There's a concept in Marketing known as "Fear, Uncertainty, and Doubt". The general idea is that you can win a customer's business by creating or perpetuating FUD about the alternatives to your product. (Either your competition, or simply the absence of your product, as in the case of computer anti-virus software.)
The plethora of Y2K products (computer protection, survival kits, etc.) are a great example of FUD marketing. Average Joe Consumer had no way of really knowing with any confidence what would happen at the stroke of midnight of New Years Eve. Would planes fall out of the sky? Would the electric grid collapse? It was very fertile ground for FUD marketing.
I don't think it's anything of a stretch to say that the GOP has become the Political Party of FUD. Their primary tactic in both the 2004 and 2008 presidential campaigns has been to stoke the electorate's anxiety with a massive FUD campaign. For example, "if you vote for the other guy, we'll get attacked again." Even the suggestion that this year's democratic nominee is underqualified falls squarely into the category of FUD marketing. (Underqualified? See Lincoln, Abraham)
FUD is certainly an effective marketing tactic in some situations. But it's also an awfully sleazy way to run a political campaign.
If you can make yourself see through the FUD, there are only a few reasons I can think of to vote for McCain this November:
I invite any GOP defenders to provide their rationale in the comments... but please don't just restate the FUD. I'm looking for substance.
The plethora of Y2K products (computer protection, survival kits, etc.) are a great example of FUD marketing. Average Joe Consumer had no way of really knowing with any confidence what would happen at the stroke of midnight of New Years Eve. Would planes fall out of the sky? Would the electric grid collapse? It was very fertile ground for FUD marketing.
I don't think it's anything of a stretch to say that the GOP has become the Political Party of FUD. Their primary tactic in both the 2004 and 2008 presidential campaigns has been to stoke the electorate's anxiety with a massive FUD campaign. For example, "if you vote for the other guy, we'll get attacked again." Even the suggestion that this year's democratic nominee is underqualified falls squarely into the category of FUD marketing. (Underqualified? See Lincoln, Abraham)
FUD is certainly an effective marketing tactic in some situations. But it's also an awfully sleazy way to run a political campaign.
If you can make yourself see through the FUD, there are only a few reasons I can think of to vote for McCain this November:
- You are an Oil company executive
- You own a private defense contractor that is currently raking in Zillions from Iraq contracts (See: Blackwater)
- Your income is in the top 1% of Americans, in which case, yes, Obama might let your current tax breaks expire (lots of overlap between this and the first two groups)
I invite any GOP defenders to provide their rationale in the comments... but please don't just restate the FUD. I'm looking for substance.
3 comments:
your father believes that the war is really combating terrorism and a deturent to further attacks. i disagree (of course), but thought that i'd answer why some wil vote for the mac man.
How could I not respond to a post (partially) about taxes?
Just to throw a few figures out there, to earn enough to be considered the top 1% of all earners in the US, your AGI would need to be about $364,000. These 1% of all earners make 21% of all the income in the US and pay 39% of all taxes in the US.
Now, I've seen a few differences here in the numbers, but one report showed over 19% of all taxpayers make more than $100,000 and another report said to be in the top 10% of earners, you had to make more than $100,000. Not sure what the discrepancy is from, but that's just from some quick searching I did. Additionally, the top 10% of taxpayers, earn 48.5% of the income.
I'm not saying this is a reason to vote for McCain or for Obama, but I just wanted to point out that those figures aren't so high. When you talk about the top 1%, still, I'd agree the income levels are high, although I have several, several clients who fit that bill, but to be in the top 10% is not so high from those in our social circles.
Hi Aliza,
I love having a tax professional to weigh in on my blog! (Can I deduct a reasonable hourly rate for the time I spend blogging?)
According to this blog: http://felfoldi.wordpress.com/2008/02/01/top-us-household-incomes/
...the top 5% of households are those with income over $174,000.
The Obama tax plan would result in a tax increase for households making over $250,000 and individuals making over $200,000 (according to factcheck.org). That should account for somewhere around the top 3-4%.
I can't find details on McCain's tax plan, but I presume it doesn't include an increase for any bracket... I could be wrong about that.
Post a Comment