Skip to comments.Do We Want to Reach the Low-Info Crowd?
Posted on 12/20/2012 4:35:45 PM PST by COBOL2Java
RUSH: We're gonna start in Long Valley, New Jersey. This is Frank. Thank you, sir, and welcome. Great to have you here.
CALLER: Thank you, Rush. I was sitting here enjoying a cigar in one of the last bastions in New Jersey you're still allowed to smoke. So having a good time listening to you. But the real problem here is, you're talking about the uninformed voter, you're not gonna get them by giving them more information. And the left separates elections from governing. And we don't do that. We tell people during the elections what we're gonna do after we are elected, and progressives tell people what they want to hear to get elected. And we don't separate it.
I had breakfast with Romney. And I looked at him and I said, "Are you gonna attack President Obama during this election?" And he said, "No." I said, "Then you're gonna lose, because we need to start thinking about elections separately than governing." And we don't do that. We come up with great ideas, great policies, but there's never been a policy enacted with a concession speech. All we do is give concession speeches. It's ridiculous. And the tax issue, I said to him, "I think you should go out there and say to people, 'Look, progressives want to tax less people more and conservatives want to tax more people less. Because when more people are being taxed less, then people are working and the economy grows.'" He looked at me and said, "Ah, it's a great idea, it's true, but you can't say that." I said, "Why can't you say it? It's the truth. And we need to separate --"
RUSH: Wait a minute. Wait a minute, now. He did say it, and that was the problem. What was it that scared people about the Republican convention, do you think?
CALLER: Probably too many facts and figures. Probably too much information.
RUSH: No! The Republican convention was about hard work. Every Speaker had the same story, up from nothing. Families who sacrificed for years, in some cases decades, so their kids could make something of themselves. The kids came along and they worked really hard, America's great, the land of opportunity. Sorry, doesn't sell. But Romney did talk about broadening the base, lowering taxes so more people get hired. More people working equals more revenue to the government. People weren't interested in that. They're not interested in that.
CALLER: No, but he did it just like you did it, by explaining it through facts and figures in a broad sense. We need to start using -- and this is what low-information people understand -- one- and two-sentence terms and repeat it over and over and over and over. And that's what the progressives have done and that's why they win. They don't care about governing. The governing comes after the election. We don't think about just winning. We need to destroy the opponents. We should be looking at whoever's gonna run in 2016 and we should start to destroy them today. Today.
RUSH: Now, I'm gonna tell you something. You are right on the money with that because that's what they are already doing. They are already targeting Marco Rubio. They are already beginning to target whoever they think our future stars are. That is exactly what they did to Romney, and Romney didn't do a thing about it. Bush didn't do a thing about it when it was happening to him while he was president. For some reason our side keeps believing, ah, nobody's gonna really believe that. That's so extreme and outrageous, nobody's gonna believe it, and they do.
RUSH: Our last caller did have a point. Actually, two points. He said we ought to be out destroying whoever, working on Hillary right now. They are. The Democrats, that's their modus operandi. They're out destroying Rubio. Now, the low-information voters don't think it's unfair. They think the Democrats are warning them, telling them the truth about these evil people that want to do 'em harm, gonna make 'em work or what have you. Do you realize, Obama really never has governed, at least the perception is he's always campaigning. Now, clearly he's governing. Don't misunderstand me. The people we're talking about, he's constantly appealing to them. He's constantly reaching out.
Do you know he's fundraising even now off of Newtown, Connecticut, on his website? What's he fundraising for? He doesn't have another campaign. They're out asking for donations to Obama websites. And they're appealing to people's emotions based on the Republicans and their stand on the fiscal cliff and Newtown, Connecticut. They're fundraising on this stuff. And he hasn't even been inaugurated for his second term yet and he's fundraising. For what? Democrat Party? Who knows what. But the caller's on to something. You know, we equate campaigning with governing. "Okay, here's how we're gonna govern."
They don't do that. In fact, the Democrats cannot be honest about that they're gonna do. If they were, they would lose every election. If Obama had told people, "My plan is a perpetual unemployment rate near 9%, ever-expanding government with more debt and a higher deficit," you think he'da won anything? In fact, he campaigned promising people he's gonna end all that stuff. And so he gets credit for trying, because that's what they think he's doing. Now, we're talking low-information people here. That's the caveat.
In one way it's very frustrating. It's also, to me, quite fascinating, in the sense that we gotta devise a way to defeat it.
Here's Larry in Evansville, Indiana. Thank you for calling, sir. Great to have you on the program.
CALLER: Well, hi, Rush. I've been waiting to have this conversation for a long time, and it's very important. I'm glad you're having it. Listen, my comments are, earlier you raised two questions. How do we reach low-information voters, and then what do we tell them? Well, I believe there's only three ways, there's actually three ways --
RUSH: Can I interrupt you for a second? Don't lose your train of thought, but I'm gonna tell you what my gut reaction is. And this is why I could never be a politician. When you say, what do we have to do to reach low-information -- I don't even want to. I don't even want to descend to that level.
CALLER: Well, I think it's necessary to win elections.
RUSH: Now, no, no, wait. See, even my staff here, highly overrated the other side of the glass, thinks I just stepped in it by saying that. But do we want to be governed by -- or maybe -- I know what my problem is, we have to figure out a way not to appeal to 'em but to use them.
RUSH: We make them think we care about them but we really don't.
CALLER: Well, I wouldn't say that.
RUSH: That's what the Democrats are doing.
CALLER: I say we have three opportunities to reach them.
RUSH: All right.
CALLER: If you want to win elections, debate number one, debate number two, and debate number three. Now, Rush, if we woulda put an earpiece in Romney's ear and you on the other end telling him what to say, we woulda won. In other words, we want our Republican candidates to say what you and your colleagues have been saying for years.
RUSH: Wait a second.
CALLER: That's why it's so frustrating.
RUSH: Wait just a second. Just a second. Your premise, are you telling me that I know how to reach low-interest voters?
CALLER: I think you could, yeah, better than Romney could, yes. See, low-information voters tend to vote emotionally rather than logically.
CALLER: And you're a smart person, very logical and all this. They like Obama 'cause he's cool, he plays basketball and all that. Romney is being the same old same old Republican rich guy who's gonna make us go to work. In other words, if you would say in the debate, "Hey, if you want a bunch of free stuff then I'm not your guy. But if you want some dignity in your life --"
RUSH: So what, we have to convince them that we don't want 'em to go to work, either?
CALLER: No, you gotta reach them emotionally. In other words, you say, "Hey, if you want some dignity and pride in knowing that you can provide for your family with a good job, then I'm your guy." That's an emotional thing they're gonna react to, you see what I'm saying? They'll react to that, "Hey, I don't want to be a freeloader. I really do want to work. This makes sense." It's an emotional -- they buy emotionally. See what I'm saying? And that's how we gotta change things.
RUSH: Now I'm confused. I understand when you talk about they're emotional, not thinking, but I don't equate teaching them about work and opportunity as working with the low-information voter. Now, I could be wrong about this. Okay, let me ask you, are you essentially saying that you think my degree of passion and my desire to have people understand what I'm saying could reach these people? Is that your point?
CALLER: Rush, thank you. You just put words in my mouth. Passion is the key. You have a passion for caring about people and our country. That's not being displayed so much in the debates on the Republican side. Thank you. That's exactly what I wanted to say.
RUSH: Okay. All right. No, I appreciate it 'cause I must tell you, when I hear low-information voter, I think hopeless. Low-information voter, how do you reach somebody that doesn't know anything? And then I guess I'm coupling the fact that -- and maybe this is where I'm wrong. I'm assuming that in America in 2012, if you're a low-information voter, you don't want to know. We got more media. We have more opportunity to be informed than we've ever had in this country, and if you aren't it means you don't want to be. Maybe I'm wrong about that, but you have to work at not being informed in this country.
CALLER: Well, not when you got the liberal news media against you. You know what I would do? I would take all the campaign money or all the money I would spend on commercials and give it to supporting low-information supported charitable causes, not spend one dime --
RUSH: What the hell is that? What is a low-information charitable cause?
CALLER: Well, I didn't mean low charitable causes, but people who benefit from charitable causes from low income or low --
RUSH: Who are they? What are low-information charities?
CALLER: People who abuse the welfare system. People who want a free ride. I'm not talking about people who are in real true need, but the people who are abusing the giveaways by the government. That's who I'm talking about. In other words, if a candidate actually said, "Hey, I'm donating all my money." You're not buying votes, you're showing your sincerity, because it doesn't matter anyway. Those commercials are just a waste of money. Why not give those to charitable causes anyway. And you have to reach people at the debates because they don't listen to conservative radio. We're preaching to the choir too much.
RUSH: They're not listening to liberal media, either. By definition. They're low-information. They're watching Entertainment Tonight.
RUSH: They're tuning in to TMZ on the Web. They care about KStew and RPattz. They care about the Twilight saga. They are moved by when Oprah cries.
RUSH: But they're not watching CBS, ABC, NBC.
CALLER: They don't care about the fiscal cliff. They don't understand the national debt. As long as they can watch their reality TV shows, it's not affecting their lives on a day-to-day basis.
RUSH: They think that stuff is just typical Washington BS, fiscal cliff, all this. Let me illustrate 'cause I realize I'm probably making people very nervous and I'm probably sounding very threatening to 24-year-old single unmarried, maybe divorced twice, three times, bigamy women. Who knows. I don't intend to be doing that. But let me illustrate what I mean when I think of low-information voter. Oh, this isn't gonna work because I'm just gonna get called names. Let me use it anyway. I'll run the risk. You remember in the first term, maybe the first year, Obama announced a voucher program for rent-free leaving in certain American cities. One of the cities was Detroit. Literally 30,000 people showed up to register for the opportunity to get some rent assistance or something like that.
Of the 30,000, there were only like 1,500 such grants to be made. Thirty thousand people showed up. And our affiliate, WJR, sent a reporter into the crowd to ask them some various questions. Why were they there. What did they hope to get, and where was it coming from. They were the classic low-information voters. They thought they were showing up to get a free apartment and that Obama was giving it to 'em. And when he said, "Well, where's Obama getting the money?"
"From his stash. I don't know, I don't care, Obama, Obama, it's coming from Obama's stash." Now, they were of the opinion that Barack Obama personally was gonna get them into some apartment or whatever the deal was. I think it was rent assessment or abatement, but Obama was gonna do this personally for them. That's why they were showing up. Now, that is what I think of low-information voter, and I said at the time that if I were president and that's what people thought I was going to do, I'd be embarrassed. But Obama was not embarrassed. That's a sign of success to Obama and the Democrats. That kind of citizenry, if you will. See, they don't care how it is they end up with their power. They don't care what kind of country it is that they're governing, as long as they're governing it or controlling it.
Where it is often thought they have all the compassion, they're the ones that have all the care and concern for these people. They don't. Your average Democrat voter lives in squalor, lives in near poverty. Your average Democrat voter lives a subsistence. But they keep voting for it. Now, it would embarrass me, and I said this at the time, it would embarrass me. I caught hell, by the way, from the Drive-By Media for this assessment at the time that I made it. I'm just repeating the story because that's what I think of when I think of low-information voter. So when I say I wouldn't want to reach them, as president I wouldn't want to do what it takes to get their support. 'Cause what is that?
That's turning the country into a socialist state. I don't want to do that. I don't have a desire for power like that. When I hear low-information, that's what I see. I don't see skin color. I see helpless people. Now, you may see low-information people in a totally different way. You may see average, ordinary, common Americans who just don't know anything, or don't care to know anything. I have a different knee-jerk, admittedly, definition or reaction to low-information voter. So if I'm wrong, feel free call and tell me. I could very well be. You know me. I'm never right that much.
If they vote, we’d better try to reach them, yes
Some of the moron vote is beyond help e.g. the Obama phone lady, but for others it may take things getting so bad that any alternative to Obama’s socialism would be better. Sadly it might take the US turning into East Germany complete with a border fence to keep people from fleeing.
Reach them how? By promising them more goodies than Obama? Because they vote for whoever gets them more goodies.
I think they need to be constantly reminded that they are slaves to the democrat party and show them the conservative path to freedom. I suspect you could even use their socialist indoctrination against the democrats.
“We need to start using — and this is what low-information people understand — one- and two-sentence terms and repeat it over and over and over and over. And that’s what the progressives have done and that’s why they win.”
The caller is correct. Another thing is that conservatives are too busy praying and actually thinking everyone will play by the rules. Dems DONT. They will do everything, meaning cheat, to win and I doubt conservatives will do that.
I think it will have to come bottom-up, from the red states first. Hopefully the 10th Amendment won’t be quashed before this happens. Once states like Texas, Oklahoma and others start pushing back against the statist tide and prosper, it will eventually trickle up to the federal level. Hopefully it’s not too late.
“I think they need to be constantly reminded that they are slaves to the democrat party and show them the conservative path to freedom.”
You have to understand, they don’t see themselves as slaves. You can’t appeal to their intellect. As sad as this is, “feelings” are treated as facts.
Feelings inspire action. Persuasion works best when it focuses most on core emotions, not cerebral abstractions.
You don’t sell the steak, you sell the sizzle.
And you lose when you don’t even try.
Encouraging prepping is a good foot in the door strategy. It appears to be non partisan, but encourages self sufficiency and not waiting for the government to come rescue you from a hurricane.
I actually don’t agree with Rush. Obama lost this election by legal votes. He did not legally win.
He won because the low info voteers were pushed to commit fraud.
That is why we see odd polls like “the American people say we are going in the wrong direction”.
Very true, but that won’t fix voter fraud that goes unanswered.
You want low info? Look at the Republican party leadership. We have 24 months between elections. We’ve burned up a month and a half, and where are they? Still scratching their heads.
“And you lose when you dont even try.”
I didn’t say not to try, just do it differently.
And one of the most powerful feelings is in feeling betrayed. They need to know that Obama and the Democrats are taking them for granted, keeping them in poverty, and laughing behind their backs that they STILL got reelected.
And it's true, they don't watch ABC, CBS, NBC, or listen to Rush Limbaugh. They are on social media most of the day. That's where they need to be reached.
How much info does an inner city single Mom need to make a decision on who to vote for? Here’s what an inner city single Mom cares about.
“I’m scared for me and my kids. Can you help me?”
The Democrats used Behavioral Scientists who taught them to use fear to manipulate people. It’s sickening but effective. Our big political science brains are trying to squeeze out an extra four votes in a precinct while the Democrats are going after millions across the country.
“Understand yourself and understand your opponent, and in one hundred battles, you will not be defeated.”
Well one thing we could do is get rid of Boehner and elect representatives and leaders like Allen West who will tell it straight and put it into language these idiots can understand. For example, instead of saying Obama’s plans are unacceptable state that Obama is a petty tyrant who is spending us into bankruptcy. Tell it straight into kitchen table language.
I think SOME will vote for a candidate who does a really good job of articulating the advantages of a real economic recovery and the pride and liberty and better life that comes with making your own living
SOME. I realize... not all.
But we only need SOME.
Yes, unfortunately the techniques of propaganda and brain-washing are well known...and, as we’ve been seeing, quite effective.
Let’s just say that the next R candidate would be wise to at least study a little basic marketing before going on the campaign
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.