Christine O'Donnell knows she is not me. But it does not matter, because she is not trying to get my vote.
OTOH, "I'm you" is the perfect message for the demographic she needs to reach.
Rather than laughing at this ad we should all be trying to understand why it has the potential to be very effective, and how we can use the power of personal identification to get more people to vote D in 2010 and 2012.
I'm going to keep saying this until everyone here gets it, because it is the difference between winning and losing elections.
Low information voters do not make their voting decisions based on facts. They do not read position papers (many people dislike reading so much that they avoid it at all costs--do you know how many US citizens do not own even one book?), they are not exposed to a lot of reality-based media, they do not analyze and think things through from all angles like we intellectual political junkies do (they do not even enjoy analyzing things--imagine that!).
They make their voting decisions based on PERSONAL IDENTIFICATION.
This can be influenced by authority figures somewhat. They may turn to a pastor or a trusted neighbor or Rush Limpbaugh to find out who to vote for.
But basically low information voters and disinformation voters (i.e. people who believe GOPropaganda) vote for the candidate they think is the most like them.
Low information voters don't have a lot of information, but they don't need a lot of information. It only takes a few minutes to decide whether you identify with somebody--whether that person is someone who is 1) like you, or 2) what you wish you could be.
Sometimes the label "Democrat" is enough to turn them off. Sometimes it is the way someone expresses him/herself--the vocabulary they use. Saying "nuke-you-ler" can be a plus. It is no accident that O'Donnell is mimicking Sarah Palin's hairstyle, eyeglasses and wardrobe. If Scott Brown had campaigned in his regular clothes instead of that barn jacket (and if Martha Coakley had known Curt Schilling was not a Yankee fan) we might still have 60 in our Senate caucus.
When lo-info voters watch ads and debates, they are not listening to the material presented. If they hear a few memorable catch phrases, that is about all they can absorb from a verbal point of view. What they are really doing is sizing up the candidates on the basis of personality and visual presentation and asking themselves, which of these people looks/sounds/acts the most like me?
And once they decide they identify with a candidate, their support cannot be dislodged. A candidate would have to do something really terrible in order to lose support based on personal identification. Follow this closely--if the candidate with whom LoInfo Joe identifies does something questionable, but for which L.I. Joe would forgive himself or a close friend, then the candidate will keep L.I. Joe's support.
Drunk driving? Joe's had a few and driven himself home from the bar. An affair? These things happen. Went to a prostitute? Joe wishes he could afford to do that. Didn't really graduate from that big school? Joe doesn't identify with college types anyway. Hired an "illegal" to look after his kids or his mom? Was the cheapest choice under the circumstances. Forgot to pay taxes? Joe hates taxes. I could go on, but I think you get the picture.
This is why GWB got two terms as president instead of being laughed off the national stage. This is why Mike Huckabee is much more dangerous in 2012 than Mitt Romney. This is the entire key to the popularity of $ister $arah. (ooo I wish I had a hunky husband and five children and a red leather jacket and a figure good enough to get on TV and make men see sparkles! I don't read much but I just want to buy her book to find out more about her, just like I buy People magazine to find out about other celebrities whose lives I wish I had!)
That is why Christine O'Donnell still has a chance in Delaware, because a LOT of people identify with her... people who don't usually bother to vote and who will not show up in polling. That is why lot of tbags that we think are laughable for what they believe are going to win their elections four weeks from today, because scads of people will look at the Democrat and say--s/he's not very much like me. I want the other one.
When I saw the O'Donnell ad last night, I did not laugh. I thought, damn, Rs are getting desperate enough to bring their strategy out in the open.
But if we are smart, we will let that help us.
No, Christine O'Donnell is not me. But again, she is not after my vote. She knows she can't get the vote of people like me who evaluate candidates based on facts. She knows that "I'm You" is not the primary qualification I look for in a candidate. But she is betting that there are enough of the other kind of voter out there to push her over the top. And Republicons have been doing this successfully for a very long time.
Dems need to stop bemoaning this tactic and start using it to the advantage of the Blue Team at EVERY level of elected office, because it is even more true in local elections.
It's too late for 2010 but for 2012 we need to concentrate on finding candidates who, in addition to having progressive positions on the issues, look and sound and speak and dress and act like the people they seek to represent.