Years back, on these very boards, I remember reading liberal Dopers who insisted that Dubya had given the Religious Right all the secret code words to let them know Harriet Miers was the perfect candidate for the Supreme Court. I told them the Right would never sit still for Harriet Miers, but they all told me the rubes would quickly fall in line since THEY surely heard Bush’s dog whistle.
What does it mean when you blow on your dog whistle but the dogs don’t hear it?
I think we need a bigger whistle.
I’m having trouble decoding this post, but the concept of dog whistles is not some made-up, paranoid fantasy concept. See the above post about Bush’s mention of Dred Scott in the '04 debates. I think it’s pretty well documentable that up to that point, Dred Scott was frequently mentioned in pro-life circles and used as a parallel to Roe v. Wade, and it was not used in pro-choice or generally wider circles. I don’t think it takes a whole lot of logic to get to the fact that the reference was understood different by ardent pro-lifers and everyone else.
The only potentially open question is if Bush intended it to be understood differently by the different groups. As far as I know, neither he nor anyone involved in his debate prepped has said one way or the other, so we’re left with knowing that the statement was understood differently by different groups in a way that would have been beneficial Bush. And there was no other particularly good reason to bring up a pre-Civil War era Supreme Court case that is not active law, no one believes in, and no one defends. So, I think it’s obvious what happened there, but I guess I have a secret decoder ring.
I hear “urban” used to mean black all the time.
“You wouldn’t like living there, it’s too urban.”
Hard to answer in the absence of actually seeing the conversation in question, but here are some possibilities:
There was no dog whistle in this case, and the ‘liberal Dopers’ were incorrect. One could conclude from this that all dog whistles are fake, but of course, that would make one wrong.
Bush in fact blew the dog whistle, but his audience didn’t hear it. Probably the least likely, and hard to distinguish from option 1.
Bush blew the dog whistle, and his audience didn’t care. They interpreted it as, “Bush thinks x about Miers, but we still think not x, so we still oppose her nomination.”
Bush blew the dog whistle, and his audience heard it, and pushed on their Senators to support Miers. But there were too few of them, and their Senators didn’t care.
Bush blew the dog whistle, and his audience heard it, but they couldn’t effectively turn their personal support for Miers into support for her in the Senate. This hypothesis could be tested by looking at public polling data, especially cross-tabs for self-identified right-wingers.
Note that none of these answers to your question are, “dog whistles don’t exist, and the whole thing is made up.”
And the ‘rap/hip-hop’ section of music stores, back when we had those, was sometimes labeled ‘Urban.’ But I think this is just a euphemism, and everyone understood what it meant.
“I’m Karl Urban, and I approve these albums”?
“This is dope crunk. I give it two eyebrows up!”
That’s a new one to me, but I’ve seen “affirmative action president,” which is not even subtle enough to qualify as a dog whistle.
Here’s a line that strikes me as a dog whistle, but which surely didn’t bother people who are most prone to object to dog whistles.
Back in 1992, there was a certain Presidential candidate who said repeatedly, “I represent the people who work hard and play by the rules.”
What did Bill Clinton mean by that? Simple- he was trying to position himself as a moderate, even conservative Democrat, and he was saying, “Hey, all you white, blue-collar workers out there! I’m one of you. I don’t represent those dark tinted folks who, we all know, don’t work and DON’T obey the law. I’m the old-fashioned kind of Democrat. You can stop voting Republican, now you have ME!”
No, it’s the excuse used by the biggest asshole in the neighborhood to defend his right to use his motorized lawnmower at un-God-by-naught on a Sunday morning.
But that’s what all political stump speeches are - “I’m one of the good guys like you, not one of those useless people the other guy represents!”
The phrases rarely withstand even a moment’s analysis and don’t even have to be “dog whistle” circumlocutions. It’s best if they’re not. Political rhetoric depends on these phrases and claims that mean whatever each listener wants them to mean. Everyone thinks they’re hard-working and law-abiding and For A Better America, and knows someone, personally or en masse or in general, who isn’t.
I can’t remember the last political speech that didn’t follow these “generalized specifics” rules, except for the ones where some dimwit used too specific a reference and got called on it.
Not meaning to single you out, panache45, but there is a big difference between a “dog whistle” and a descriptive phrase, which your examples are. also as mentioned, it is not the same as a euphemism (pro-choice is just a softer and more accurate way of describing a position that was trying to be labelled as “pro-abortion.” It is aslo different from a code word. Code words are just a way to reference an idea everyone knows the meaning of without having to go into detail.
Dog whistles are designed to be heard clearly by one group (dogs) and be silent to another group (humans.) Politically, it means appealing to a group of voters while attempting to have it sound innocuous to another group. “Dred Scott” is probably the best example given. I’ personally, had no idea what GWB was saying in 2004, but when explained it made perfect sense. “States rights” and “welfare queen” haven’t worked for decades, but when Ronald Reagan used them, they did. Especially when talking about states rights in Philadelphis, MS in 1979. He was clearly appealing to whites and referencing segregation and busing (not slavery.)
Dinesh D’Souza uses dog whistles a lot. “Anti-colonial” is a dog whistle meaning "Kenyan, not American.)
I dunno. I think claiming “Christian persecution” because Christians of the speaker’s exact stripe are no longer allowed to run things their way is pretty whistle-ish. Ditto for “creeping socialism” when it means the Republicans no longer have an unopposed hand in policy. And the only “agenda” most gays have is to be treated like people; they’re willing to set aside their undermining of traditional values and turning young people for that. 
Yes, but everyone knows exactly what they are saying. They are not trying to hide anything. Those are code phrases.
Uh… and the notion of “dog whistles” is different, how?
To the right ears, “gay agenda” is just as loud a whistle as “urban” is to others.
Then we (and we know who we are 
) do not need an uber-secret code book to decipher what a dog-whistle term is suspected to mean to those for whom the dog-whistle term was intended for, and another for those who were not the intended recipients.
It seems to me that the word-police are trying to compile a list of so-called dog-whistle terms which they can later use to claim invalidates someone’s post. As if anyone actually listens to the word-police.
I agree with you. If someone doesn’t understand how a person is using a word, or they don’t understand the word, they can always ask for a clarification.
(post shortened)
I guess you need a secret decoder ring? Dog whistles actually exist. They’re used to get the attention of, and give commands to, dogs. They might also work with donkeys and elephants, if you’re patient enough?
The assumption that this is so-called secret code stuff is ludicrous at best, and paranoid ramblings at the worst.
I guess so. It sounds like you’re saying that literal dog whistles (which I guess is funny, haha), but that the metaphorical kind that we’re actually discussing are ludicrous at best. If so, you’d be wrong. I point you again to my example of Bush’s mention of Dred Scott in the '04 debates. Am I paranoid to think that Bush intended for that to be understood differently by different audiences? And that he’d benefit by that?
As you said up thread, "Note that none of these answers to your question are, “dog whistles don’t exist, and the whole thing is made up.” Most of your answers were based on your belief that Bush blew the dog whistle. In the one answer that suggests there was no dog whistle, you concluded that all dog whistles are fake and that you were wrong if you suggested that.