Critical Race Theory attack is case study in how right has mastered that turnout is persuasion. And knows that job of message isn't to say what’s popular; it’s to make popular what you want said. A 🧵
View from swing voters in focus groups (caveat qual) over last weeks: “CRT” attack isn’t persuasive. Phrase not intuitively bad (eg “death tax”), some think it means critique of racializing things. When explained, swing still want kids taught truths. So why is right doing this?
CRT attack is red 🥩 for their base. Generated “righteous” fury when base feeling defeated. Something new to repeat
over and again, making them seem like guardians of our national virtue instead of propaganda peddlers for prejudice.
We don’t have to call things the names our opposition have deliberately manufactured to frame issues on their terms. 1
Yelled about this whole bunch - to no avail- after “Citizens United” decision. We could have called it Corporations Unleashed instead of rendering ourselves opposed to the notions of citizens acting together. 2
“Pre-existing conditions” is an industry talking point, invented by corporations who put life and health up for sale.
Having a human body means it needs care. 3
They lost. And so they declare themselves winners and eagerly shed blood. We won. But we imbibe a narrative that democracy is an impossibility, that they’ve destroyed it beyond repair. Nah. We dealt a blow to fascism at the ballot box. Nothing we can’t do.
The very purpose of guerrilla warfare (for that is what this angry minority clinging to their supremacy is) is to destroy their enemies will to resist.
We are through resisting. We are embracing our power, under the guidance of Black, Indigenous and immigrant led movements. And we’re moving into governance.
Much has rightly been said about the destructive influence of money in politics. Less discussed is how the chase for dollars pollutes campaign messaging. 1
Analyses buzzing at the race forward, holistically progressive approaches in #GASEN - talking about human rights issues (grossly mislabeled “identity politics”) not just ok, it’s required. 2
A closer look at Ossoff’s narrative shift, in particular, reveals a telling evolution. In the final sprint, he pivoted toward an *affirmative* solution based message, rooted in having a government that cares for and respects all, no exceptions. 3
How well do you know high potential voters? In RCT of 6000 which reluctant voters did this engage?
a. Cynics (feel burned by system, don't believe change possible)
b. Peace seekers (find politics a whole lotta yelling, prefer to focus on fam and friends)
Progressive’s attachment to constantly narrate all we’re confronting frequently renders our target audiences objects, not subjects, in our sentences. Little wonder we have trouble motivating people to sustained action.
Anytime you’re taking about what “they” do to us - you’ve made the opposition the actor and made passive those you’d like to see acting.
One of the proven most effective levers for mobilization is social proof: suggesting or claiming the group to which your audience belongs is already doing the thing you’re hoping to inspire.
Dear Leftie Twitter -
I know you’re freaked. Not sleeping great myself.
But, stop declaring yourselves the losing team; no one’s joining that.
We ran 2018 & delivered in 2019. We know how to organize, persuade & mobilize. Need to keep doing it & inspire others to same.
If the GOP were coming into 2020 with our track record last two years, they’d have “we are the champions” on endless replay.
Voters are attracted to what they think other voters are attracted to. I would say fake it till ya make it but we don’t even have to fake it.
Myths are powerful things. Whole ways of being, of relating to others, of determining right and wrong, come from them.
Stop spreading the story that the GOP is invincible. You’ll render it true.