Sunday, October 17, 2010

Truth Be Told...

“We’re not losing.” -- Nancy Pelosi

“Yes, you are.” -- The Public

Have you noticed the Democrats running around pretending they’re going to win in November? They know they won’t win, but they’ve decided to lie to keep their base from getting demoralized. But it that really a good strategy? I don’t think it is.

If there is one thing I know about the American public, it is that the public is very forgiving. Maybe this goes back to some Christian tradition, maybe it’s just human nature. . . maybe we’re just suckers. Whatever the reason, in this country, you can be “worse than Hitler” one week and find yourself cheered on as the quarterback of the Philadelphia Eagles the next. Indeed, the American story is the story of redemption and renewal: it’s in our culture, it’s in our laws, and it’s in our very way of thinking.

But there’s a catch: people want to believe you’ve become genuinely contrite before they will forgive you. It’s really not that complicated. They want to believe that you’ve learned your lesson, and that you won’t ever do anything wrong ever again.

And that brings us to the Democrats.

They blew it. They were given control over the government and they ran wild with influence peddling, rampant corruption, abject stupidity, utter incompetence, and a power-high unlike anything seen since Russia, circa October 1917. Not only did they do nothing to benefit the public, but they actively endangered our country and our economy in the process, and they seemed to revel in antagonizing and taunting the public.

And now that the polls show they are in deep trouble, their answer is to lie about the polls in the hopes of tricking enough of their voters to turn out to prevent November from turning from a debacle into a rout. . . or is it the other way around?

Wouldn’t they be better off tapping into the redemption theme that weaves its way throughout our history? In other words, rather than lying about the polls, wouldn’t they be better off admitting the truth:

“We blew it. We did a lot of things wrong and we’re very sorry. We know you want to punish at the polls in November, but we are asking for a second chance. We understand why you’re upset, and we intend to fix that, and we hope that you’ll give us that chance.”
It may sound corny at first, but if you think about it, it really could prove to be a highly effective strategy. Right now the public has lost faith in the political parties and in individual politicians, and I don’t see how this relationship can be repaired by choosing a strategy of telling obvious lies in the hopes of tricking a handful of non-observant voters. That just highlights the problem, and by doing that, it becomes impossible to convince the rest of the public that they’ve changed and to ask for a second chance.

And it’s not just lies about the polls. The Democrats have been running around lying about. . . well, everything. They lie about their voting records, they lie about their "independence," they lie about things they’ve said, they lie about where they get their money, they lie about what their legislation will do, and they lie about what they want to do if reelected. I understand their reason for telling these lies (the public is angry), but this just seems like a bad idea -- they are trading all future trust for a long shot of short-term gain.

It’s not just the Democrats either. The same thing applies to the Republicans. The more I see them try to repackage the same old policies as something new or as evidence that they understand the public’s anger, the more it seems obvious that they have chosen to go the route of deceit and that we can’t believe that they've changed their ways either.

The public does forgive, but needs a reason to believe you’ve changed. Continuing to tell obvious lies only reinforces the public's distrust. Honestly really is the best policy. Both sides should try it.


20 comments:

Libertarian Advocate said...

Andrew: Honesty absolutely is the best policy. The problem is that the vast majority of politicians are inherently dishonest and therefore constitutionally incapable of even recognizing the truth.

AndrewPrice said...

Libertarian Advocate, I think that's right. It seems that it's almost pathological with politicians to tell you what you want to hear, no matter how obvious it is that they are lying.

But I'll tell you, I honestly think that a party that was honest about what it wanted, how it intended to get there, and what the problems are that they are facing would gain a LOT of trust from the public and could make it through both the good and the bad times.

Instead, we get parties that are lying and we know this, so there isn't really a lot of reason to trust anything they say or to rely on them doing anything in particular. I think that's why party loyalty is at an all time and why neither party can prevail for any length of time.

Individualist said...

Andrew....

The members of the GOP that have been laying the grounds for misdirection just went through the ringer. We in the Tea Party managed to score some direct hits in that area but now we go after the really big game when it comes to political deceit. The self admitted admirer's of Alinsky's "Fan of MAn" (Al Pacino, Devils advocate) themselves, the progressives.

I think the main difference is that the GOP establishment feels the crosshairs as well whicch is why their support of Tea Party candidates has been very suspect while their support of Tea Party "ideals" has been very vocal. The democrats have not got a clue. Their main concern right now is whether Colbert and Stewart are successful at mocking Glen Beck at a "fake" Conedy Central backed rally. More Fools they....

AndrewPrice said...

Individualist, I think that's right.

I think the GOP knows they are in the public's crosshairs, so they are starting to adopt the language the public wants to hear. . . but they haven't yet realized that the party wants more than language, they want policies. And since the public no longer trusts the incumbents to deliver those policies, they have decided to send their own people. That's what the GOP needs to realize. If they treat these people as enemies or try to coopt them, then they are finished. The game has changed.

In terms of the Democrats, you're right about them being clueless. They thought the last two elections meant the public had completely abandoned American values and now favored socialism. . . they were wrong.

Then they thought they could placate their own base with the usual practice of talking big and making symbolic votes but not actually delivering. . . they were wrong.

Now they think that continuing to lie is the best way to win back their base. They are wrong.

Ed said...

What's this truth you keep talking about? You may need to explain this concept to our political masters.

BevfromNYC said...

Robert "Baghdad Bob" Gibbs made the same "We're not gonna lose the House or Senate" statement today too. It's just delusional. And to think that 18 months ago the pundits and liberal blogs were gleefully eulogizing the Republican Party as forever gone. Hey, James Carville said this May 2009:

"...Every growing demographic is trending Democratic and I think we're probably on the verge of another 40-year era of party dominance here."

Maybe Carville has been married to Mary Matlin too long...

AndrewPrice said...

Ed, It's a scarce commodity that is rarely sold in places politicians frequent.

AndrewPrice said...

Bev, It is delusional, and I think they know that. I think they are just saying it to keep their voters from deciding that they can't make a difference and then staying home.

In either event though, it's not a good idea. Either they are straight up lying, which means that their own people can't trust them and thus should be rid of them.... or they're crazy and they can't be trusted and their own people should be rid of them.

It really does amaze me that they don't at least give the truth a try? I guess they've become so used to lying that the idea of being truthful is simply not something they can consider anymore?

LawHawkRFD said...

"Truth? You can't handle the truth!" Jack Nicholson. Or was it Barack Hussein Obama?

AndrewPrice said...

P.S. Bev, on the other point, I recall those statements from the 2008 election and it struck me that they just don't understand politics or the public.

Politics is a pendulum which swings from left to right and back. The idea of a permanent one way swing is just silly. Moreover, our pendulum is much further to the right (even when it swings left) than their base understands.

That said, I will give them that the Democrats had a chance to make that come true -- if they'd acted center-right on economic issues and slightly center-left on social issues. But they didn't. They went hard left and probably turned off another generation or two of voters.

AndrewPrice said...

Lawhawk, I think it was both.

Ed said...

scarce commodity -- LoL! Did you make that up?

AndrewPrice said...

Ed, Actually no, I think it was Twain, though I haven't looked it up. I think he said truth was precious and that's why people hoard it. . . or something similar.

Patti said...

the obvious attempt at deception is, i believe, one of the main reasons folks are defecting. people aren't stupid (well, all of them aren't) and calling something green when it is obviously red is bad form. if the republicans blow this, my head might *actually* blow off.

AndrewPrice said...

Patti, I agree. I think party loyalty can survive the occasional bad policy or poor leader, but it can't survive deception -- and that's what's going on here. Both parties (though especially the Democrats) think that the way to get and keep voters is to deceive them about what is going on. Basically, tell them the right lies and they'll love you. But it doesn't work that way. All you do is turn off large numbers of people.

DUQ said...

Nice picture! Pants on fire is right, or maybe that was just what I was dreaming?

AndrewPrice said...

Nice dream DUQ, I'm sure lot of people have shared it!

Individualist said...

DUQ

Thanks for pointing the pants on fire quot out because that reminds me...

Andrew you should probably warn the readers here not to use H2O based fire retardant to put out fires on Nancy Pelosi.

After all the damage from excessive melting caused by the water would be far and beyond what the fire could do. And we can't use fire extinguishers because let's face it that is just compressed CO2. So if there is not a half ton of sand around to dump on her I think Nancy P may be in real trouble.... just saying

AndrewPrice said...

Individualist, LOL! Great point! Water could do way more harm than the fire when it comes to Pelosi. So it's best to drop a ton of sand on her. . . or a house! ;-)

DUQ said...

Individualist, You are welcome. Great idea too about dousing the witch with water.

Post a Comment