"Hey, you're ANTI-LIFE!"
What's your reaction to that? For me, incredulity. It's preposterous to say I'm anti-life. In fact, I can give examples of my support for the sanctity of human life, such as my distaste for unprovoked war and distrust of executioners. But look at some hard-right sites, and you'll see that people really throw the "anti-life" frame around quite a bit. Why hasn't it gained traction when so many other right-wing frames, like "Moral Values," "tax relief" and even "pro-life?"
Here's what I think:
Negative frames have very limited utility. I think they only work well in two situations:
(1) Everybody agrees something is bad. Nobody's going to get on your case for referring to "killer bees" or the death camps of World War II. They're frames everybody can get behind.
(2) Unfamiliar issues. "Death tax" works so well because few Americans have a very good idea of what an estate tax is, whom it affects and why we have one. So make it sound scary before anybody really talks about it, and your frame is entrenched.
But negative frames don't work well for contentious issues, and they certainly don't work well when applied to people you want on your side. "Hate Amendment" is a pithy phrase, and instantly evokes a contentious issue. But it will never win us a voter. Just as I think I'm not "anti-life," the supporters of those amendments don't think they're hateful. They also don't think they're fearful, stupid, backward, ignorant, biased, racist, prejudiced or gullible. Those words just don't work, and putting them in a frame only excites the opposition.
I bring this up because I've noticed a tendency of dKos readers (and Democrats in general) to suggest and adopt reactive or negative frames. "Moral Values" is a big one these days, and there's a big temptation to frame it in an insulting but satisfying manner. I don't think that's a good idea. Frames like "pro-life," "pro-choice" and "Moral Values" are effective because they are inclusive. You can bring a bunch of people into a big tent, although each might have a slightly different philosophy. And once you have them on your team, it's much easier to sell them your particular bill of goods. Using negative frames like "hate amendment" is inherently divisive, and probably drives away more people than it attracts.
I think this may have something to do with the way the election turned out. Taking the catch-phrases at face value, "security," "Clear Skies" and "tax relief" are much nicer things to contemplate than lost jobs or "Two Americas." And a "prescription drug benefit" sure sounds better than a complicated hybrid plan, whatever the actual content.
So let's break out the honey. Anybody have some good positive frames they're dying to try out? How about a Safer Cities initiative instead of gun control? A Thankful Nation program for veteran's benefits? "Revenue" or "investment" instead of "taxes?" Maybe even an international platform of Peace and Progress.