Language lessons for Democrats, from the political brain of Drew Westen

This article discusses the way Democrats use rhetoric as opposed to Republicans. Drew Westen is a new addition to the team of Democrats working on next fall’s campaign. He is a psychologist and neurologist rather than a politician. Westen suggests that the Democrats are using facts far too much instead of appealing to emotions. The examples he gives include using “the air we breathe and the water we drink” rather than “the environment” and “people who’ve lost their jobs” instead of “the unemployed.” As a psychologist and neurologist, Westen is basing his ideas on science that proves that people are more receptive to emotional appeals. The Democrats need to depart from their traditional list of facts and focus on “people’s core values and concerns.” John B. Larson, a Democrat Representative from Connecticut, has realized that constituents do not feel a connection with their representative, and this may come from the factual, unappealing language the Democrats use.

This all sounds contradictory to the messages of hope and change that Obama inspired voters with during his campaign. Obama may just be the exception, for he has a way with words that inspires, challenges, and motivates people like no politician has in years. However, the Democrats in the House and the Senate may need to change their rhetoric if they would like to see more votes in the fall.

It seems as though Obama has abandoned his message of hope and trust in the future since getting elected. His rhetoric has become realistic, addressing the crises that we are facing. His language has become more urgent, and he has been calling for “dramatic action” from Congress. He has been upfront about the problems the country is facing even if he must send a darker message than he did during his campaign.

There is a very good reason politicians use the inspiring, although less realistic, language that they do: people like to hear positive statements. People do not want to know that the economy is ruined, we are in the middle of a war, or that unemployment is rising. They want to think that there are better times ahead. But is it healthy for citizens to receive and believe false hope and false promises? Shouldn’t people know the truth, no matter how grim, so that they can prepare and take action? But when politicians are honest, they often do not win votes. Politicians’ sole purpose is to win elections, so they have no choice but to use hopeful language. Until citizens choose to elect politicians with a real, direct agenda, politicians’ speech will only cater to the public.

Obama article here.