In mulling over how any intelligent voter could be attracted to Trump on the one hand, and on the other, how a woman dedicated to public service like Hillary could be viewed so negatively, I stumbled on something. In the case of Trump, he is selling the notion that his goal is to “Make America Great Again,” without referencing any identifiable group that would benefit. Trump says America will benefit if he is elected; and by definition, any voter would be included in the Trump promise and can mentally fill in the blank about how he or she would benefit.
By contrast, Democrats, both Hillary and Bernie, talk about individual groups that would benefit if either of them would be elected. For example: women, college students, minorities, minimum wage earners, the medically under-insured, coal miners, supporters of rights for LGBT and pro-choice, union workers, immigrants, etc.
Trump targets individual Americans indirectly, but emphasizes the patriotic notion of Make America Great Again specifically; while Democrats target some, but not all of the constituent parts of America specifically, and the rest of the citizens generally, without any appeal to patriotism or the concept of “America” as an entity.
Ironically, we know from studies and our own observations that individual Democrats, liberals and intelligent independents respond when asked to demonstrate their love for the notion of “America” as much as the Trump supporters; and they are just as subconsciously inspired to support and defend America. But our candidates are not appealing to our love of country. Instead they are pandering to the groups of voters who would benefit if a Democrat is elected. This revelation came through to me when I listened to several of Bernie’s speeches and thought he was not addressing me. I have 5 kids. Four already completed college and one is still attending. Their tuition bills are behind me, and the debt is part of my way of life. I also have my health insurance under control, and when I get into my car and it works, when I use my smart phone, my TV, or take medicine, I am not angry at the “millionaires and billionaires” who put such useful wonders on the market; and I do not want my doctor to leave clinical practice because a different health care regime, imposed instantly, could impair his ability to earn a living and pay off the debt he incurred in getting educated and buying equipment for his medical practice. In other words, while I would vote for Bernie if he was the Democrat’s candidate, but he did not inspire me. Since Hillary also addresses individual groups, she also does not inspire me either, but I find that she panders far less than Bernie.
I assume I am different that other white males who have found Trump’s benefits-to-America message attractive because I have been a strong liberal for almost 50 years, and as a reader of Daily Kos, I have been exposed to what is at stake. Most importantly, I am a lawyer, and have been waiting since Nixon made his first Supreme Court appointment for a reprise of the Warren Court.
I have a suggestion. In Irving Berlin’s song, God Bless America, there is a line that would be apt as the theme and slogan for Hillary’s campaign (or Bernie’s if lightening strikes): AMERICA: Land that we love, instead of Hillary’s current slogan, “Fighting for us”. That slogan’s use of the word “us” has been defined by her speeches as the groups mentioned above, and, for example, she never claims to be fighting for white men in decent jobs, or business owners, or anyone who does need someone to fight for them. (For example, I do not need her to fight for me, and I will vote for her despite her slogan’s lack of relevance to my life; but someone who is not baked into the liberal cake, like an independent could easily just walk away from that slogan and Hillary as being not designed for him.)
Under my slogan, the message would be: We need to preserve our great accomplishments, and to embark on the a path that is headed toward improving and perfecting, AMERICA: Land that we love.
While this would be a positive message that would invoke patriotism without pandering to any group, and correspondingly alienating other groups, the negative implication of this message is that: We cannot afford to let Trump and his ignorance of our government’s needs, spoil AMERICA: Land that we love.
The bottom line is that if Hillary becomes associated with an inclusive message of pure patriotisim, her negatives will begin to melt.