On the Lido Deck of the Titanic; Or Democracy Folding in 2024
Action Item: Stop talking about Democracy folding to those you want to vote your way. It turns them off. And, pick their issue of interest. One issue. One message. Every few days, or even weeks.
by Christine Merser
I feel like I'm standing on the Lido deck of the Titanic, jumping around, waving my hands up and down, screaming at the people drinking their champagne and listening to the band play on. People are drowning below, and the ship is sinking. "Why are you not all doing something?" I've irritated friends and family with, "How can you go camping and teach your children about the beauty of this country when it could end with drilling in just a few years? The Grand Canyon could be sold for condos? What is wrong with you people? How can you have female children and not be asking how to help ensure the right to freedom of choice over their bodies is not lost?" Enough! You get the point.
I turned to AI to ask why people say they have to run and talk to me later after I bend their ear about the fear of the future, with the decibels of my voice rising every ten seconds.
AI: Fear of democracy folding, or concerns about the stability and future of democratic institutions, is important to a segment of the voting population but generally falls lower on the list compared to more immediate and tangible issues. For many Americans, these abstract concerns might rank around 11th to 15th place, behind more pressing day-to-day issues like the economy, healthcare, and public safety.
The possibility of a democratic decline in the United States is a grave concern for many, especially in the context of former President Donald Trump's potential re-election. Despite the warnings from political analysts, journalists, and concerned citizens, a significant portion of the American population remains indifferent to these fears. Understanding this phenomenon requires examining several factors, including political polarization, media influence, trust in institutions, and psychological responses to fear-based messaging. (Full explanation of these issues is at the end of this post.)
When Obama was behind in the polls against Romney, the campaign made a change in messaging. Romney, in Philadelphia for example, was sending his generic messaging to the urban area with his five talking points for changes he would make if elected. (Sure seems not so threatening now!) Obama’s team (I was on it) segmented his messaging to the one issue most pressing for that targeted group. In the inner city, black women arena, it was child care and health insurance. It worked. By focusing on one thing they cared about and not diluting the message with all kinds of policies, he took the area. People felt seen. They could relate because it was something foremost in their minds. Some thought it was the reason he won. He tailored his messages to one or two things when he spoke.
Hit me over the head enough times, and I can learn. Pick the one thing the person you want to woo cares about, and gently place info in front of them.
Want to get your mom to change her vote? Explain to her—show her what she might lose in Medicare and Social Security. Tell her Reagan would not want her to lose those benefits. #KiddingNotKidding
We can do this. #GettingSmarterEverDayToGetHarrisElected
AI’s full explanation: Why Some Americans Are Unmoved by Warnings About Democracy's Potential Decline
The possibility of a democratic decline in the United States is a grave concern for many, especially in the context of former President Donald Trump's potential re-election. Despite the warnings from political analysts, journalists, and concerned citizens, a significant portion of the American population remains indifferent to these fears. Understanding this phenomenon requires examining several factors, including political polarization, media influence, trust in institutions, and psychological responses to fear-based messaging.
Political Polarization and Tribalism
The United States is deeply divided along partisan lines, with political affiliations often resembling tribal loyalties. Many Trump supporters view critiques of Trump and warnings about democracy's decline as attacks on their identity and beliefs. This polarization creates an environment where individuals are less likely to engage with or believe information that contradicts their political stance. Instead of viewing the potential threats objectively, they may dismiss them as partisan exaggerations or fear-mongering by the opposition.
Media Influence and Echo Chambers
Media consumption plays a crucial role in shaping public opinion. In today's fragmented media landscape, many Americans consume news from sources that reinforce their existing beliefs. Conservative media outlets, which hold significant sway over Trump supporters, often downplay or outright reject concerns about democratic backsliding. This selective exposure to information creates echo chambers, where individuals only hear what they want to believe, further entrenching their views and reducing their openness to opposing perspectives.
Distrust in Institutions and Experts
Trust in institutions, including the media, government, and experts, has been eroding for years. Many Americans, particularly those who support Trump, are skeptical of warnings from these sources. This distrust is fueled by a belief that the establishment is biased against Trump and his supporters. When experts and media outlets issue dire predictions about the future of democracy, those predisposed to distrust these sources are less likely to take such warnings seriously.
Psychological Responses to Fear-Based Messaging
Fear is a powerful motivator, but it can also lead to denial and disengagement. Constant exposure to negative news and fear-inducing predictions can create a sense of helplessness and fatigue. For some, the prospect of a democratic decline is so overwhelming that they choose to ignore it rather than confront it. This psychological defense mechanism helps individuals avoid the anxiety and stress associated with contemplating such a dire future.
Focus on Immediate Concerns
Many Americans are more concerned with immediate, tangible issues affecting their daily lives, such as the economy, healthcare, and crime. These concerns often take precedence over abstract threats to democracy. For individuals struggling with economic uncertainty or personal hardships, warnings about democratic decline may seem distant and less urgent.
The indifference of some Americans to the potential loss of democracy under a Trump re-election is a multifaceted issue. Political polarization, media influence, distrust in institutions, psychological responses to fear, and a focus on immediate concerns all contribute to this phenomenon. Addressing these challenges requires a nuanced approach that goes beyond fear-based messaging, fostering open dialogue, rebuilding trust in institutions, and highlighting the tangible impacts of democratic erosion on everyday life.