I knew the Kerry campaign was in trouble when I saw the ad of Bush hugging a young girl, a family member of a 9/11 victim. I waited for a Democratic counter ad that would effectively depict Kerry as a caring compassionate person. It never came.
When the GOP was pushing privatization of Social Security, the ad in which a house was destroyed, rather than the sink, clarified the Republican approach more than words alone could.
Although my references are about visual involvement, I think there are some crisp verbal phrases which, like the ads mentioned, bring about a subconscious emotional connection. "Cut and run" is one of these. It implies lack of honor or cowardice and association with it is definitely negative.
I realize that one response to a "cut and run" accusation would be to reframe the argument. That could work but "cut and run" would still be an elephant in the room of discourse.
So I suggest we consider this response:
You have that backward. Neocons "cut and run"; they "cut" off common sense and "run" from reality.
That phrasing (cut/common sense; run/reality)is easy to remember. I admit it does sound a bit sophomoric to use a "not me but you" format. However, we're dealing with a catch phrase and the response would build on something already ingrained and give it new meaning.
I tried to think of substituting two other verbs to use in response to the neocon position. Came up with "stand and bleed". But that doesn't work since "stand" has a positive connotation.
Any other ideas out there on a crisp response to a "cut and run" accusation?