RNC reaches new low (even for them).

[iman]

I guess we all know how cynical and calculating the Republicans are, but it is a little shocking to see that cynicism in black and white.(actually Obama in whiteface)

A RNC document indicates that fund raising will be done this year through "fear" and a promise to "save the country
from socialism".

The small donors who are the targets of direct marketing are described under the heading “Visceral Giving.” Their motivations are listed as “fear;” “Extreme negative feelings toward existing Administration;” and “Reactionary.”

Major donors, by contrast, are treated in a column headed “Calculated Giving.”
Their motivations include: “Peer to Peer Pressure”; “access”; and “Ego-Driven.”

Read more: http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0310/33866.html

The Republican Agenda (from their own documents)


Another Proud Day for the Republicans
I'm sure your all standing a little taller.

 

[JB3]

You don't think Democrats did this?

I mean, for Christ's sake it even says so right in the story that the democrats did exactly the same thing with Bush.

Manipulating donors with crude caricatures and playing on their fears is hardly unique to Republicans or to the RNC – Democrats raised millions off George W. Bush in similar terms – but rarely is it practiced in such cartoonish terms.

Read more: http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0310/33866.html#ixzz0hFNyM9oh

What is more concerning to me is the bit about socialism and fear. But, again, its hardly unique from one of the two political parties.

 

[01solara]

I guess we all know how cynical and calculating the Republicans are, but it is a little shocking to see that cynicism in black and white.(actually Obama in whiteface)

A RNC document indicates that fund raising will be done this year through "fear" and a promise to "save the country
from socialism".





Read more: http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0310/33866.html

The Republican Agenda (from their own documents)


Another Proud Day for the Republicans
I'm sure your all standing a little taller.

Listing motivations and understanding the motivations of the voter are not the same as fundraising through fear. Saving the country from socialism is a legitimate platform on which to run. Connecting those who fear it and are angry is very smart. I know many don't believe this is socialism and that is legitimate position for Democrats to make their case about. We the voters will decide which one we believe. Both of the political parties act in their own best interest more so than the interest of the country. I have heard and believe this may be a bad year for incumbents in both parties because the average American is tired of both of them. The time for placing country above party is now and politicians that don't behave as such are likely to face a backlash regardless of party affiliation.

 

[construct]

You don't think Democrats did this?

I mean, for Christ's sake it even says so right in the story that the democrats did exactly the same thing with Bush.

What is more concerning to me is the bit about socialism and fear. But, again, its hardly unique from one of the two political parties.

What is more concerning to me is that it is so fundamental that they put it in a fund-raising strategy session.

For everyone's edification, here's a link to a .pdf file of the whole presentation. Note pages 26 and 27.

http://www.politico.com/static/PPM136_100303_rnc_finance_leadership.html

 

[JB3]

What is more concerning to me is that it is so fundamental that they put it in a fund-raising strategy session.

For everyone's edification, here's a link to a .pdf file of the whole presentation. Note pages 26 and 27.

http://www.politico.com/static/PPM136_100303_rnc_finance_leadership.html

That's what I was saying. It shouldn't be the foundation of their fundraising strategy.

For me, its the same as the democrat's 2006 and 2008 strategy, which was 'anyone but republicans', and 'anyone but Bush'.

 

[iman]

Listing motivations and understanding the motivations of the voter are not the same as fundraising through fear. Saving the country from socialism is a legitimate platform on which to run. Connecting those who fear it and are angry is very smart. I know many don't believe this is socialism and that is legitimate position for Democrats to make their case about. We the voters will decide which one we believe. Both of the political parties act in their own best interest more so than the interest of the country. I have heard and believe this may be a bad year for incumbents in both parties because the average American is tired of both of them. The time for placing country above party is now and politicians that don't behave as such are likely to face a backlash regardless of party affiliation.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I know that the Republicans long for the good old Nixonian days when they could smear opposition as commies, pinkos or fellow travelers, but the USSR is gone and the Republicans have to resort to the sad label od "socialist". The problem is that socialism has a definition and distinct meaning, even if the teabaggers have no idea what socialism really is.
http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/socialism

There is nothing remotely resembling socialism in this administrations agenda and the economic advisors, the Treasury Secretary and the Fed Chairman aren't even close to being socialist. It was this administration and the Bush administration which bailed out the most important capitalist institutions in our country, had the administration been anything like socialist they would have allowed those institutions to fail as Bernie Sanders, Socialist Senator from Vermont has advocated.

No, it's all fear and scare tactics because that's all the Republicans have.

Droid - The Dems did not have to do "exactly the same thing with Bush." Nobody had to make up anything about Bush, nobody could make that shit up. Bush lied us into war and lied for the rest of his term. The Dems did not write Powell's UN speech or fly the "Mission Accomplished" banner, they didn't out Valerie Plame or fire US Attorneys for political reasons. Bush/Cheney demonized themselves and the Dems rightly reminded people of it.

 

[JB3]

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I know that the Republicans long for the good old Nixonian days when they could smear opposition as commies, pinkos or fellow travelers, but the USSR is gone and the Republicans have to resort to the sad label od "socialist". The problem is that socialism has a definition and distinct meaning, even if the teabaggers have no idea what socialism really is.
http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/socialism

There is nothing remotely resembling socialism in this administrations agenda and the economic advisors, the Treasury Secretary and the Fed Chairman aren't even close to being socialist. It was this administration and the Bush administration which bailed out the most important capitalist institutions in our country, had the administration been anything like socialist they would have allowed those institutions to fail as Bernie Sanders, Socialist Senator from Vermont has advocated.

No, it's all fear and scare tactics because that's all the Republicans have.

Droid - The Dems did not have to do "exactly the same thing with Bush." Nobody had to make up anything about Bush, nobody could make that shit up. Bush lied us into war and lied for the rest of his term. The Dems did not write Powell's UN speech or fly the "Mission Accomplished" banner, they didn't out Valerie Plame or fire US Attorneys for political reasons. Bush/Cheney demonized themselves and the Dems rightly reminded people of it.

Please. You're so blinded by your own partisanship you cannot understand that what you posted is nothing new and nothing shocking. Yes, it is in bad taste, but it happens with both parties.

 

[iman]

^Droid, in case you have not noticed, you continually make assertions but never back them up with any examples or citations.

 

[Zingerific]

Please. You're so blinded by your own partisanship you cannot understand that what you posted is nothing new and nothing shocking. Yes, it is in bad taste, but it happens with both parties.

Surely, though, the fact that both sides do it absolves neither of culpability. Right?

I think what's surprising is that such a level of cynicism was actually articulated. I would think that such things are left unsaid -- the sort of thing that "everybody knows" but no one is stupid enough to commit to paper.

I mean, a movement cannot survive for long if it alienates its true-believers. This sort of thing is pure trouble for establishment Republicans, and may fuel some primary challenges this year.

 

[iman]

When did the DNC do anything like this? It is absurd to keep saying that "both sides do it". This tactic is substantially different from the normal rough and tumble of politics. What has the DNC that is comparable to this?

 

[01solara]

When did the DNC do anything like this? It is absurd to keep saying that "both sides do it". This tactic is substantially different from the normal rough and tumble of politics. What has the DNC that is comparable to this?

Republicans ripped into John Kerry yesterday over a stunning new internal manual that advises Democrats to launch “pre-emptive” strikes charging the GOP with voter intimidation — even if none exists.

The “Election Day Manual” — written for Kerry’s Colorado campaign workers — includes a menu of options Democrats can follow next month to claim Republican intimidation, ranging from issuing press releases to organizing minority leaders to denounce the practice.

It was unclear last night whether the manual had been penned by the Kerry campaign or the Democratic National Committee, although questions about it were fielded by the DNC.

Democratic leaders dismissed the charge, insisting the manual was aimed at providing guidance for “preventing and combating” voter intimidation from happening in the first place.

This one was done months before that one and was thought of as no big deal.

 

[hotatlboi]

had the administration been anything like socialist they would have allowed those institutions to fail

I will have to disagree with this.

The socialist response would have been to nationalize them, not let them fail.

As to the main topic, I'm not surprised even the RNC party leaders have realized what an absurd level their FUD campaign has risen to, or that they are laughing all the way to the bank.

 

[bike10]

So what is new the Republican Party has been playing the fear card since the 1960's The fear of JFK as Catholic presient. They did the same in 1928 with Al Smith to smear Smith as a Catholic.

Karl Rove and company use of fear in the 2000-2008 on terrorism and who can forget the fear of us GAYS.

What gets me is RNC chairman Michael Steele said he knew "nothing about it."

So glad left the Republican Party years ago.

 

[opinterph]

the "daisy girl" ad shaped the modern era (TV) slide into fear mongering

Some readers may not be aware of the ad to which you refer.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ExjDzDsgbww

 

[Zingerific]

the "daisy girl" ad shaped the modern era (TV) slide into fear mongering

While I think this is true, it's also important to note that there is nothing new about terribly nasty smear campaigns. In fact, the argument can be made that at certain times in the past things were much worse. Not even Jefferson and Adams the elder, two of the founders, were immune.

I'm not trying to absolve anyone -- my point is simply that we've gone through sleazy periods before and survived. This isn't a sign that a collapse of the Republic is imminent.

 

[iman]

this post is symptomatic of the problem in usa politics (my side is good; your side is evil)

wake up people! generally an ideologue from any (all) side is an impediment to progress

Maybe one side is good and one side is evil. If both sides are equally at fault, where's the evidence?

The 1964 ad, over 40 years ago, only ran once and did sum up many peoples fears about the erratic and unstable nature of the candidate during the cold war.

The modern Republican history of communist smears and racism is well known, the Democrats do not have a similar history and the attempt to equate the two parties campaign styles is simply bogus.

The point that your missing or denying is that the Republicans have no positive agenda, never have, they are simply the reactionary party capitalizing on fears and insecurities.

 

[iman]

Cites? Don't we have any rules around here?
___________________________________________________________________________________

Republicans ripped into John Kerry yesterday over a stunning new internal manual that advises Democrats to launch “pre-emptive” strikes charging the GOP with voter intimidation — even if none exists.

The “Election Day Manual” — written for Kerry’s Colorado campaign workers — includes a menu of options Democrats can follow next month to claim Republican intimidation, ranging from issuing press releases to organizing minority leaders to denounce the practice.

It was unclear last night whether the manual had been penned by the Kerry campaign or the Democratic National Committee, although questions about it were fielded by the DNC.

Democratic leaders dismissed the charge, insisting the manual was aimed at providing guidance for “preventing and combating” voter intimidation from happening in the first place.

This one was done months before that one and was thought of as no big deal.

 

[iman]

This picture of Bush was put out by a cartoonist not the Democratic Party and was done in 2008 when Bush was not running. Please don't waste our time by putting up bogus posts that you know are not relevant - you seem to be suffering from the Republican Disease of Truthlessness.

 

[JB3]

This picture of Bush was put out by a cartoonist not the Democratic Party and was done in 2008 when Bush was not running. Please don't waste our time by putting up bogus posts that you know are not relevant - you seem to be suffering from the Republican Disease of Truthlessness.

What's your point? That picture of Obama was made by a liberal art student from Chicago, not by any republican.

 

[opinterph]

Cites? Don't we have any rules around here?

The excerpt appears to be taken from a New York Post article published October 15, 2004. I cannot find a direct link, but other sites provide that attribution.

See: The Truth About "Caging" (An [anonymous] blog: The Truth In Arkansas Politics, June 20, 2007)