Forum Thread

Too Much Attention Given to Republican Brand

Reply to ThreadDisplaying 15 Posts
  • Democrat
    Pensacola, FL
    Are you sure you want to delete this post?
        
    I am concerned that everything I hear or see in the political news arena focuses primarily on Republicans whether I am viewing a conservative or progressive news station. They seem to be the only ones in the news worthy of reporting on. A viewer sent in a question on the Ed Schultz show asking a question very closely related to this very topic. Ed responded by saying that it is too early in the election season and Democrats did not want to set themselves up for negative press given all the big money donors that Republicans seem to attract that are willing to spend big bucks on negative attack ads. While I strongly suspected this already, I am concerned that the name recognition for even the most bizarre and obtuse Republicans is growing by leaps and bounds. Not everyone pays a lot of attention to politics and for them it is all about name recognition when they go to the polls. If they see a lot of a particular beaming and smiling face on TV, for them it really does not matter what they stand for, all they have to do is appear to be a pleasant person. Case in point is Chris Christie. He has done some horrible things but yet continues going forward just as if nothing has happened and people allow him to get away with this just because he has a certain command of a podium or platform and can seemingly talk to people on a one to one basis.

    I propose that Democrats start getting out there more often if there is even a hint they will run for office. They can always keep the press guessing but they need to be more visible even if they do not give away any of their battle plans. Further, I think it would be a good thing if progressive news outlets jointly made a decision to minimize exposing the Republican brand. All references to a Republican candidate or politician should often be made without showing an accompanying photo or video. Even where possible, the candidate or politician’s name should even be eliminated where it still makes sense to do so. For instance, instead of referring to Paul Ryan by name, call him the Republican Senator from Wisconsin. When showing photos or pictures of Democrats try to make sure they have a persona where they are always smiling or displaying a sympathetic face and make sure to use their names often.
  • Liberal
    Other Party
    Llos Angeles, CA
    Are you sure you want to delete this post?
        
    The republican party realizes that most Americans are mentally challenged and should be told what to think. this can be verified by asking half of this country why they would vote against their own interest. the republican party openly defends the wealthy.

    The democratic party also takes money from the wealthy but claim to represent the working man....a bit of a quagmire. the red party doesn't apologize on who they support. the blue party does.
  • Center Left
    Independent
    Denton, TX
    Are you sure you want to delete this post?
        
    L.A. Citizen Wrote: The republican party realizes that most Americans are mentally challenged and should be told what to think. this can be verified by asking half of this country why they would vote against their own interest. the republican party openly defends the wealthy.

    The democratic party also takes money from the wealthy but claim to represent the working man....a bit of a quagmire. the red party doesn't apologize on who they support. the blue party does.
    Mentally challenged is hardly the proper term. It's just basic psychology. Name recognition works. Adding to that, it costs money to get your name out there and it costs a lot of money to get your name out there on a national level. There are rich people that support the GOP and there are rich people that support the Dems and both of those groups donate to help their interests and further their ideology. You can take money from the rich while still supporting policies that benefit the middle class. The policy stances are already out on the table.

    I think what the OP is talking about is that many of the Republican candidates are getting tons of free press (both positive and negative) which is giving them free name recognition and he is curious if that press will translate into votes.
  • Liberal
    Other Party
    Llos Angeles, CA
    Are you sure you want to delete this post?
        
    Zach F Wrote:
    L.A. Citizen Wrote: The republican party realizes that most Americans are mentally challenged and should be told what to think. this can be verified by asking half of this country why they would vote against their own interest. the republican party openly defends the wealthy.

    The democratic party also takes money from the wealthy but claim to represent the working man....a bit of a quagmire. the red party doesn't apologize on who they support. the blue party does.
    Mentally challenged is hardly the proper term. It's just basic psychology. Name recognition works. Adding to that, it costs money to get your name out there and it costs a lot of money to get your name out there on a national level. There are rich people that support the GOP and there are rich people that support the Dems and both of those groups donate to help their interests and further their ideology. You can take money from the rich while still supporting policies that benefit the middle class. The policy stances are already out on the table.

    I think what the OP is talking about is that many of the Republican candidates are getting tons of free press (both positive and negative) which is giving them free name recognition and he is curious if that press will translate into votes.
    I disagree with you completely. Name recognition is great when you're buying a pepsi. PEOPLE VOTE AGAINST THEIR INTEREST BECAUSE THEY'RE STUPID. mentally challenged was a nice term. people vote out unions because they're stupid, not because of name recognition. and no, the rich and the working class have no common interest.
    an example would be GMC, they withheld the ignition switch problem since 2001. even prior to the bailout. I said that the dems don't admit publicly in any speeches I've ever heard that they take money from Wall street. Obama....champion of immigration reform has deported more aliens than any other president.

    half of this country believes in non-union, more prisons, abolishing estate taxes. no rights for women, no increase in minimum wage, a foreign president, and a spooky guy in the sky with a score card.....American voters are retarded
  • Center Left
    Independent
    Denton, TX
    Are you sure you want to delete this post?
        
    The one thing that we can agree on is that American voters are typically uninformed.

    The rich and middle class share many common interests. The best and most successful way a business can do well and expand is by appealing to the middle class. But that isn't the topic on this thread, so I won't elaborate here.

    But I think name recognition has a lot to with it. First and foremost, probably the most widely implemented form of voting is the letter next to the name (R) or (D). Some research shows that up to 95% of voters use this method while others say it is as low as 77%. Most of these people are the type that latch on to any catch phrase or any rumor that is going around and spread it on social media or at the water cooler at work. This also includes the extremely wealthy who have a huge vested interest in national politics.

    The other 5%-23% of voters are the swing voters, either those who don't care enough to pay attention or those who vote based in individual candidates and whatever criteria they set for that candidate. I couldn't find any numbers to divide these groups up.

    Now, for the voters who don't pay attention to politics at all but still vote, do you really think name recognition would have nothing to do with it?
  • Liberal
    Other Party
    Llos Angeles, CA
    Are you sure you want to delete this post?
        
    What middle class????? a hundred thousand a year pays the bills here...that about it
  • Democrat
    Philadelphia, PA
    Are you sure you want to delete this post?
        
    Just a simple reminder regarding the wealthy and what they represent , there is not one member of Congress, Republican or Democrat, that is not considered wealthy!! That also includes the Independents.
  • Other Party
    Nebraska
    Are you sure you want to delete this post?
        
    Right and more than half of them are worth more than a million.

    So...what exactly do they have in common with the rest of us?
  • Strongly Liberal Democrat
    Democrat
    Portland, OR
    Are you sure you want to delete this post?
        
    johnnycee Wrote: Just a simple reminder regarding the wealthy and what they represent , there is not one member of Congress, Republican or Democrat, that is not considered wealthy!! That also includes the Independents.
    You do realize that this isn't even remotely close to being true, right? There are multiple members of Congress that are flat out broke and well into the red. It is true that the majority are millionaires, but that doesn't mean they all are.
  • Democrat
    Philadelphia, PA
    Are you sure you want to delete this post?
        
    jaredsxtn Wrote:
    johnnycee Wrote: Just a simple reminder regarding the wealthy and what they represent , there is not one member of Congress, Republican or Democrat, that is not considered wealthy!! That also includes the Independents.
    You do realize that this isn't even remotely close to being true, right? There are multiple members of Congress that are flat out broke and well into the red. It is true that the majority are millionaires, but that doesn't mean they all are.
    And which members of Congress are flat broke, also I said wealthy not millionaires, your words not mine
  • Democrat
    Philadelphia, PA
    Are you sure you want to delete this post?
        
    jamesn Wrote: Right and more than half of them are worth more than a million.

    So...what exactly do they have in common with the rest of us?
    What they have in common is that they want out our votes and to that end they pander to our weakness, they could not care less about having our best interest's at heart.
  • Strongly Liberal Democrat
    Democrat
    Portland, OR
    Are you sure you want to delete this post?
        
    johnnycee Wrote:
    jaredsxtn Wrote:
    johnnycee Wrote: Just a simple reminder regarding the wealthy and what they represent , there is not one member of Congress, Republican or Democrat, that is not considered wealthy!! That also includes the Independents.
    You do realize that this isn't even remotely close to being true, right? There are multiple members of Congress that are flat out broke and well into the red. It is true that the majority are millionaires, but that doesn't mean they all are.
    And which members of Congress are flat broke, also I said wealthy not millionaires, your words not mine
    Rep. David G. Valadao ($12,167,002)
    Rep. Alcee L. Hastings ($4,732,002)
    Rep. Ruben Hinojosa ($881,000)
    ...

    There are many, many more. You can get the full list HERE
  • Other Party
    Nebraska
    Are you sure you want to delete this post?
        
    johnny we have two things that they care about: our vote, and our money, and not necessarily in that order. The more money a person has, the more they can contribute, and therefore they are more important.

    The wealthier a person is, the more important they are to the politicians.

    I'm not wealthy, therefore they do care about me, only for my vote for which they will tell me anything they think I want to hear.
  • Democrat
    Philadelphia, PA
    Are you sure you want to delete this post?
        
    jaredsxtn Wrote:
    johnnycee Wrote:
    jaredsxtn Wrote:
    johnnycee Wrote: Just a simple reminder regarding the wealthy and what they represent , there is not one member of Congress, Republican or Democrat, that is not considered wealthy!! That also includes the Independents.
    You do realize that this isn't even remotely close to being true, right? There are multiple members of Congress that are flat out broke and well into the red. It is true that the majority are millionaires, but that doesn't mean they all are.
    And which members of Congress are flat broke, also I said wealthy not millionaires, your words not mine
    Rep. David G. Valadao ($12,167,002)
    Rep. Alcee L. Hastings ($4,732,002)
    Rep. Ruben Hinojosa ($881,000)
    ...

    There are many, many more. You can get the full list HERE
    I checked your link and it showed that Rep. Valadao ( R from Ca), was in debt in 2012 to the tune of 24 million,498 thousand ,997 dollars and now the debt is 12 million and change which left him with a net of 164,993 dollars and he brought down that debt on the salary of a US Rep. , and this is what you refer to as being flat broke and that makes him just one of us common folk, I rest my case on the standard of pandering to ones weakness.
  • Strongly Liberal Democrat
    Democrat
    Portland, OR
    Are you sure you want to delete this post?
        
    Are we reading the same thing, Johnny?

    David Valadao (R-Calif) Minimum Net Worth-- $-24,498,997 Average Net Worth-- $-12,167,002 Maximum Net Worth $164,993

    Where are you getting that he has a net of +164,993? These are three different numbers.