Jump to content
one...two...tree

Conservatives target 12-year-old boy and his family in S-CHIP debate

 Share

169 posts in this topic

Recommended Posts

Let it ride, why not? It's going to make you look a hell of a lot better than the person who says, ok, you started flinging the dirt, so I now feel obligated to fling it back and then some. I am not sure who you imagine is going to be won over by these cheap tactics either. You are really making the argument that the electorate is as stupid as the marketing ad execs would like us to believe. To that I say, hogwash.

Refusing to use the spellchick!

I have put you on ignore. No really, I have, but you are still ruining my enjoyment of this site. .

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 168
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

If you don't think that makes sense, ask this. Who's mind has been changed by the introduction of this 12 year old into the debate? That would be...no one. Who's changed their mind as a result of the revelation that the 12 year old 'should never have been a recipient of the program? That would be...no one. Who's changed their mind as a result of further digging to discover that the 12 year old may in fact be a legitimate recipient of the program? That would be...no one. All that's happened is the argument has been deflected away from the real issues and onto the merits of one very specific case.

Fact is, the Dems made a tactical error, which should be obvious to anyone without having to do this 'let's try to trash the reputation of this family' rubbish.

Edited by Purple_Hibiscus

Refusing to use the spellchick!

I have put you on ignore. No really, I have, but you are still ruining my enjoyment of this site. .

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Filed: Country: Philippines
Timeline
Let it ride, why not? It's going to make you look a hell of a lot better than the person who says, ok, you started flinging the dirt, so I now feel obligated to fling it back and then some. I am not sure who you imagine is going to be won over by these cheap tactics either. You are really making the argument that the electorate is as stupid as the marketing ad execs would like us to believe. To that I say, hogwash.

Stating that having this 12 year old boy, a car crash survivor, recipient and beneficiary of the CHIP program, give an adress on radio, a cheap trick is silly. There's no trickery involved. Emotional appeal is what it is...like it or not, it is effective to a point. Like I've stated before, if the public thinks it was too heavy on the syrup, they'll respond to it negatively.

As for emotional appeal in advertising...this is considered one of the all time best commercials. :)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I've already said it once, and I'll say it again, these type of emotional appeals have no place in politics. All they do is promote the idea that the electorate is unable to handle real debate or understand the issues. The more people accept this as fact, the less likely we are to get politicians having to make the effort to argue their case. We already see it on those pathetic 'ask the candidate' debates where the answers are restricted to sound bite answers. The electorate deserve more than this and politicians need to work harder to put their messages across.

Edited by Purple_Hibiscus

Refusing to use the spellchick!

I have put you on ignore. No really, I have, but you are still ruining my enjoyment of this site. .

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Filed: Country: Philippines
Timeline
I've already said it once, and I'll say it again, these type of emotional appeals have no place in politics. All they do is promote the idea that the electorate is unable to handle real debate or understand the issues. The more people accept this as fact, the less likely we are to get politicians having to make the effort to argue their case. We already see it on those pathetic 'ask the candidate' debates where the answers are restricted to sound bite portions. The electorate deserve more than this and politicians need to work harder to put their messages across.

LOL...I don't mean to beat a dead horse but you make it sound as if all emotions should be shut off from the political spectrum when, at least here in America, we have found that to be a bit stuffy. It's all about balance - emotional appeal by itself without substance is just blowing smoke up people's #######. From what I've learned watching politics over the years is that many Americans respond negatively when politicians act like Vulcans (see Al Gore). There is a place for emotions in politics...as to how much is open for debate.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Who said no emotion? The politicians can give me all the emotion they want, in fact, the more the better, up to a point. However, we are not talking about that, we are talking about manipulating people by wheeling out emotive images, putting children on the political stage, allowing candidates to show 60 second tv adverts as though that's supposed to make their case for them. As I said, make the politicians work for our votes.

Refusing to use the spellchick!

I have put you on ignore. No really, I have, but you are still ruining my enjoyment of this site. .

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Filed: Country: Philippines
Timeline
Who said no emotion? The politicians can give me all the emotion they want, in fact, the more the better, up to a point. However, we are not talking about that, we are talking about manipulating people by wheeling out emotive images, putting children on the political stage, allowing candidates to show 60 second tv adverts as though that's supposed to make their case for them. As I said, make the politicians work for our votes.

Ok, so where do you draw the line? Politicians kissing babies? Bringing their children/grandchildren up on stage with them? I don't know...it seems much ado about nothing. Welcome to politics.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You know perfectly well a) that kissing babies isn't comparable and that b ) that this is much more than much ado about nothing. Politics does not have to be this manipulative game that it is rapidly becoming. However, if everyone just shrugs and laughs it off, then we will let the politicians off the hook and as I said the political process will be the loser.

What would you think, for example, if instead of responding to you with words, I got out one of those emoticons, or a cartoon to make a point? Cop out perhaps?

Edited by Purple_Hibiscus

Refusing to use the spellchick!

I have put you on ignore. No really, I have, but you are still ruining my enjoyment of this site. .

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Filed: Country: Philippines
Timeline
You know perfectly well a) that kissing babies isn't comparable and that b ) that this is much more than much ado about nothing. Politics does not have to be this manipulative game that it is rapidly becoming. However, if everyone just shrugs and laughs it off, then we will let the politicians off the hook and as I said the political process will be the loser.

What would you think, for example, if instead of responding to you with words, I got out one of those emoticons, or a cartoon to make a point? Cop out perhaps?

Because it is highly subjective. You believe just the act of having this boy make a radio address was manipulative, yet you haven't articulated exactly how it is manipulation. I see it as using emotional appeal to persuade the public...there is a difference. Manipulation is when you benefit from a situation and the other person doesn't. In persuasion, both people benefit. I encourage 'principled persuasion,' where you speak with sincerity to persuade a person to want to help you.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Who exactly benefited from having the boy speak on the radio? The boy? Come on, even you don't believe that one. Whoever thought this tactic up figured they would benefit in some way one can only assume to illustrate what a wonderful program S-CHIP is.

Sadly, it backfired. I say sadly because the boy and his family are now in a position of not only having to defend their use of the program against those who think this was a misuse of public funds, but also because the focus of attention has totally switched from the program to the merits or lack of of this one particular case. That makes the whole tactic an abysmal failure, something the person/people who thought of it should have envisaged before they went ahead and did it.

Edited by Purple_Hibiscus

Refusing to use the spellchick!

I have put you on ignore. No really, I have, but you are still ruining my enjoyment of this site. .

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Filed: Timeline
Because it is highly subjective. You believe just the act of having this boy make a radio address was manipulative, yet you haven't articulated exactly how it is manipulation. I see it as using emotional appeal to persuade the public...there is a difference. Manipulation is when you benefit from a situation and the other person doesn't. In persuasion, both people benefit. I encourage 'principled persuasion,' where you speak with sincerity to persuade a person to want to help you.

It only stands to reason that this kid would be thrown under the bus the second he was involved to 'deliver the Democrats' message'. It invites scrutiny.

Anyways, we're all just going round and round as per usual.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Who said no emotion? The politicians can give me all the emotion they want, in fact, the more the better, up to a point. However, we are not talking about that, we are talking about manipulating people by wheeling out emotive images, putting children on the political stage, allowing candidates to show 60 second tv adverts as though that's supposed to make their case for them. As I said, make the politicians work for our votes.

I have to agree with you there. I would respect their positions if they laid out a logical reason for what they want rather than trying to play on our emotions. It's OK for product advertising but in politics I see it as phony and it tends to make me dig my heals in.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Filed: Country: Philippines
Timeline
Who exactly benefited from having the boy speak on the radio? The boy? Come on, even you don't believe that one. Whoever thought this tactic up figured they would benefit in some way one can only assume to illustrate what a wonderful program S-CHIP is.

The boy and his family benefited from the CHIP program. You're argument is that the emotional appeal is a form of manipulation on the public, correct? How is the public being manipulated? No offense, but after all these posts and you have yet to articulate that point.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yes, by parading this child on a political platform the argument changes from arguing the merits of the program and how it should be funded to 'look at this child and tell me that you could in all conscience turn down this xyz that I am telling you needs to be provided to allow children like this to benefit from the program'

That's emotional manipulation in my book. Provide the figures, tell me what funding is required to make the program work allow me to evaluate the proposition and alternative possibilities, but don't parade a kid in front of me and tell me that if I don't agree with you I am immoral or don't care about children. The fact that this has now backfired, that the children's family is under the spotlight, that the argument has swung away from the program to whether this person was a legitimate recipient, makes it even worse. That the person who came up with this scheme didn't even bother to worry that this might or even was likely to happen, tells me that this person is not only manipulative, but rather cold as well.

Refusing to use the spellchick!

I have put you on ignore. No really, I have, but you are still ruining my enjoyment of this site. .

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
- Back to Top -

Important Disclaimer: Please read carefully the Visajourney.com Terms of Service. If you do not agree to the Terms of Service you should not access or view any page (including this page) on VisaJourney.com. Answers and comments provided on Visajourney.com Forums are general information, and are not intended to substitute for informed professional medical, psychiatric, psychological, tax, legal, investment, accounting, or other professional advice. Visajourney.com does not endorse, and expressly disclaims liability for any product, manufacturer, distributor, service or service provider mentioned or any opinion expressed in answers or comments. VisaJourney.com does not condone immigration fraud in any way, shape or manner. VisaJourney.com recommends that if any member or user knows directly of someone involved in fraudulent or illegal activity, that they report such activity directly to the Department of Homeland Security, Immigration and Customs Enforcement. You can contact ICE via email at Immigration.Reply@dhs.gov or you can telephone ICE at 1-866-347-2423. All reported threads/posts containing reference to immigration fraud or illegal activities will be removed from this board. If you feel that you have found inappropriate content, please let us know by contacting us here with a url link to that content. Thank you.
×
×
  • Create New...