Democrats Need to Stand Up for Themselves

[Celerity]

Humans are drawn to narratives, but too many politicians struggle to use storytelling to find common ground.

https://www.theatlantic.com/ideas/archive/2022/04/democrats-storytelling-connecting-with-voters/629681/



By Molly Jong-Fast

It’s unusual for a one-off political speech to make someone famous. This is especially the case in today’s toxic fog of disinformation and apathy. But last week a Democratic state senator named Mallory McMorrow from Royal Oak, Michigan, somehow broke through when she stood up on the floor of the Michigan Senate and defended herself against smears from another state senator, Lana Theis, who wrote in a fundraising email that Democrats like McMorrow “are outraged they can’t teach can’t groom and sexualize kindergartners or that 8-year-olds are responsible for slavery.”

Link to tweet

McMorrow laid out the absurd charges against her, and she did so on personal terms—telling a story about her own childhood before describing the obligation she feels to call out the tactics of politicians like Theis. “I am a straight, white, Christian, married suburban mom … I want every child in this state to feel seen, heard, and supported, not marginalized and targeted because they are not straight, white, and Christian. We cannot let hateful people tell you otherwise to scapegoat and deflect from the fact that they are not doing anything to fix the real issues that impact people’s lives. And I know that hate will only win if people like me stand by and let it happen.”

Conor Friedersdorf: That’s not what grooming means

McMorrow’s remarks were memorable because she was tenacious in her delivery, but also because Democrats tend not to defend themselves in this way. More often, they ignore scurrilous attacks. They take the high road, whatever that means, with very mixed results. Think of Swift Boat Veterans for Truth, which helped derail John Kerry’s presidential campaign in 2004, or the conspiracy theories about the Benghazi embassy attack, which hurt Hillary Clinton’s popularity. McMorrow did two stunning things: She defended herself, and she did so in a way that came across as wholly authentic. She wasn’t afraid to be emotional, or even enraged.

Over the past few weeks, Republicans have taken to accusing supporters of LGBTQ rights of being “groomers.” This hyperaggressive smear tactic is straight out of the QAnon playbook, but it can be traced to the early days of American politics. Richard Hofstadter wrote in 1964 of the “paranoid style” that “traffics in the birth and death of whole worlds, whole political orders, whole systems of human values.” In 1977, the singer Anita Bryant successfully drew a connection between homosexuality and child sexual predation with her demented “Save Our Children” campaign, which promoted harmful lies about gay people as a way to overturn a law that would ban discrimination against them. Everything old is new again, including, it turns out, allegations of pedophilia. Democrats have puzzled over how to deal with allegations so obviously false. Some argue that rebutting such absurdities amounts to stooping to the GOP’s level, and risks inadvertently elevating the claims. But McMorrow proved that rebuttal can be done effectively—and she succeeded because her rebuke rested on a personal narrative. This is a lesson that resonated with me immediately.

snip

[2naSalit]

1. It's the only way to deal with...

A cult of lying bullies.

[Ohio Joe]

2. +1 - nt

[usonian]

3. Read up on Influence and Persuasion and the key thing is to connect.

Personal narratives are a great way to do this.

Robert Cialdini's "Influence" (1984) is a standard. Here's a summary:
https://cxl.com/blog/cialdinis-principles-persuasion/
The most significant aspects of this tome were Cialdini’s “6 Principles of Influence,” which are:

Reciprocity;
Commitment/consistency;
Social proof;
Authority;
Liking;
Scarcity.

On a different level, you might skim "Life Strategies" by Dr, Phil. (the ONLY book by Dr. Phil I can recommend)
It starts with a narrative --- Oprah convincing a Texas jury about her beef remarks --- talk about a tough case.

Another thing that's important to connect is to replace "Yes, but" with "Yes, and" if that's at all possible.

I *do* recommend avoiding hard-core cult members, who are in denial of anything but dogma, and communicating instead with people who can make a human connection. It's a matter of finding a common ground or experience.

Narratives can open doors and minds.

Despite all the hate talk, there are things we have in common with others if we ask. Broad smears are meant to close those doors in advance.