Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Excellent Tactic: Frame Repugs with 'Words of Weakness'

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion: Presidential (Through Nov 2009) Donate to DU
 
freeandbrave Donating Member (108 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Feb-04-05 11:34 AM
Original message
Excellent Tactic: Frame Repugs with 'Words of Weakness'
By Tom Ball at Political Strategy
02/04/05

http://www.politicalstrategy.org/archives/001126.php

Use words that exude WEAKNESS to describe the opponent (regardless of their true behavior).

Do not use words that could be construed in the 'Strict Father' model of morality as strong. This refers specifically to many of the words that progressives use liberally in describing the opposition: Mean, heartless, insensitive, dictatorial, hateful, angry, evil, stubborn, harsh, etc.

Unfortunately, although the 'Nurturant Parent' perceives these words as describing a wholly unworthy person, those with the strict father morality activated perceive that same person described by those same words as tough, driven, no-nonsense, in control, and decisive -- in essence, a strict father. In such a case, the strict father's faults are overlooked in favor of his desirable strict father characteristics. Thus, we must instead use words that are degrading in the strict father model. Specifically, we must use words to describe them as weak, confused, and lacking control.

In both the progressive and conservative world views, weakness has no value. And, while progressives are tolerant of weakness -- striving even to help those who are most vulnerable, conservatives are unforgivably intolerant of weakness -- finding it immoral... even evil.

Therefore, if you truly wish to attack conservatives at their deepest level of meaning, then forget the sissy taunts of, "Oh, you're so mean," or "...so stubborn," or "...so evil!" Instead, label them WEAK and do it in a myriad ways. If a conservative person, or policy, or institution, etc. is effectively framed in this way, he/she/it will instantly lose credibility in conservative circles. It will essentially destroy the person's or thing's standing in the strict father model.

To the strict father, weakness is immoral -- something to abhor and punish. To be labeled as such is the ultimate insult to a conservative and one of the few things that really hits home.

So, when describing Bush, the GOP, and their policies, drop the adjectives you're most likely using now: mean-spirited, disingenuous, liars, evil, blah, blah, blah -- and step up to the truly effective descriptors -- the ones that rip into the heart of the strict father's core -- those that portray them as weak and lacking control.

Of course, I couldn't just leave you with a couple of suggestions, so here's a sampling of…oh, 175 or so useful words:

Coward, immoral, wishy-washy, whiny, sniveling, milquetoast, confused, valueless, unprincipled, obtuse, little, self-righteous, doormat, oversensitive, failure, weak, baby, fragile, gutless, spineless, craven, pusillanimous, faint-hearted, lilly-livered, nervous, timid, spiritless, sad, boneheaded, weak-willed, pathetic, feeble, frail, puny, scrawny, timorous, fearful, defenseless, weak-kneed, helpless, dependent, vulnerable, powerless, boneless, invertebrate, dismal, hopeless, wretched, sorry, meager, inadequate, small, paltry, insignificant, miserable, crying, tiny, petite, minor, negligible, inconsequential, trivial, unimportant, trifling, petty, juvenile, minute, wee, scared, frightened, shy, afraid, apprehensive, nervous-nelly, worried, edgy, panicky, paranoid, delicate, sickly, flimsy, slight, dull, cheerless, distressed, uncontrolled, bitter, depressing, gloomy, hysterical, delusional, impaired, oppressed, repressed, browbeaten, downtrodden, subordinated, broken, battered, injured, demoralized, exploited, conquered, loser, dominated, broken down, wreck, disappointment, overpowered, overwhelmed, trounced, dispirited, pessimistic, deflated, dejected, downcast, depraved, destitute, hapless, degenerate, indecisive, boring, namby-pamby, waffling, annoying, bawling, weeping, sobbing, dopey, baffled, bewildered, befuddled, dishonorable, shameful, disgraceful, sleazy, questionable, wimp, easily upset, thin-skinned, hypersensitive, disappointment, frustrated, castrated, cry-baby, mumbling, twit, worthless, ineffective, poor, laughable, ridiculous, absurd, mediocre, embarrassment, unimpressive, incompetent, incapable, defective, deficient, lacking, impoverished, wanting, undisciplined, unfortunate, awkward, tongue-tied, babbling, inept, clumsy, speechless, flailing, humiliated, disgraced, debased


See Also: "Every Word Matters: Using 'Keywords' as a Political Tactic"
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
ewagner Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Feb-04-05 11:39 AM
Response to Original message
1. thanks
great idea for a LTTE usinjg these words.........
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
freeandbrave Donating Member (108 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Feb-04-05 11:57 AM
Response to Reply #1
5. What is LTTE?
???
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
noamnety Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Feb-04-05 12:14 PM
Response to Reply #5
6. LTTE = Letter to the Editor (nt)
(nt = no text in the message body here, it's all in the subject, in case you don't know that acronym either)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ewagner Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Feb-04-05 12:14 PM
Response to Reply #5
7. Letter to the Editor n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Nite Owl Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Feb-04-05 11:42 AM
Response to Original message
2. We should all committ
that word list to memory. Very good article.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
bleever Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Feb-04-05 11:45 AM
Response to Original message
3. Very interesting. Important points about how not to describe
the negative aspects of right-wing conservatism.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
zbdent Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Feb-04-05 11:46 AM
Response to Original message
4. Like Gingrich whining and throwing a tantrum because
he didn't get invited to "ride with the President" on Air Force One when he became "Speaker". Frame that as a point for "revenge" by impeachment.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Name removed Donating Member (0 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Feb-04-05 12:21 PM
Response to Original message
8. Deleted message
Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.
 
Devil Dog Dem Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Feb-04-05 12:40 PM
Response to Original message
9. We need to depict Rice as whiny right now.
She is pouting because the Europeans are going forward with Iranian nuclear issues without her and is pisses her off.
She also whines because people impugn her lack of integrity.

She should be an easy target, getting her is a proxy for getting her husband, er I mean: her boss, Bush.

Also, we need to take her down for her Senate run.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
freeandbrave Donating Member (108 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Feb-04-05 12:44 PM
Response to Original message
10. FREEPERS are on to this site and it looks like they like it...
...Check out this posting on FREEREPUBLIC.com about this site.

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1335979/posts#comment

What can we do about this? Does it matter?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
freeandbrave Donating Member (108 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Feb-04-05 02:16 PM
Response to Reply #10
12. The Best one is this comment...
...from the Freepers: "I think what the website is trying to say is that the right are hypocrites. But they only give a few examples and hope the readers buy the argument."

How many examples do they need? Unfortunately, there isn't enough bandwidth on the internet to carry every documented instance of GOP Hypocrisy. (LOL)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Why Syzygy Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Feb-04-05 12:50 PM
Response to Original message
11. add "flaccid" . n/t
Edited on Fri Feb-04-05 01:18 PM by votesomemore
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Sat May 04th 2024, 12:05 AM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion: Presidential (Through Nov 2009) Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC