#1  
Old 02-18-2019, 12:43 PM
Exapno Mapcase is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: NY but not NYC
Posts: 31,279

Hope vs. Fear


I've been arguing that debating the GND on the basis that it unrealistically utopian is missing the point. Progressive Democrats finally seem to have broken through to the realization that people want hope for a better future. Merely serving up fear 24/7 worked for a while but the progressives think - and I agree - that hope is a better long term strategy.

I guess we'll see whether that's a good argument.

Republicans Hope to Sway Voters With Labels That Demonize Democrats
Quote:
In the 116th Congress, if you’re a Democrat, you’re either a socialist, a baby killer or an anti-Semite.

That, at least, is what Republicans want voters to think, as they seek to demonize Democrats well in advance of the 2020 elections by painting them as left-wing crazies who will destroy the American economy, murder newborn babies and turn a blind eye to bigotry against Jews.
Yay, American values.
  #2  
Old 02-18-2019, 12:46 PM
Velocity is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jun 2014
Posts: 14,365
Loss aversion: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Loss_aversion

The fear of loss is a much more powerful motivation than the desire for gain. But yes, relentlessly beating the drum of fear and gloom takes a toll on voters and every now and then they want that ray of light. But, again, one side's ray of hope is the other side's laser beam of tragedy and mayhem.
  #3  
Old 02-18-2019, 01:02 PM
elbows is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2000
Location: London, Ontario
Posts: 14,287
GND? Isn’t that a wiring thing?

Huh?

Can anyone decode?
  #4  
Old 02-18-2019, 01:37 PM
Inigo Montoya's Avatar
Inigo Montoya is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: On the level, if inclined
Posts: 15,744
Green New Deal
  #5  
Old 02-18-2019, 03:24 PM
Kent Clark's Avatar
Kent Clark is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Apr 1999
Posts: 25,947
You could say that Obama ran a campaign of hope, but we have to remember that the economy was crashing, and a good deal of "hope" was simply the fear that things would get worse if the Republicans got four more years.

Jimmy Carter and Ronald Reagan were supposedly candidates of hope, but a lot of their support came from voters' disillusionment from the previous four years.
  #6  
Old 02-18-2019, 07:22 PM
Exapno Mapcase is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: NY but not NYC
Posts: 31,279
Quote:
Originally Posted by kunilou View Post
You could say that Obama ran a campaign of hope, but we have to remember that the economy was crashing, and a good deal of "hope" was simply the fear that things would get worse if the Republicans got four more years.

Jimmy Carter and Ronald Reagan were supposedly candidates of hope, but a lot of their support came from voters' disillusionment from the previous four years.
And there's no voter disillusionment from these four years?

The point is that many of our right-wing posters keep insisting that hope is a bad strategy. The alternative? Apparently that's fear, which is perfectly all right as an election strategy because that can't turn any voters off at all.

Excuse me while I smilie again.

  #7  
Old 02-18-2019, 07:58 PM
KarlGauss's Avatar
KarlGauss is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2000
Location: Between pole and tropic
Posts: 8,117
"People want hope for a better future". Indeed they do. And now many people, maybe most, are hoping for something very different than a GND, something very simple.

They hope that Trump will not win in 2020 and a Democrat will be the next president.

As a bonus, it's far more likely to actually happen than any green new deal.
  #8  
Old 02-18-2019, 08:07 PM
Exapno Mapcase is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: NY but not NYC
Posts: 31,279
Quote:
Originally Posted by KarlGauss View Post
"People want hope for a better future". Indeed they do. And now many people, maybe most, are hoping for something very different than a GND, something very simple.

They hope that Trump will not win in 2020 and a Democrat will be the next president.

As a bonus, it's far more likely to actually happen than any green new deal.
It won't happen if Trump once again boosts turnout from people who are crazed with fear about the socialists and MS 13 and millions of illegals voting. Are you suggesting that Democrats don't need to do anything to counter that?
  #9  
Old 02-18-2019, 09:08 PM
KarlGauss's Avatar
KarlGauss is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2000
Location: Between pole and tropic
Posts: 8,117
"Are you suggesting that Democrats don't need to do anything to counter that?"

Not at all. Just saying that the Dems don't have to go so far to give hope.

In fact, I think there's a real risk in going too far 'left' or 'green' or whatever you want to call it. The fundamental and unriskable goal - and the hope - is ridding the White House of Trump and the Republican bund.

Last edited by KarlGauss; 02-18-2019 at 09:10 PM.
  #10  
Old 02-18-2019, 09:32 PM
Wesley Clark is offline
2018 Midterm Prediction Winner
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Posts: 21,890
The democrats can't sell us on hope. They are far too disorganized and plutocratic for that.

Seriously. What hope are they selling? Another incomplete band aid like the ACA? Allowing the bankers to get away with fraud? Empty speeches about 'America being the greatest nation on earth' while people can't afford health care and the climate falls apart?

I'm not one of those 'both parties are the same' types. THe democrats are light years better than republicans.

But true hope requires declaring war on the oligarchs and plutocrats. The democratic party, as a whole, has 0 interest in doing that. So they'll give pretty speeches and pass token reform or nibble around the edges of what is wrong with America without doing anything meaningful to address health care, climate change, income inequality, regulatory capture, the fragile banking system, etc.

Meanwhile more and more people will be sucked into identity politics because they don't feel the government provides them with any meaningful, material benefits.
__________________
Sometimes I doubt your commitment to sparkle motion

Last edited by Wesley Clark; 02-18-2019 at 09:33 PM.
  #11  
Old 02-18-2019, 09:35 PM
Exapno Mapcase is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: NY but not NYC
Posts: 31,279
Quote:
Originally Posted by Wesley Clark View Post
But true hope requires declaring war on the oligarchs and plutocrats.
And people claim the GND is unrealistic!
  #12  
Old 02-18-2019, 09:47 PM
Wesley Clark is offline
2018 Midterm Prediction Winner
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Posts: 21,890
When the democrats had supermajorities in both the house and senate, they could barely get enough votes for the ACA which protected the oligarchs from competition.

I don't see them getting enough votes for a GND, Medicare for all, meaningful tax hikes on the rich, laws to rebuild unions, etc.
__________________
Sometimes I doubt your commitment to sparkle motion
  #13  
Old 02-19-2019, 07:57 AM
CalMeacham's Avatar
CalMeacham is offline
Member
 
Join Date: May 2000
Location: Massachusetts
Posts: 44,115
We need to shoot for The Land Beyond Beyond. Then it won't be an issue anymore.
__________________
Who is the Calypso Singer that rides Pegasus?
Harry Bellerophonte
  #14  
Old 02-19-2019, 08:52 AM
Inigo Montoya's Avatar
Inigo Montoya is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: On the level, if inclined
Posts: 15,744
Quote:
Originally Posted by Wesley Clark View Post
When the democrats had supermajorities in both the house and senate, they could barely get enough votes for the ACA which protected the oligarchs from competition.

I don't see them getting enough votes for a GND, Medicare for all, meaningful tax hikes on the rich, laws to rebuild unions, etc.
Sadly, I agree with this. Hating Trump doesn't mean you love the Democratic party. And preferring the Democratic party doesn't mean you think it's right even most of the time or even competent, it's just less awful than the alternative.
__________________
Y'all are just too damned serious. Lighten up.
  #15  
Old 02-19-2019, 09:14 AM
septimus's Avatar
septimus is online now
Guest
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: The Land of Smiles
Posts: 19,385
Quote:
Originally Posted by Wesley Clark View Post
When the democrats had supermajorities in both the house and senate, they could barely get enough votes for the ACA which protected the oligarchs from competition....

I'm not sure what you mean. When ACA passed, the Dems had less than 59% of the lower House but needed only 51%. The Senate passed ACA by a vote of 60-40 which under the McConnell rule was the absolute minimum margin. Every single Democratic Senator voted for ACA; there were Zero exceptions. Both the Independent Senators voted for ACA. Every single voting Republican Senator voted against ACA; there were Zero GOP votes in favor. Despite that ACA had wide support, e.g. from the American Medical Association, Susan Collins, supposedly moderate GOP Senator, voted against ACA. John McCain voted against ACA. (All this despite that the key provisions of ACA had originated with Republicans. Recall moreover that Republican malice had delayed the Seating of Al Franken for six months, denying the Dems their supermajority.)
  #16  
Old 02-19-2019, 10:33 AM
WillFarnaby's Avatar
WillFarnaby is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Oct 2011
Location: Baltimore
Posts: 4,976
Quote:
Originally Posted by Exapno Mapcase View Post
And there's no voter disillusionment from these four years?

The point is that many of our right-wing posters keep insisting that hope is a bad strategy. The alternative? Apparently that's fear, which is perfectly all right as an election strategy because that can't turn any voters off at all.

Excuse me while I smilie again.

Who is saying hope is a bad strategy?
  #17  
Old 02-19-2019, 12:02 PM
Exapno Mapcase is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: NY but not NYC
Posts: 31,279
Quote:
Originally Posted by WillFarnaby View Post
Who is saying hope is a bad strategy?
Posters in the How much would a green new deal actually cost? thread, for one.

You could possibly argue that the GNP is a false hope and so doesn't count as a hope, but I can't buy that. All hope strategies are at least somewhat unrealistic and unachievable. That doesn't make them any less valuable as campaign strategies. As I somehow have to keep repeating, Trump fed his supporters a shit-ton of outright lies and they cheered him into office. Why not take his shit and turn it into gold?

If the Republicans wanted to put up a more realistic hope strategy they could make the attempt. But they won't. They opted for fear.

It's telling that our conservatives are telling progressives how to appeal to Democratic voters. Did I say telling? I meant laughable.
  #18  
Old 02-19-2019, 05:33 PM
Wesley Clark is offline
2018 Midterm Prediction Winner
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Posts: 21,890
Quote:
Originally Posted by septimus View Post

I'm not sure what you mean. When ACA passed, the Dems had less than 59% of the lower House but needed only 51%. The Senate passed ACA by a vote of 60-40 which under the McConnell rule was the absolute minimum margin. Every single Democratic Senator voted for ACA; there were Zero exceptions. Both the Independent Senators voted for ACA. Every single voting Republican Senator voted against ACA; there were Zero GOP votes in favor. Despite that ACA had wide support, e.g. from the American Medical Association, Susan Collins, supposedly moderate GOP Senator, voted against ACA. John McCain voted against ACA. (All this despite that the key provisions of ACA had originated with Republicans. Recall moreover that Republican malice had delayed the Seating of Al Franken for six months, denying the Dems their supermajority.)
Yeah thats my point. They got 60 votes and it was for a bill that wasn't bad, but didn't address what is truly wrong with our healthcare system. So the democrats can't really run on hope because even when they have supermajorities in congress, they can only pass tepid, pro corporate half measures.
__________________
Sometimes I doubt your commitment to sparkle motion
  #19  
Old 02-19-2019, 05:51 PM
Pithily Effusive is offline
BANNED
 
Join Date: Feb 2019
Posts: 100
Americans vote their pocketbooks. All politics is local. Forgetting these two things is how the mighty Newt lost his job in Dunwoody. In the LONG run, issue-related/policy-laden discourse eclipses utopia here we come and they're coming to get you every time.
__________________
If you want to know what God thinks of money just look at the people He gave it to.
-Dorothy Parker-

Last edited by Pithily Effusive; 02-19-2019 at 05:52 PM.
Reply

Bookmarks

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is Off
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 03:48 AM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2019, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.

Send questions for Cecil Adams to: cecil@straightdope.com

Send comments about this website to: webmaster@straightdope.com

Terms of Use / Privacy Policy

Advertise on the Straight Dope!
(Your direct line to thousands of the smartest, hippest people on the planet, plus a few total dipsticks.)

Copyright © 2018 STM Reader, LLC.

 
Copyright © 2017