From 538 (4.00 / 1)

I never heard of this guy Sean Quinn, but I suspect that he's on to something here, even if the headline is a bit absurd.

Dems Must Give Voters Explicit Permission To Like Palin

Because they already do. That ship has sailed. When facts are used to discredit Sarah Palin, emotion trumps facts. The instinct is to defend against the facts. Consider: you meet someone and like him or her on a gut level. A stranger - someone who doesn't have built-up personal credibility with you - gives you a list of reasons not to like that person. How do you react?

On an emotional level, you want them to be wrong, and you will take every possible favorable inference on the likable person's behalf. Using facts is pushing a big rock uphill. You might get it to the top with a few voters, but you're going to expend a lot of energy for only a little return.

There's a giant disconnect between all the gleeful Democratic claims of this or that magic bullet and the genuine, instant "Blink"-style emotional connection Palin has made with so many voters who see themselves in her. The Sarah Palin Phenomenon is not about facts - it's about an emotional gut reaction to someone who has charisma and reflects something essentially common and real about themselves.

http://www.fivethirtyeight.com...

---

by: JimC @ Mon Sep 15, 2008 at 09:27:25 AM CDT

We need to keep the pre-requisites low (4.00 / 2)

You shouldn't have to dislike or distrust Sarah Palin to vote for Obama.

You shouldn't have to admit you made a mistake voting for GWB to vote for Obama.

"A third Bush term!" and Palin stories are great for firing up Democrats, but they may be counterproductive in winning independents and swayable Republicans.

---

by: elwood @ Mon Sep 15, 2008 at 09:42:31 AM CDT

[ Parent | ]

But then again, Jon Stewart was right... (4.00 / 3)

During the Democratic National Convention, Jon was frustrated by the qualifying praise heaped on McCain by the leaders of our party.  He had an interesting precognition:

May I offer you a sentence you will not hear at the Republican convention?  "Barack Obama is heroic and American."

---

by: Douglas E. Lindner @ Mon Sep 15, 2008 at 11:38:16 AM CDT

[ Parent | ]

Third, yes, Palin, no (4.00 / 1)

The third Bush term is not just good for firing up Democrats; it is also a good shorthand message for independents who disapprove of Bush's performance. Or, as Jon Stewart said to Huckabee, "so you are saying that your party is the best party to clean up the mess your party made?"  We need a short message to get past the clutter, and "more of the same" works very well.

On Palin, however, I agree with you. People still voted for George H. W. Bush even though he picked Dan Quayle.  McCain is the candidate, not Palin.  

"When you get to the end of your rope, tie a knot and hang on."  Franklin D. Roosevelt   [I'm an advisor to the NHDP Coordinated Campaign]

---

by: Kathy Sullivan 2 @ Mon Sep 15, 2008 at 16:35:40 PM CDT

[ Parent | ]

My misgivings about "Third Bush Term" (4.00 / 1)

1. There are a lot of voters who supported Bush in 2000 and/or 2004 who are reachable by Obama. If they have to say "Boy, I guess I screwed up" first - which a "Bush = BAD" theme demands - fewer of them will support him. We humans like to avoid confessing error - especially to ourselves.
2. Talking about "the third Bush term" demands that the audience think about the 2008 election in terms of the past. That is in conflict with a call to the future.
3. For voters who opposed Bush but are ready to support McCain, the "Third Bush Term" can be effective. But I don't think there are many such voters, and I think they can be reached more effectively with a positive message - or a strong anti-McCain message that finesses the question of whether he is a maverick and just shows that he is Wrong (on the economy, on Social Security, on minimum wage, on reproductive rights...)

---

by: elwood @ Mon Sep 15, 2008 at 18:34:49 PM CDT

[ Parent | ]

Proof of a third bush term (0.00 / 0)

You ask is there proof of a third Bush term. Take a look at the Alaska Governors Office and how it runs. Like Bush 43 but ran by a "Hockey Mom."

You have to realize the strength of the Bush Adminstration is in Dick Cheney and his role in the Bush White House. With McCain being McCain, chances are good that Palin will run much of the White House and this government.

To ignore the choice of or downplay the choice of a Vice President in the 21st Century White House is going to be a miscalculation in my book. I know Sarah Palin is going to make sure she isn't ignored. Now a days the race to The White House is a team effort the Republicans sure know it and hit us with a round house right with it.  And now whose scrambling to counter it?

I'm actually hoping the economy gets worse so we might be able to use the issues to our advantage.

"I'm not smart enough to run the economy."

- John McCain (r) Arizona
Interview with the Keene Sentinel, November 7, 2007

---

by: TJMCNH1 @ Mon Sep 15, 2008 at 22:37:29 PM CDT

[ Parent | ]

No, I don't ask that at all. (0.00 / 0)

I ask whether that is a winning campaign theme.

I think McCain is indeed a continuation of the Bush regime - after all, when he went to sell his soul, they were the ones in the market. And Palin combines the personal corruption of Huey Long with the competence of J. Danforth Quayle.

But do you run on that? Maybe not.

---

by: elwood @ Tue Sep 16, 2008 at 05:21:04 AM CDT

[ Parent | ]

I Know Sean Quinn (4.00 / 4)

He's an old friend -- a Dartmouth '92 who served as hockey announcer and worked at the college radio station (with, among others, Grant Bosse).  

Sean worked as a lawyer after college, but quit his job and moved to Montana to campaign for Jon Tester.  (He helped to hook me on Brian Schweitzer's national potential.)  He was also an early -- and incredibly passionate -- Obama supporter.

Sean is also one of the smartest and most creative guys I know.  I don't always agree with him, but he invariably makes me think.

---

by: Dartmouth Dem @ Mon Sep 15, 2008 at 18:09:37 PM CDT

[ Parent | ]