A lot of people see politics as overly combative and manipulative, to which I respond, "It's the economy, stupid!"
Politicians and policies are sold or assailed like every other product in our consumer-based, market-driven economy. Why? Because it works. Every technique employed in politics has either come from, or been refined by, Madison Avenue and psychology-based marketing.
Negative campaigns?
Try Mac versus PC. It wasn't good enough for MacIntosh to attack the defects of PCs as computers. It had to first personify the PC into dorkdom before employing a savage tongue-in-cheek assault. Shouldn't we be troubled that a multi-million dollar ad campaign is based on getting us to laugh when the cool kid disses a nerd? (As an aside, does anybody doubt the advertizers were thinking about Bill Gates as the PC embodiment when they came up with that spot?) I promise you, though, that this "message" was tested before it went on the air, and Americans responded.
Pizza places and deli sandwich shops are currently waging cut-throat campaigns against each other. I expect Dominos to tell you anyday now that Papa John "does not care about people like you who cannot afford $25 pizzas."
Another marketing concept politics has taken from the corporate world is the power of a name. Say the words "Phillip Morris" and "lying tobacco company" might pop to mind. Realizing that kind of impression would kill its other product lines, Phillip Morris faced the choice of either: (1) being better; OR (2) changing its name. (Number two seemed like less hassle, so they went with that).
Sometimes the name can't even be written. I was in the grocery store looking for butter, and I realized that none of the boxes actually have the word "butter" anywhere on the packaging. The closest was Country Crock, which read: "Spreadable sticks." Sticks of what? I felt like I was watching the early Viagra commercials when you couldn't tell the product. Had I not been familiar with how sticks of butter are packaged and where butter is located in my store, I would have had no idea what I was buying.
I can only conclude that the manufacturers of the product have market research that says "butter" has negative connotations, a notion supported the prevalence of a "substitute good" called "It's Not Butter." In your face, Imperial!
This is crazy. Do the companies believe I can delude myself into thinking I'm buying something other than butter because it doesn't say butter? Actually, yes, they do. If businesses do what works, and this kind of name change/omission happens all the time, it must work on at least a subconscious level.
This brings us to the notion of Republican "rebranding." Rebranding means the same product with either a new name, new omission, or new packaging. You can add some Yellow #5 to your margarine and call it "New and Improved," but it's not new ingredients, folks. It'll still taste the same.
Likewise, the Republican Party can try to make itself seem "cool and hip" by conspicuously omitting "old" from G.O.P. It can change its logo, create a new slogan, and air new Benetton-style ad campaign ads showing us its "big tent" inclusion. But until it changes its ingredients, it can't fool us. We'll know it's still bad for us like butter.
Or will we?
