This is a fucking country, not a supermarket. What kind of fucking world do we live in where it’s acceptable to use fucking marketing terms openly to talk about political parties?
Fuck this shit and those who came up with it and are working hard to banalize the incursion of corporate thinking into the people’s politics. As if we needed to do more to discourage honesty and moral integrity in favor of commercial propaganda.
And fuck the people who came up with “bleeding edge”. It’s CUTTING EDGE you cocksucking motherfuckers! Edges don’t fucking bleed you retarded buffons. WE FUCKING GET IT THAT IF AN EDGE IS CUTTING, IT’S GONNA MAKE YOU BLEED! WE DON’T FUCKING NEED IT SPELLED OUT GODDAMNIT! WHAT ARE WE? RETARDS?
Cutting edge was fucking fine. Everytime i read “bleeding edge”, I just want to puke.
FUCK YOU ALL AND YOUR GRUESOME RAPE OF OUR CULTURE!
Political campaigns are a kind of marketing. You’re “selling” a candidate to voters. Therefore, it’s ok to use marketing terms and concepts to describe them.
“Bleeding edge” doesn’t mean the same thing as cutting edge. Cutting edge means using the latest and best technology. Bleeding edge means using technology that’s one step newer than that, stuff that hasn’t been proven.
“Brand” is a defensible term for a party label, considering they have to market it and advertise it using methods very similar to commercial marketing and advertising (as well as by other methods unique to politics).
I think “rape” is not at all the right term here. Branding is a simple bendover application of a hot-iron logo to the loins of those owned and utilized for profitable production. Down the chute they go!
Yes, also “leading edge” gets used synonymously with “cutting edge”, and “bleeding” is a play on that. The insinuation is that by going one step beyond the proven the costs can outweigh the advantages (haemorrhaging money).
(I only hear “bleeding edge” used with regards to new technologies though – who would apply it to politics?)
Sorry, that train left the station 40 years ago. The Selling of the President from 1969 was all about marketing Nixon.
That Republicans have a brand makes sense. The brand is supposedly strong defense, business-like competence, small government. When Bush screwed things up, he screwed up the brand just like some bottling company selling Coke that tastes like dog piss. I think one of the reasons they lost so big in 2006 (besides Iraq) that the family-loving Pubbies started looking like a collection of pedophiles and adulterers.
The state of culture that you consider “yours” was formed by the very same process as is currently changing the culture in a way that you are decrying.