One Political Plaza - Home of politics
Home Active Topics Newest Pictures Search Login Register
Main
Clarifying Party Branding For The Politically Confused.
Page 1 of 10 next> last>>
Dec 28, 2013 11:05:52   #
PoppaGringo Loc: Muslim City, Mexifornia, B.R.
 
For the casual observer of news, navigating the political landscape has proven increasingly difficult with the influx of modern day semantics. Political parties, it seems, rebrand themselves with every 24-hour news cycle. Liberals call themselves progressive. The self-proclaimed, open-minded call themselves independents. Conservatives come with qualifiers – their conservatism is either fiscal or social. Republicans are too busy posturing over who is the next Ronald Reagan to redefine.



Identifying party affiliation begins to get truly difficult when liberals and conservatives cajole under the cloak of moderateness for fear of being labeled either fringe, extreme or radical. Party identity proves to be quite confusing for the apolitical.

Newscasts are littered with a hodgepodge of swappable names – blue dog democrat, tea partier, centrist and libertarian and other nomenclatures. News outlets make the assumption that viewers are well versed enough in the political landscape to decipher revolving party definitions. Outlets opt to gloss over party complexities without clarity or consideration for viewer confusion.

For the record, Blue Dog Democrats are southern state Democrats with a Conservative v****g record. Tea Partiers are limited government proponents who favor responsible taxation. Centrists are interchangeable with Moderates. Libertarians are for individual liberties, including more lenient drug policy, and free markets.

Party committee chairs go to great lengths to frame their brands to escape the negative stereotypes that accompany them. Branding matters, even in the political realm. For example, Republicans would rather not be branded as bigoted, callous or arcane. Many in the Party have come to the realization that if their brand cannot be resuscitated, it must be rebranded or scratched entirely. In the hopes of appearing more lucid like their progressive counterparts, those wise to the stereotypical negativity are leaving the Party in droves for Libertarian pastures.

With the political landscape in a constant state of flux, new, fresh voices emerge; each jockeying to redefine the Party brand under his or her leadership. With focus on more centralized government with the onset on mandated healthcare and increased social spending, President Obama has t***sformed President Clinton’s center left Democrat Party hard left.

Having determined the changing hands of leadership as the definitive factor in Party affiliation, brand and direction, deciphering the labyrinth of the political spectrum still projects to be complex in perpetuity. Deciphering party direction proves even more daunting during the e******n cycle when candidates seek to appear more populist than partisan.

Politics have become more about branding; branding Parties, issues and personalities, than about policy. Intricacies of issue stance have become increasingly inconsequential to the larger brand and are often lost in its shadow. Consumers have their favorite brands and are often loyal to them. The campaign consulting class banks on it.

Reply
Dec 28, 2013 11:21:03   #
Tasine Loc: Southwest US
 
Old_Gringo wrote:
For the casual observer of news, navigating the political landscape has proven increasingly difficult with the influx of modern day semantics. Political parties, it seems, rebrand themselves with every 24-hour news cycle. Liberals call themselves progressive. The self-proclaimed, open-minded call themselves independents. Conservatives come with qualifiers – their conservatism is either fiscal or social. Republicans are too busy posturing over who is the next Ronald Reagan to redefine.



Identifying party affiliation begins to get truly difficult when liberals and conservatives cajole under the cloak of moderateness for fear of being labeled either fringe, extreme or radical. Party identity proves to be quite confusing for the apolitical.

Newscasts are littered with a hodgepodge of swappable names – blue dog democrat, tea partier, centrist and libertarian and other nomenclatures. News outlets make the assumption that viewers are well versed enough in the political landscape to decipher revolving party definitions. Outlets opt to gloss over party complexities without clarity or consideration for viewer confusion.

For the record, Blue Dog Democrats are southern state Democrats with a Conservative v****g record. Tea Partiers are limited government proponents who favor responsible taxation. Centrists are interchangeable with Moderates. Libertarians are for individual liberties, including more lenient drug policy, and free markets.

Party committee chairs go to great lengths to frame their brands to escape the negative stereotypes that accompany them. Branding matters, even in the political realm. For example, Republicans would rather not be branded as bigoted, callous or arcane. Many in the Party have come to the realization that if their brand cannot be resuscitated, it must be rebranded or scratched entirely. In the hopes of appearing more lucid like their progressive counterparts, those wise to the stereotypical negativity are leaving the Party in droves for Libertarian pastures.

With the political landscape in a constant state of flux, new, fresh voices emerge; each jockeying to redefine the Party brand under his or her leadership. With focus on more centralized government with the onset on mandated healthcare and increased social spending, President Obama has t***sformed President Clinton’s center left Democrat Party hard left.

Having determined the changing hands of leadership as the definitive factor in Party affiliation, brand and direction, deciphering the labyrinth of the political spectrum still projects to be complex in perpetuity. Deciphering party direction proves even more daunting during the e******n cycle when candidates seek to appear more populist than partisan.

Politics have become more about branding; branding Parties, issues and personalities, than about policy. Intricacies of issue stance have become increasingly inconsequential to the larger brand and are often lost in its shadow. Consumers have their favorite brands and are often loyal to them. The campaign consulting class banks on it.



Read the rest of this PolitiChicks.tv article here: http://politichicks.tv/column/clarifying-party-branding-politically-confused/#qASVYK0xRwbeyHvQ.99
For the casual observer of news, navigating the po... (show quote)

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
I love your definitions and characterizations. Mostly you are right on target. We NEED "brands", though to talk at all politically. What I find sad is that we must talk politics. Politics should not even be in our lives. We elect people to see to the politics. They don't. They subvert the very things we revere. We would be better off without any government, but I know most people of the world think all citizens need other dummies telling them how to live, ergo, I suppose we must have some type of "leadership". What we have ISN'T IT!

As to "brands", I seldom think in any detail except "those who cherish individual freedom" and "those who want to control all of us". All of those who want to control the rest of us are in fact collectivists, and it doesn't matter one whit if they are liberals, democrats, progressives, socialists, c*******ts, Marxists, or dictators. All who want to be FREE are not collectivists. We believe in free trade and self responsibility. I could readily use the labels, "freemen" and "collectivists".......I could use those labels because there in no way one can be both.......they are the opposites.

Reply
Dec 28, 2013 11:51:25   #
Floyd Brown Loc: Milwaukee WI
 
Old_Gringo wrote:
For the casual observer of news, navigating the political landscape has proven increasingly difficult with the influx of modern day semantics. Political parties, it seems, rebrand themselves with every 24-hour news cycle. Liberals call themselves progressive. The self-proclaimed, open-minded call themselves independents. Conservatives come with qualifiers – their conservatism is either fiscal or social. Republicans are too busy posturing over who is the next Ronald Reagan to redefine.



Identifying party affiliation begins to get truly difficult when liberals and conservatives cajole under the cloak of moderateness for fear of being labeled either fringe, extreme or radical. Party identity proves to be quite confusing for the apolitical.

Newscasts are littered with a hodgepodge of swappable names – blue dog democrat, tea partier, centrist and libertarian and other nomenclatures. News outlets make the assumption that viewers are well versed enough in the political landscape to decipher revolving party definitions. Outlets opt to gloss over party complexities without clarity or consideration for viewer confusion.

For the record, Blue Dog Democrats are southern state Democrats with a Conservative v****g record. Tea Partiers are limited government proponents who favor responsible taxation. Centrists are interchangeable with Moderates. Libertarians are for individual liberties, including more lenient drug policy, and free markets.

Party committee chairs go to great lengths to frame their brands to escape the negative stereotypes that accompany them. Branding matters, even in the political realm. For example, Republicans would rather not be branded as bigoted, callous or arcane. Many in the Party have come to the realization that if their brand cannot be resuscitated, it must be rebranded or scratched entirely. In the hopes of appearing more lucid like their progressive counterparts, those wise to the stereotypical negativity are leaving the Party in droves for Libertarian pastures.

With the political landscape in a constant state of flux, new, fresh voices emerge; each jockeying to redefine the Party brand under his or her leadership. With focus on more centralized government with the onset on mandated healthcare and increased social spending, President Obama has t***sformed President Clinton’s center left Democrat Party hard left.

Having determined the changing hands of leadership as the definitive factor in Party affiliation, brand and direction, deciphering the labyrinth of the political spectrum still projects to be complex in perpetuity. Deciphering party direction proves even more daunting during the e******n cycle when candidates seek to appear more populist than partisan.

Politics have become more about branding; branding Parties, issues and personalities, than about policy. Intricacies of issue stance have become increasingly inconsequential to the larger brand and are often lost in its shadow. Consumers have their favorite brands and are often loyal to them. The campaign consulting class banks on it.



Read the rest of this PolitiChicks.tv article here: http://politichicks.tv/column/clarifying-party-branding-politically-confused/#qASVYK0xRwbeyHvQ.99
For the casual observer of news, navigating the po... (show quote)


Isn't it about time to just forget about Party Branding & just stick to our individual views?

We may still not get the best to run the country but by not v****g a party line we will open up the field for more independent people.

Reply
 
 
Dec 28, 2013 12:46:33   #
Ve'hoe
 
That is only fine when,,,, the right sticks with its individual views and the left continues with the lie of the party,,, which is what IS happening,,,,

Floyd Brown wrote:
Isn't it about time to just forget about Party Branding & just stick to our individual views?

We may still not get the best to run the country but by not v****g a party line we will open up the field for more independent people.

Reply
Dec 28, 2013 13:15:18   #
Floyd Brown Loc: Milwaukee WI
 
Ve'hoe wrote:
That is only fine when,,,, the right sticks with its individual views and the left continues with the lie of the party,,, which is what IS happening,,,,


What I an trying to say don't give me the party views just give me your views.

I try to give my personal views. Agree or not They are just my views. I may lean more to one side or point of view than others. But my thoughts are mine & I alone will answer to my believes

I seek to find in others values that I can live with & agreement from others that can live with what I believe in.

If we see things differently I seek to see if we can find agreement.

Reply
Dec 28, 2013 13:43:39   #
Ve'hoe
 
I don't think you got my point,,,,

The left has NO views that are not dictated to them through the party... the right is starting to awaken,, and changing,,, whereupon the left brands them r****t,,,, just like the party told them to.

So, my VIEW is that the left has very little thought into positions, but they have a lot of political talking points...

So what are "YOUR VIEWS" that differ with the majority of the party,,, or are you for every single line item of the dem platform???

If not,, what praytell is it that you disagree with the Obama platform on?
What about the teaparty,,, what are your thoughts there?
Taxes?
Welfare?
Living wage/minimum wage?

Floyd Brown wrote:
What I an trying to say don't give me the party views just give me your views.

I try to give my personal views. Agree or not They are just my views. I may lean more to one side or point of view than others. But my thoughts are mine & I alone will answer to my believes

I seek to find in others values that I can live with & agreement from others that can live with what I believe in.

If we see things differently I seek to see if we can find agreement.

Reply
Dec 28, 2013 13:51:16   #
Floyd Brown Loc: Milwaukee WI
 
Ve'hoe wrote:
I don't think you got my point,,,,

The left has NO views that are not dictated to them through the party... the right is starting to awaken,, and changing,,, whereupon the left brands them r****t,,,, just like the party told them to.

So, my VIEW is that the left has very little thought into positions, but they have a lot of political talking points...

So what are "YOUR VIEWS" that differ with the majority of the party,,, or are you for every single line item of the dem platform???

If not,, what praytell is it that you disagree with the Obama platform on?
What about the teaparty,,, what are your thoughts there?
Taxes?
Welfare?
Living wage/minimum wage?
I don't think you got my point,,,, br br The lef... (show quote)


No I guess I didn't get your point.

All I got out of it is that if some one don't believe what you believe in is brain dead.

As such you have closed your mind to any thing that some one that disagrees with you says.

Reply
 
 
Dec 28, 2013 13:57:28   #
Ve'hoe
 
I guess that is where we part,,, cause I didn't say that,, and don't think that, Floyd,

What do you "think" or what views do you have,,, that are different than your party?

And,,, then you insult me,,

Want to talk,,, then talk, want to insult, you know I can get right with it,,,, but I gave you a chance to say something and THIS is what you used it for.

Want to try again?


Floyd Brown wrote:
No I guess I didn't get your point.

All I got out of it is that if some one don't believe what you believe in is brain dead.

As such you have closed your mind to any thing that some one that disagrees with you says.

Reply
Dec 28, 2013 14:27:05   #
Floyd Brown Loc: Milwaukee WI
 
The left has NO views that are not dictated to them through the party... the right is starting to awaken,, and changing,,, whereupon the left brands them r****t,,,, just like the party told them to.

So, my VIEW is that the left has very little thought into positions, but they have a lot of political talking points...
[quote=Ve'hoe]

Those were your words.

Is it so far off that when you stated that you view the left as not thinking one could think you meant their brain dead?

If one calls out some one for not thinking for them self is like saying they are brain dead. That their personal views are not their views. That have very little thought?

I find it useless on my part to in gauge in exchanging ideas with some one who thinks i lack the mental capacity to think.

Reply
Dec 28, 2013 14:46:48   #
Tasine Loc: Southwest US
 
Floyd Brown wrote:
What I an trying to say don't give me the party views just give me your views.

I try to give my personal views. Agree or not They are just my views. I may lean more to one side or point of view than others. But my thoughts are mine & I alone will answer to my believes

I seek to find in others values that I can live with & agreement from others that can live with what I believe in.

If we see things differently I seek to see if we can find agreement.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
I can assure you, Floyd, that any opinion I take the trouble to type out, is MINE. It may or may not gel with a political party, but it is MY view. I only quote politicians when I can use it against them or to support a point I find interesting. People belong to parties for ONE reason, and only ONE reason - so that they are represented in government. If they are representing me the way I want, I agree with them. If they are NOT representing me, I yell.

Reply
Dec 28, 2013 15:18:32   #
Ve'hoe
 
I think you are proving my point Floyd,,, I stated exactly what you copied,,, you THEN decided I said you were brain dead, and began to go into the left wing party attack line,, on "Mean ole Vehoe,,, h**es me and has a closed mind"

I also asked your views on several subjects and all I got was the same old liberal line, that I was being mean.

I asked your views and you have yet to give them...

Don't you see that as a problem or are you waiting for me to tell you your views are correct BEFORE you state them,,, so that no one can disagree with you??

Who truly has the closed mind?? (Which is also a trick of the left)
[quote=Floyd Brown]The left has NO views that are not dictated to them through the party... the right is starting to awaken,, and changing,,, whereupon the left brands them r****t,,,, just like the party told them to.

So, my VIEW is that the left has very little thought into positions, but they have a lot of political talking points...
Ve'hoe wrote:


Those were your words.

Is it so far off that when you stated that you view the left as not thinking one could think you meant their brain dead?

If one calls out some one for not thinking for them self is like saying they are brain dead. That their personal views are not their views. That have very little thought?

I find it useless on my part to in gauge in exchanging ideas with some one who thinks i lack the mental capacity to think.

Reply
 
 
Dec 28, 2013 15:18:38   #
Ve'hoe
 
I think you are proving my point Floyd,,, I stated exactly what you copied,,, you THEN decided I said you were brain dead, and began to go into the left wing party attack line,, on "Mean ole Vehoe,,, h**es me and has a closed mind"

I also asked your views on several subjects and all I got was the same old liberal line, that I was being mean.

I asked your views and you have yet to give them...

Don't you see that as a problem or are you waiting for me to tell you your views are correct BEFORE you state them,,, so that no one can disagree with you??

Who truly has the closed mind?? (Which is also a trick of the left)
[quote=Floyd Brown]The left has NO views that are not dictated to them through the party... the right is starting to awaken,, and changing,,, whereupon the left brands them r****t,,,, just like the party told them to.

So, my VIEW is that the left has very little thought into positions, but they have a lot of political talking points...
Ve'hoe wrote:


Those were your words.

Is it so far off that when you stated that you view the left as not thinking one could think you meant their brain dead?

If one calls out some one for not thinking for them self is like saying they are brain dead. That their personal views are not their views. That have very little thought?

I find it useless on my part to in gauge in exchanging ideas with some one who thinks i lack the mental capacity to think.

Reply
Dec 28, 2013 19:37:18   #
lpnmajor Loc: Arkansas
 
Ve'hoe wrote:
I think you are proving my point Floyd,,, I stated exactly what you copied,,, you THEN decided I said you were brain dead, and began to go into the left wing party attack line,, on "Mean ole Vehoe,,, h**es me and has a closed mind"

I also asked your views on several subjects and all I got was the same old liberal line, that I was being mean.

I asked your views and you have yet to give them...

Don't you see that as a problem or are you waiting for me to tell you your views are correct BEFORE you state them,,, so that no one can disagree with you??

Who truly has the closed mind?? (Which is also a trick of the left)
I think you are proving my point Floyd,,, I stated... (show quote)


Both parties seem to feel that the way to identify their "brand" is to attack the other one. The confusion occurs when one party accuses another for doing something they do themselves. Every party has it's members who try to distinguish themselves within the party causing them to be critical of other members of the same party.
Groups of people within the same party trying to be "different" from their fellows to keep their positions, cause even more confusion. The only way I can tell what party anyone is registered with is to look at the letter after their name, D, R, or I. Trying to do so by listening to them is futile.

Reply
Dec 28, 2013 19:43:54   #
Ve'hoe
 
I am not sure I understand what you are saying here...


lpnmajor wrote:
Both parties seem to feel that the way to identify their "brand" is to attack the other one. The confusion occurs when one party accuses another for doing something they do themselves. Every party has it's members who try to distinguish themselves within the party causing them to be critical of other members of the same party.
Groups of people within the same party trying to be "different" from their fellows to keep their positions, cause even more confusion. The only way I can tell what party anyone is registered with is to look at the letter after their name, D, R, or I. Trying to do so by listening to them is futile.
Both parties seem to feel that the way to identify... (show quote)

Reply
Dec 29, 2013 08:07:20   #
nancyjess
 
Tasine wrote:
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
I love your definitions and characterizations. Mostly you are right on target. We NEED "brands", though to talk at all politically. What I find sad is that we must talk politics. Politics should not even be in our lives. We elect people to see to the politics. They don't. They subvert the very things we revere. We would be better off without any government, but I know most people of the world think all citizens need other dummies telling them how to live, ergo, I suppose we must have some type of "leadership". What we have ISN'T IT!
WE ELECT PEOPLE TO DO THE GOVERNMENT JOBS FOR US ......WE THE PEOPLE... THEY WORK FOR US... WE THE PEOPLE.
WHEN WE DO NOT DO OUR HOMEWORK ON PEOPLE RUNNING FOR THAT JOB... WE DESERVE WHAT WE GET.... !!
RESEARCHING A CANDIDATE.. HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH COLOR, RELIGION ,, IT HAS TO DO WITH THE CORE OF THE PERSON... WHAT ARE HIS OR HER BELIEF SYSTEM? WHERE WERE THEY TRULY BORN? WHERE DID THEY GO TO SCHOOL?
WHAT CLUBS AND INTERESTS DID THIS PERSON HAVE BEFORE RUNNING FOR OFFICE OF THIS GREAT NATION. ?
IS THIS PERSON GOING TO REPRESENT THIS GREAT COUNTRY AND DEFEND IT WITH EVERY THOUGHT AND ACTION ?
AND ABOUT THE SEPARATION FROM CHURCH AND STATE.....
THEY USE THAT. TO CHOKE US OUT OF WHAT WE BELEIVE. !!!
WASN'T IT OUR FOREFATHERS.. THAT SAID... ONE NATION UNDER GOD ???? FOR LIBERTY AND JUSTICE FOR ALL..
WAKE UP EVERYONE...! WE ARE BEING JERKED AROUND. BE SMART AND START READING AND RESEARCHING, WE HAVE A MAJOR V**E COMING UP IN 2014 - !!

As to "brands", I seldom think in any detail except "those who cherish individual freedom" and "those who want to control all of us". All of those who want to control the rest of us are in fact collectivists, and it doesn't matter one whit if they are liberals, democrats, progressives, socialists, c*******ts, Marxists, or dictators. All who want to be FREE are not collectivists. We believe in free trade and self responsibility. I could readily use the labels, "freemen" and "collectivists".......I could use those labels because there in no way one can be both.......they are the opposites.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ br I love your def... (show quote)

Reply
Page 1 of 10 next> last>>
If you want to reply, then register here. Registration is free and your account is created instantly, so you can post right away.
Main
OnePoliticalPlaza.com - Forum
Copyright 2012-2024 IDF International Technologies, Inc.