[FairfieldLife] Re: Conservative Big-Wigs are Clueless

[emily.ma...@yahoo.com [FairfieldLife]]

Interesting and good points on the power of "narratives" and how they are 
crafted.  
 

---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com,  wrote :

 Why We Lose: National Review Launches Victorian-Era Attack On Donald Trump

by John Nolte, 22 Jan 2016 

 Whatever you might think of National Review’s Thursday night attack on Donald 
Trump is beside the point. That’s not what I’m here to talk about. 

 

 Just forget about The Establishment versus… Trump versus… This has nothing to 
do with politics and everything to do with tactics and media savvy. There are 
many fine people at National Review, smart people, which is why the incredibly 
lame and heavy-handed execution of this “broadside” against Trump is something 
worth talking about.
 

 Conservatives cannot win elections, most especially national elections, living 
in the 19th century.  If you are going to go to the trouble of building what 
you believe is a Nuclear Bomb — and a full issue of National Review devoted to 
annihilating Trump is obviously crafted with that in mind — you have to also 
build a 21st century delivery device.
 

 All that time, all that work, all that effort, all that organization, and by 
noon the next day, because of a terrible launch platform, National Review’s 
nuke has already belly-flopped and disappeared into the sea.
 The entire execution behind the delivery of this dud immediately brought this 
to my mind:
 INT. PRIVATE CLUB – K STREET – VICTORIAN ERA
 

 Long hallway. Oak paneled walls. Ends at two closed, imposing doors.
 The only sound is horse-drawn carriages passing by outside and the echo of 
IMPORTANT MEN discussing IMPORTANT MATTERS from behind those doors.
 

 From somewhere a bell tinkles. Immediately a BOY in a heavily-starched uniform 
appears. The doors swing open. A toxic cloud of cigar smoke swallows the boy. 
As the smoke dissipates, we see that the room inside is filled with 
WELL-DRESSED IMPORTANT MEN pleased with themselves. They sit in leather chairs 
and drink brandy.
 

 The BOY is handed a piece of paper – A PROCLAMATION.
 Like it is as sacred as the Magna Carta, the BOY runs to make his delivery as 
the WELL-DRESSED IMPORTANT MEN confidently celebrate how their proclamation 
will change the world.
 Other than the usual-usual Fox News appearances, that is exactly what National 
Review did last night.
 

 I’m sorry but even if it ever did, the world does not work this way anymore. 

 

 Even if you believe 100% in every word National Review wrote against Trump, if 
there ever really was an era where one could change the world by stuffing a 
bunch of opinions in-between magazine covers, this sure as hell isn’t it.
 

 This is 2016. Opinions are not changed with the drop of a magazine filled with 
Very Important Thinkers espousing Very Big Thinks about How We Should All 
Think. This approach only backfires because it looks self-important, stuffy and 
conceited from good people who are none of those things.
 

 If I may paraphrase the Coen Brothers: Nobody likes the high hat.
 

 Drudge doesn’t issue proclamations.
 

 BuzzFeed doesn’t issue proclamations.
 

 The Mainstream Media doesn’t issue proclamations.
 

 Hearts and Minds are changed through Narratives — narratives built over time 
and tested with carefully-crafted storytelling, characters, caricatures, 
tweets, Facebook posts, attention-grabbing headlines, pictures, videos, and 
yes, even gifs.
 

 The only message coming out of this National Review issue today is that A 
BUNCH OF FAMOUS CONSERVATIVES PILED ON DONALD TRUMP…
 

 It’s all one big Harumph! Harumph! Harumph!
 

 And how is that effective in a year where being an outsider is sexier than 
Sophia Loren in a lace teddy?
 

 It is arguments that change minds, small, tight, individualized arguments that 
have been honed, tested, and perfected to drive a Narrative. Narratives change 
minds. Narratives stick. Narratives leave a mark.
 

 Ironically, it is this very narrative-method that has kept Trump on top; it is 
this very method that has allowed Trump to successfully destroy Jeb Bush, Ben 
Carson, Hillary Clinton, and the DC Media. It is this very method that Trump is 
using right now to dismantleSen. Ted Cruz (R-TX).

 And here’s the kicker: this is also the very method Trump has used to 
inoculate himself from laughably late-hits from the likes of a National Review.
 National Review isn’t hurting Trump, like a Keystone Cop, National Review is 
stepping directly into his well-honed anti-establishment narrative.
 

 Before you attempt to bury Donald Trump, maybe you should try and learn a 
thing or two from him.
 

 All due respect, all I learned from National Review today is that Republicans 
still suck at media.
 

 The Establishment has absolutely no idea how to fight.
 

 

Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Conservative Big-Wigs are Clueless

[Mike Dixon mdixon.6...@yahoo.com [FairfieldLife]]

Republicans traditionally do *something* like that. But usually it's a 
*seniority* system. The Time before last was  John McCain's turn to lose. He 
had been wanting to be president for so long. He was the senior statesman, the 
war hero, the one that bucked the party to cross the isle and work with the 
dems. Bob Dole was in a similar situation. He ran against Clinton. Everyone 
knew he would lose.

 

  From: "s3raph...@yahoo.com [FairfieldLife]" 
<FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com>
 To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com 
 Sent: Saturday, January 23, 2016 6:29 PM
 Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: Conservative Big-Wigs are Clueless
   
    When Obama ran for his second term it seems to have been taken for granted, 
even by Republicans, that he would win.
In that case, thought I at the time, wouldn't it have been a smart move to have 
Sarah Palin as the rival candidate.
Why so?
Well, if the candidate is going to lose regardless you don't want to sacrifice 
a plausible, high-profile contender. Why not throw Palin onto the funeral pyre?
And, by having a woman as their choice, Republicans could claim ever after that 
they were the first party in US history to root for a female President. You 
want progressive politics? Go GOP.
And - just as many voters opted for Obama simply because he was black - Sarah 
Palin would have been a wild card: many might have voted for her simply because 
she was a woman (though fibbing that they had voted for the Democrats).
Apologies for giving you nightmares, but what do you think of my cunning plan?


  #yiv7131192800 #yiv7131192800 -- #yiv7131192800ygrp-mkp {border:1px solid 
#d8d8d8;font-family:Arial;margin:10px 0;padding:0 10px;}#yiv7131192800 
#yiv7131192800ygrp-mkp hr {border:1px solid #d8d8d8;}#yiv7131192800 
#yiv7131192800ygrp-mkp #yiv7131192800hd 
{color:#628c2a;font-size:85%;font-weight:700;line-height:122%;margin:10px 
0;}#yiv7131192800 #yiv7131192800ygrp-mkp #yiv7131192800ads 
{margin-bottom:10px;}#yiv7131192800 #yiv7131192800ygrp-mkp .yiv7131192800ad 
{padding:0 0;}#yiv7131192800 #yiv7131192800ygrp-mkp .yiv7131192800ad p 
{margin:0;}#yiv7131192800 #yiv7131192800ygrp-mkp .yiv7131192800ad a 
{color:#ff;text-decoration:none;}#yiv7131192800 #yiv7131192800ygrp-sponsor 
#yiv7131192800ygrp-lc {font-family:Arial;}#yiv7131192800 
#yiv7131192800ygrp-sponsor #yiv7131192800ygrp-lc #yiv7131192800hd {margin:10px 
0px;font-weight:700;font-size:78%;line-height:122%;}#yiv7131192800 
#yiv7131192800ygrp-sponsor #yiv7131192800ygrp-lc .yiv7131192800ad 
{margin-bottom:10px;padding:0 0;}#yiv7131192800 #yiv7131192800actions 
{font-family:Verdana;font-size:11px;padding:10px 0;}#yiv7131192800 
#yiv7131192800activity 
{background-color:#e0ecee;float:left;font-family:Verdana;font-size:10px;padding:10px;}#yiv7131192800
 #yiv7131192800activity span {font-weight:700;}#yiv7131192800 
#yiv7131192800activity span:first-child 
{text-transform:uppercase;}#yiv7131192800 #yiv7131192800activity span a 
{color:#5085b6;text-decoration:none;}#yiv7131192800 #yiv7131192800activity span 
span {color:#ff7900;}#yiv7131192800 #yiv7131192800activity span 
.yiv7131192800underline {text-decoration:underline;}#yiv7131192800 
.yiv7131192800attach 
{clear:both;display:table;font-family:Arial;font-size:12px;padding:10px 
0;width:400px;}#yiv7131192800 .yiv7131192800attach div a 
{text-decoration:none;}#yiv7131192800 .yiv7131192800attach img 
{border:none;padding-right:5px;}#yiv7131192800 .yiv7131192800attach label 
{display:block;margin-bottom:5px;}#yiv7131192800 .yiv7131192800attach label a 
{text-decoration:none;}#yiv7131192800 blockquote {margin:0 0 0 
4px;}#yiv7131192800 .yiv7131192800bold 
{font-family:Arial;font-size:13px;font-weight:700;}#yiv7131192800 
.yiv7131192800bold a {text-decoration:none;}#yiv7131192800 dd.yiv7131192800last 
p a {font-family:Verdana;font-weight:700;}#yiv7131192800 dd.yiv7131192800last p 
span {margin-right:10px;font-family:Verdana;font-weight:700;}#yiv7131192800 
dd.yiv7131192800last p span.yiv7131192800yshortcuts 
{margin-right:0;}#yiv7131192800 div.yiv7131192800attach-table div div a 
{text-decoration:none;}#yiv7131192800 div.yiv7131192800attach-table 
{width:400px;}#yiv7131192800 div.yiv7131192800file-title a, #yiv7131192800 
div.yiv7131192800file-title a:active, #yiv7131192800 
div.yiv7131192800file-title a:hover, #yiv7131192800 div.yiv7131192800file-title 
a:visited {text-decoration:none;}#yiv7131192800 div.yiv7131192800photo-title a, 
#yiv7131192800 div.yiv7131192800photo-title a:active, #yiv7131192800 
div.yiv7131192800photo-title a:hover, #yiv7131192800 
div.yiv7131192800photo-title a:visited {text-decoration:none;}#yiv7131192800 
div#yiv7131192800ygrp-mlmsg #yiv7131192800ygrp-msg p a 
span.yiv7131192800yshortcuts 
{font-family:Verdana;font-size:10px;font-weight:normal;}#yiv7131192800 
.yiv7131192800green {color:#628c2a;}#yiv7131192800 .yiv7131192800MsoNormal 
{margin:0 0 0 0;}#yiv7131192800 o {font-size:0;}#yiv7131192800 
#yiv7131192800photos div {float

[FairfieldLife] Re: Conservative Big-Wigs are Clueless

[feste37]

Your cunning plan does not pass muster, I'm afraid. Republicans did not assume 
Obama was going to win in 2012. On the contrary, they thought right up to the 
last minute that their candidate Romney would win. They saw Obama as a failed, 
unpopular Jimmy Carter-type one-term president. Boy, did they get that wrong!

Also, Sarah's star had faded long before the 2012 elections. She was not in the 
hunt at all, thank God. 


---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com,  wrote :

 When Obama ran for his second term it seems to have been taken for granted, 
even by Republicans, that he would win. 

 In that case, thought I at the time, wouldn't it have been a smart move to 
have Sarah Palin as the rival candidate.
 

 Why so?
 

 Well, if the candidate is going to lose regardless you don't want to sacrifice 
a plausible, high-profile contender. Why not throw Palin onto the funeral pyre?
 

 And, by having a woman as their choice, Republicans could claim ever after 
that they were the first party in US history to root for a female President. 
You want progressive politics? Go GOP.
 

 And - just as many voters opted for Obama simply because he was black - Sarah 
Palin would have been a wild card: many might have voted for her simply because 
she was a woman (though fibbing that they had voted for the Democrats).
 

 Apologies for giving you nightmares, but what do you think of my cunning plan?
 

 

 

[FairfieldLife] Re: Conservative Big-Wigs are Clueless

[s3raph...@yahoo.com [FairfieldLife]]

When Obama ran for his second term it seems to have been taken for granted, 
even by Republicans, that he would win. 

 In that case, thought I at the time, wouldn't it have been a smart move to 
have Sarah Palin as the rival candidate.
 

 Why so?
 

 Well, if the candidate is going to lose regardless you don't want to sacrifice 
a plausible, high-profile contender. Why not throw Palin onto the funeral pyre?
 

 And, by having a woman as their choice, Republicans could claim ever after 
that they were the first party in US history to root for a female President. 
You want progressive politics? Go GOP.
 

 And - just as many voters opted for Obama simply because he was black - Sarah 
Palin would have been a wild card: many might have voted for her simply because 
she was a woman (though fibbing that they had voted for the Democrats).
 

 Apologies for giving you nightmares, but what do you think of my cunning plan?
 

 

 

[FairfieldLife] Re: Conservative Big-Wigs are Clueless

[emily.ma...@yahoo.com [FairfieldLife]]

From Huffington Post re: the 2008 election:

 

 "Clinton got 83 percent of the black vote in 1992 and 84 percent in 1996; the 
third-party candidate Ross Perot probably sliced away some of Clinton's black 
support. Al Gore got 90 percent in 2000; John Kerry got 88 percent in 2004. 
Obama captured 95 percent in 2008, and 2 million more black people voted than 
in the previous election."

 

From the Wall Street Journal re: Obama's 2012 win: 

 "More fundamentally, the thing to keep in mind with analyses about which 
demographic group decided an election is that, given a small enough margin, 
victories can be attributed to a number of different factors. And that applies 
even to Obama’s seven-point win. For instance, it’s possible to make the 
argument that the election was decided by age instead of by race. Obama is 47, 
25 years younger than his opponent. In November 2004, Kerry was 60, two years 
older than his opponent. Obama won the 18- to 29-year-old vote by 34 percentage 
points, and the 30- to 44-year-old vote by six points; Kerry’s margins among 
those two age groups were nine points and negative seven points, respectively. 
If voters in those two age groups had split among the two major parties in the 
same proportions as in 2004, and with all else equal, McCain would have won the 
election by a percentage point. Not to mention that a given voter’s decision 
may have nothing to do with his or her age, race or other demographic factors."


---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com,  wrote :

 When Obama ran for his second term it seems to have been taken for granted, 
even by Republicans, that he would win. 

 In that case, thought I at the time, wouldn't it have been a smart move to 
have Sarah Palin as the rival candidate.
 

 Why so?
 

 Well, if the candidate is going to lose regardless you don't want to sacrifice 
a plausible, high-profile contender. Why not throw Palin onto the funeral pyre?
 

 And, by having a woman as their choice, Republicans could claim ever after 
that they were the first party in US history to root for a female President. 
You want progressive politics? Go GOP.
 

 And - just as many voters opted for Obama simply because he was black - Sarah 
Palin would have been a wild card: many might have voted for her simply because 
she was a woman (though fibbing that they had voted for the Democrats).
 

 Apologies for giving you nightmares, but what do you think of my cunning plan?