Are Sound Bites the Key to Victory?

During the recent campaign, President Obama talked repeatedly about his desire for “fair and balanced” budget proposals and that the top two percent should pay their “fair share” of federal taxes. 

Republicans responded by noting that the Administration wanted, in actuality, more spending with little, if any, tax-cutting.  And that by paying far more than their pro-rata portion of income tax revenue, the rich were already paying at least their fair share.

Voters weren’t impressed.  “Fair and balanced” sounded right.  Further, few Americans are in the top 2% and are not sympathetic to the perceived plight of those who are.

The Republicans made a big mistake in not devising effective counter-sound bites.  Of course, Speaker Boehner reminded voters that all tax payers deserved a tax break.  Yet that put the GOP in the position of defending the top 2%.  That was not smart politics. 

It would be accurate to observe – as was done repeatedly – that the Obama campaign was demagogic and fomenting class resentment. 

But to condemn demagoguery is not the same as neutralizing it.  And to call a sound bite inaccurate does not mean that listeners will disregard it.

The simple fact is that the public at large focuses little on political matters and cares even less about them.

A thumb nail sketch, or catch phrase, which resonates as compatible with one’s mind-set is good for most and will not be examined further.

Richard Luntz, a long time GOP pollster and frequent guest on Fox News, recently made the point that the effective phraseology employed by Democrats was hardly attributable to dumb luck.  The slogans had been focus group-tested and mandated as campaign talking points.