This website is a member of Liberty Alliance, which has been named as an company.

Secret to Success: Keep it Simple, GOP!

Written on Thursday, May 3, 2012 by

Print Friendly and PDF
Us vs Them

For the past few months I’ve had an image in my head that I couldn’t let go of.  The Democrats seem so streamlined and organized—while our side seems scattered, disjointed and the opposite of organized.

Thanks to the graphic department at Patriot Update, that image in my head has been made into this perfectly clear visual:

 

I personally believe this “scatteredness” is due to the fact that the very nature of Conservatism is self-sufficiency, independence and capitalistic principles.  We aren’t prone to group-think—matter of fact, we tend to run away from anything “collective” other than church.

We tend to analyze things.  We don’t simply listen to the talking heads on TV; if we’re unsure, we research things for ourselves.  We somehow don’t grow tired of hearing long explanations of things; we like to get all the facts and figures before making our decisions about anything.

On the other hand, the very nature of Liberalism IS group-think and collectivism.  They NEED all those collective brains to create something because they aren’t raised to believe in individualism.  They thrive on feelings and emotions and are taught to follow the crowd—think like everyone else and believe whatever the “authority figure” tells them to believe.  They don’t like to cloud issues with lots of facts and figures and instead thrive on the most simplistic, basic, touchy-feely type of message.

Some of the most successful ad campaigns in America have been the most simplistic, basic and easy-to-understand.  With a few simple words, you instantly have a picture in your mind of whatever the product is.

“Just do it.”

“You deserve a break today.”

“Got milk?”

“Don’t leave home without it.”

“Have it your way.”

Nothing fancy, no cluttered words—just hard-hitting syntax and there ya go.

Anyone my age and older not only knows how to say the following at lightning-fast speeds but also how to sing it, what it means and which company it comes from:  “Two all beef patties, special sauce, lettuce, cheese, pickles, onions on a sesame seed bun!!!!!!”

Don’t YOU want a Big Mac right about now?

All these brilliant advertisements came to mind when I recently attended the “pro-Obamacare” protest in Washington, D.C.  The (very organized) Union protesters were chanting the most simple, basic phrases possible.

“We love Obamacare!” and “Healthcare is a human right!” they shouted in their perfectly community organized (and Union-led) circles.

They didn’t obscure their phrasing with lots of words, facts or figures.  When questioned, they simply repeated their chants.

“I love Obamacare because I want free healthcare!”

“Everyone should be allowed to have free healthcare!”

Our side, on the other hand, was shouting things like “Follow the Constitution!” and “Who will pay for Obamacare?”  Things that, unfortunately, make you have to stop and think.

And therein, my friends, lies the key to the success of the entire Democrat party:  They DO NOT WANT PEOPLE TO THINK!

Let’s take for example the successful De Beers “A diamond is forever” ad campaign.  All the folks at De Beers wanted you to know was that when you buy one of their diamonds you’d have it forever. Yes, it might take you forever to pay for it; and yes, you should probably pay off your student loans and buy groceries instead—but all that is beside the point.  You NEED a De Beers diamond.  It will last forever.  Pure and simple.

Barack Obama and his crew know about advertising better than anyone in the universe.  In fact, Obama is the first president in U.S. history to have his own logo and it’s no coincidence that his logo looks almost identical to another advertising genius, Pepsi.

When I first arrived at the Obamacare protest that day, I had a list of detailed questions I wanted to ask some of the speakers.  I knew people like Iowa Representative Steve King and Texas Representative Louie Gohmert were scheduled to be there and I worked very hard to make sure I had “investigative journalistic-type” questions for them.  I planned to ask them about the hearings inside the Supreme Court, and wanted to know all about the pro vs. con arguments that were occurring.

But after hearing the simplistic chants of our opposition, I knew I needed answers for the OTHER guy’s questions.

I knew I had to ask, “Why don’t WE love Obamacare?” and “IS healthcare a human right?  If not, why?”

I think THIS is the answer to the entire “how do we win” question.  We don’t need to preach to the choir anymore; those of us who understand the importance of our Constitution and our Republic are unwavering.  It’s the other guys—those fence sitters, the people who are unsure—THEY are the people we need to focus on from now on.   We have to answer THEIR questions–not reiterate our own complicated concerns of what’s happening inside the Supreme Court.

We’ve got to KEEP IT SIMPLE when dealing with the Independent voter’s concerns.  Their concerns are real; we absolutely do need healthcare reform—but Obamacare is not the answer and we’ve all got to find the easiest, most basic ways to explain why.

Us Vs. ThemDIAGRAM

Meanwhile, stay tuned to PolitiChicks.tv for my Washington D.C. interviews with some of the greatest Conservative voices in America including Reps. Gohmert , Col. Allen West and Steve King; Senators Jim DeMint and Pat Toomey;  Congresswoman Michele Bachmann and many more—all giving answers to my simplistic questions that anyone and everyone can understand.

We’ve got to gain as many voters as possible in this election including our local, state and national races.  Let’s “reach out and touch someone” and make sure all OUR voices are heard– and understood–today.

 

 

 

 

 

Print Friendly and PDF
Posting Policy
We have no tolerance for comments containing violence, racism, vulgarity, profanity, all caps, or discourteous behavior. Thank you for partnering with us to maintain a courteous and useful public environment where we can engage in reasonable discourse. Read more.