Search Box

Friday, July 20, 2012

Romney's campaign slogan

Just heard from a friend who saw a Romney sign today, "Believe in America." He felt it was too innocuous, too blandly patriotic.

My initial reaction was agreement. I said that I hoped the Romney campaign would not be hamstrung by the same thing that held back the McCain campaign: passivity engendered by fear of being called racist.

But then I realized that the slogan's subtext is that Obama does not believe in America -- certainly not in the center-right, robustly capitalist country it has always been. And at that level, it works.

My friend replied, unfortunately most people are not going to put that much thought into it.

But I think it actually works better at the subconscious, or at least barely conscious, level.

Driving home the message subtly is probably more effective than a direct attack.

And anyway, how much can you really say with three words?

Obama's new slogan is "Forward," just one word.

(The last three words are left unsaid: "off the cliff.")


Anonymous said...

Have you read Peggy Noonan’s column in the WSJ this weekend? It addressed three very interesting topics: the Olympic uniforms, Mitt Romney’s tax returns, and Obama’s statement about “not getting there on your own.” I have to admit that I haven’t read the whole of his statement, so I wonder if perhaps he is being taken out of context a bit. On their face, however, these comment are very troubling. I have generally in the past thought that those who accused Obama of being a socialist were a bit extreme. This latest statement makes me wonder, however.

John Craig said...

Julie --
Just read the essay. Noonan is always on target. Yes, Obama is unquestionably a socialist at heart. He said himself in his book that while in college he was always more attracted to the Marxist professors. He has said that the great failing of the civil rights movement is that it did not achieve "economic justice." He was/is a follower of Saul Alinsky. And he has talked in the past about how redistribution is one of his main goals.

His recent comment about how if you built a business you really didn't build it yourself is very telling. His "gaffe" was merely to let slip what he really thinks, not to misstate his own position.

Those who defend him from charges of socialism or radicalism point to his proposals -- for instance, that he only wants to raise taxes back to the rates we had under Clinton, and that if he were really a socialist he'd want to raise them higher. But the fact is, if he were given his druthers, he would raise them much higher, but is only aiming for what he can hope to achieve, which looks like a standard liberal (as opposed to radical) change. There's never been any doubt in my mind that he is a socialist disguised as a moderate liberal.