Name Calling Doesn’t Work

[Watchmen]

Here’s an op-ed piece I agree with. I’ve been saying this for a year or two here and it always leads to resentment and aggression. For what it’s worth, old school liberal Bill Maher agrees.

https://www.wsj.com/opinion/democrats-trash-talk-the-voters-presidential-election-contempt-harris-campaign-4c738190?st=8ta1eL

 

[Stevicus]

Here’s an op-ed piece I agree with. I’ve been saying this for a year or two here and it always leads to resentment and aggression. For what it’s worth, old school liberal Bill Maher agrees.

https://www.wsj.com/opinion/democrats-trash-talk-the-voters-presidential-election-contempt-harris-campaign-4c738190?st=8ta1eL

Interesting article. I tend to agree with the general thrust of it, as I've noticed the same basic tactics at work for at least the past decade, probably longer. This part chimed with me:

Americans demand more than “vote for me because I self-attest to moral superiority.” Yet that’s about all the left’s got right now. That’s because the haughty arrogance—and press protection—has allowed the party to continue living in a bubble that shields them from their failings. Look, a dozen (left-leaning, partisan) Nobel Prize-winning economists just assured us that up is down—so we’re good.

It also shields them from average voters’ views. One of the gentler (yet telling) put-downs of this election came from Tim Walz, who pronounced that Republicans are “weird.” Hilarious. Want to know what’s really weird? Taxpayer-funded sex-change surgeries for felons. Attempts to regulate cow flatulence. The expectation that fewer police will mean less crime. The 1619 project. Decriminalizing border crossings. Boys competing in girls’ sports. The word “Latinx.” Sizable majorities of Americans think all this is nuts. Yet these remain staples of Democratic policy and rhetoric.

Progressives are fooling themselves if they think a close election is proof the insults are working. The independent and female voters who might pull this out for Democrats aren’t voting in favor of this rhetoric or progressive policies, but rather against a very specific and alienating individual—Mr. Trump. He probably won’t be on the ballot again.

Insults are the last refuge of fools, and there was a day when politicians on both sides understood the “likability” factor in elections. It’s hard to like a party that views you as trash.

 

[Altfish]

Here’s an op-ed piece I agree with. I’ve been saying this for a year or two here and it always leads to resentment and aggression. For what it’s worth, old school liberal Bill Maher agrees.

https://www.wsj.com/opinion/democrats-trash-talk-the-voters-presidential-election-contempt-harris-campaign-4c738190?st=8ta1eL

Agree totally, although the anti Harris bias is disturbing.
Trump has constantly name called; Harris occasionally, Biden isn't running. But to read the article you would think that both sides are as bad.

Can I also add purposely calling people's names wrong.

 

[9-10ths_Penguin]

Here’s an op-ed piece I agree with. I’ve been saying this for a year or two here and it always leads to resentment and aggression. For what it’s worth, old school liberal Bill Maher agrees.

https://www.wsj.com/opinion/democrats-trash-talk-the-voters-presidential-election-contempt-harris-campaign-4c738190?st=8ta1eL

For a long time now, campaigning in the US - on both sides - has been more focused on increasing voter turnout from people who already agree with the party's position and less about getting likely voters to switch their support.

Calling Republican positions fascist isn't about trying to convince Republicans to stop being fascist; it's about rallying Democrat supporters to go fight the fascists.

It's been like this for 20-30 years. IMO, it's fuelled by better polling and computer analysis that lets parties focus their efforts more effectively. A lot of past attempts to court votes from the opposition were due in large part to a lack of good data: they didn't know what tactics would work, so they just kind of took a broad shotgun approach and hoped for the best.

Hopefully, this will change when both parties have maximized the returns they get by courting their own base. Unfortunately, the Republicans have realized that denying Democrats the opportunity to vote is just as effective for securing a win as getting their own supporters to vote, so it may be a while before we get to the point where the most effective strategy is to reach across the aisle.

 

[Twilight Hue]

Here’s an op-ed piece I agree with. I’ve been saying this for a year or two here and it always leads to resentment and aggression. For what it’s worth, old school liberal Bill Maher agrees.

https://www.wsj.com/opinion/democrats-trash-talk-the-voters-presidential-election-contempt-harris-campaign-4c738190?st=8ta1eL

That's why Biden went back to sucking baby feet.

Put a sock in it man! And he did.

 

[McBell]

For a long time now, campaigning in the US - on both sides - has been more focused on increasing voter turnout from people who already agree with the party's position and less about getting likely voters to switch their support.

Calling Republican positions fascist isn't about trying to convince Republicans to stop being fascist; it's about rallying Democrat supporters to go fight the fascists.

It's been like this for 20-30 years. IMO, it's fuelled by better polling and computer analysis that lets parties focus their efforts more effectively. A lot of past attempts to court votes from the opposition were due in large part to a lack of good data: they didn't know what tactics would work, so they just kind of took a broad shotgun approach and hoped for the best.

Hopefully, this will change when both parties have maximized the returns they get by courting their own base. Unfortunately, the Republicans have realized that denying Democrats the opportunity to vote is just as effective for securing a win as getting their own supporters to vote, so it may be a while before we get to the point where the most effective strategy is to reach across the aisle.

Agreed.

All Trump has down in this respect is seriously lower the bar as to what can be said...

 

[Watchmen]

Agree totally, although the anti Harris bias is disturbing.
Trump has constantly name called; Harris occasionally, Biden isn't running. But to read the article you would think that both sides are as bad.

Can I also add purposely calling people's names wrong.

Trump no doubt name calls and says terrifying things (like suggesting Cheney be executed). I think the difference, though, is that Trump's name calling is specific - he names Biden, Harris, etc. . . . I don't know that Trump is making general derogatory comments about voters on the left. In contrast, Democratic leaders have no problem demeaning voters on the right as a whole.

 

[Pogo]

Trump no doubt name calls and says terrifying things (like suggesting Cheney be executed). I think the difference, though, is that Trump's name calling is specific - he names Biden, Harris, etc. . . . I don't know that Trump is making general derogatory comments about voters on the left. In contrast, Democratic leaders have no problem demeaning voters on the right as a whole.

And liberals, Mexicans Haitians Muslims people from S***hole countries, LGBTQ, Feminazi's etc. No he just declares them to be somehow a danger to Merkins so as too avoid including white protestants who are uncomfortable with the real human and US population.

 

[Watchmen]

And liberals, Mexicans Haitians Muslims people from S***hole countries, LGBTQ, Feminazi's etc. No he just declares them to be somehow a danger to Merkins so as too avoid including white protestants who are uncomfortable with the real human and US population.

Good point.

 

[Heyo]

Here’s an op-ed piece I agree with. I’ve been saying this for a year or two here and it always leads to resentment and aggression. For what it’s worth, old school liberal Bill Maher agrees.

https://www.wsj.com/opinion/democrats-trash-talk-the-voters-presidential-election-contempt-harris-campaign-4c738190?st=8ta1eL

If it doesn't work, then why do Republicans not lose every election? They are the OG trash talkers, not only Trump - and they are successful with it.
@9-10ths_Penguin has perfectly analysed why that is.

It's in German, but you don't have to understand what Mai is saying, just look at the graphs. They show the development of partisanship over time (3:50–6:00).

When there are no swing voters and the other tribe is unreachable, it becomes more important to mobilize the base. And trash talking the other side is most effective for that.

 

[Watchmen]

If it doesn't work, then why do Republicans not lose every election? They are the OG trash talkers, not only Trump - and they are successful with it.
@9-10ths_Penguin has perfectly analysed why that is.

It's in German, but you don't have to understand what Mai is saying, just look at the graphs. They show the development of partisanship over time (3:50–6:00).

When there are no swing voters and the other tribe is unreachable, it becomes more important to mobilize the base. And trash talking the other side is most effective for that.

I don't disagree that trash talking mobilizes the bases. But what about moderates and independents - those who will make a big impact on swing states? Perhaps the trash talking turns off those voters.

 

[sun rise]

That's why Biden went back to sucking baby feet.

Put a sock in it man! And he did.

Most likely Russian fake video.

 

[sun rise]

Yawn. Straining at gnats and swallowing camels from the right. Nothing new here.

 

[Twilight Hue]

Most likely Russian fake video.

Of course,. What else could it be?

 

[Heyo]

I don't disagree that trash talking mobilizes the bases. But what about moderates and independents - those who will make a big impact on swing states? Perhaps the trash talking turns off those voters.

Two answers: 1. If the number of your voter base you can mobilize by trash talking is greater than the number of moderates and independents you can convince with arguments, go for the trash talk.
2. You don't have to outrun the lion, just your colleague. (I.e. keep just below the trash talk of the other party.)

And the charts in the video show that there are ever fewer moderates. The US gets more and more tribal with time. If that trend doesn't change, a civil war (or peaceful segregation) is inevitable.

 

[McBell]

Yawn. Straining at gnats and swallowing camels from the right. Nothing new here.

The closer we get to November 5th the more desperate MAGA becomes.

 

[Twilight Hue]

Two answers: 1. If the number of your voter base you can mobilize by trash talking is greater than the number of moderates and independents you can convince with arguments, go for the trash talk.
2. You don't have to outrun the lion, just your colleague. (I.e. keep just below the trash talk of the other party.)

And the charts in the video show that there are ever fewer moderates. The US gets more and more tribal with time. If that trend doesn't change, a civil war (or peaceful segregation) is inevitable.

That part I agree with you @Heyo is if things don't change soon , it's just a matter of not but if when , a second civil war will erupt.

 

[9-10ths_Penguin]

I don't disagree that trash talking mobilizes the bases. But what about moderates and independents - those who will make a big impact on swing states? Perhaps the trash talking turns off those voters.

Does courting the independents make more of a difference than increasing turnout among supporters?

I think the impact of negative ads on undecided voters depends greatly on whether they come across as just muckraking or as valid criticism, and whether the criticism actually reflects on the person's fitness for office.

 

[Martin]

The Farting Trumpet should stop name calling.

 

[Heyo]

The Farting Trumpet should stop name calling.

It was a winning strategy in 2016. Do you think the voters have grown out of that phase?