hopefully it will be seen amongst some of the nonsense posts.

:kick: