Sublime

Connally realized that Johnson was talking about revolutionizing Texas politics. Thanks to polling, Johnson would be able to discover exactly what issues “touched” Texas voters. And when he found one that touched, he could hammer it into the voters’ consciousness, in speeches on the radio, in ads on the radio, in ads in newspapers, in mailings—with

Lloyd George frequently emphasized to me in conversation that one feature that distinguished a first-rate political leader from a second-rate politician is that the former was always careful to avoid making any definite statement that could be subsequently refuted, as he was likely to be caught out in the long run.

Instead, Reagan asked a question: “Are you better off now than you were four years ago?”

À la fin des années 1990, Pierre Bourdieu (1996) avait déjà souligné l’importance des fast thinkers, ces figures à même de se plier aux exigences du format télévisuel et de produire des avis « experts » sans les travers des universitaires et leur goût supposé pour la complexité, par exemple.

There is vote suppression, distortions of campaign finance, a largely uninformed public, vast sums of money spent to mislead and manipulate public opinion, efforts to spread fake news on social media, and a public that is increasingly likely to talk mostly to the like-minded, and consult mostly news sources it agrees with.

Words That Work, written by Republican political strategist Frank Luntz. It’s brilliant. Matt

Johnson had persuaded Graham, and Graham had persuaded Rauh, and Rauh had persuaded Wilkins—and now, in that law library on K Street, Wilkins persuaded the Leadership Conference. In the late afternoon, at the end of a long day, the conference issued a statement saying that “Disappointing as the Senate version is, it does contain some potential good

(The “ask” only comes at the very end, within the last ten words. Why? Because a recall is the most extreme political maneuver other than impeachment. Don’t ask voters to take an extreme measure until you have told them why. And don’t expect them to agree with you unless and until you tell them the consequences of inaction. That’s why we added that

Just 10 percent of Americans interviewed thought that charities did a “very good job” spending money wisely.13 To put that in perspective, even Congress, at its worst, fares better. In November 2011, Gallup reported congressional approval at an all-time historic low of 13 percent.