Predictable Obama Pattern

page: 1
2
<<   2 >>

log in

join

posted on Sep, 10 2008 @ 01:55 PM
link   
I've been getting Obama emails for months now, and it's become apparent the Obama camp is using a formulaic approach at this point.

1. Obama says something that has a surface meaning, and an underlying meaning that can be inferred to by some to mean something controversial.

2. People who infer the underlying controversial meaning in Obama's statement react. In the last two days we've seen this with the "my muslim faith" and the "pig and lipstick" comments.

3. Obama plays the role of the innocent victim. He becomes self-righteous and scolds his opponents for playing politics as usual, and portrays himself as being above the fray. He fans the flames while trying to portray his opponents as being the ones who are attacking him for no reason.

Now here's the great part....

4. His campaign then sends out an email whining about he Barack is being attacked, and by extension, YOU are being attacked. It's the classic US vs. THEM marketing approach. THEY are attacking US.

5. Then they ask for money in the email. They make it seem like if you don't send money to help US, THEY will win. If you don't send money you must be one of THEM.

So let's wait for the next email from the Obama campaign to test this theory. My guess is that the Obama campaign will send out an email that reads something like:

"Our opponents are at it again with there baseless attacks against you. But enough is enough. This election is far too important to allow politics as usual to distract us from the real issues of the economy, the two wars, and the energy crisis we are now facing.

Our opponents are proving they're not about change with these attacks. They're about politics as usual.

And we cannot afford politics as usual.

But they are getting money to run ads spreading these lies and these attacks. We have to fight back before it's too late.

But we're in this together. This campaign has been about you from the start. And it's still about you. Barack will go out and fight for what we believe in everyday, but he needs you help to combat the evil Republican propaganda machine.

If you can afford to send $5 it would be a huge help.

etc..."


It's fascinating just to observe the strategies being implemented, and how predictable they've become. If you're on the Obama mailing list, keep your eyes open for the next email. I'm guessing it will be very similar to what you've just read.




posted on Sep, 10 2008 @ 03:47 PM
link   
 


off-topic post removed to prevent thread-drift


 



posted on Sep, 10 2008 @ 03:51 PM
link   

Originally posted by zlots331 it may be just a case of profound solipsism.


Sorry, what solipsism mean? You might want to define it here on this thread so other people won't have to go to dictionary.com and look it up.

Thanks for your concern. I assure you that there are many people with hundreds of thousands of ATS points. (What do you use those for anyway?)

Also, would you post be a case of discussing the poster instead of the topic, which is Predictable Obama Pattern?

Just wondering.



posted on Sep, 10 2008 @ 04:15 PM
link   
Could you please post examples of the emails so that we can understand how you arrived at your conclusions?




posted on Sep, 10 2008 @ 04:22 PM
link   

Originally posted by MemoryShock
Could you please post examples of the emails so that we can understand how you arrived at your conclusions?




Sure. How many do you want?




I wasn't planning on sending you something tonight. But if you saw what I saw from the Republican convention, you know that it demands a response.

I saw John McCain's attack squad of negative, cynical politicians. They lied about Barack Obama and Joe Biden, and they attacked you for being a part of this campaign.




But worst of all -- and this deserves to be noted -- they insulted the very idea that ordinary people have a role to play in our political process.




It's now clear that John McCain's campaign has decided that desperate lies and personal attacks -- on Barack Obama and on you -- are the only way they can earn a third term for the Bush policies that McCain has supported more than 90 percent of the time.

But you can send a crystal clear message.

Enough is enough. Make your voice heard loud and clear by making a $5 donation right now:

link to donate



Why would the Republicans spend a whole night of their convention attacking ordinary people?




With the nation watching, the Republicans mocked, dismissed, and actually laughed out loud at Americans who engage in community service and organizing.


I need to leave now, but I can post more when I come back.



posted on Sep, 10 2008 @ 04:24 PM
link   
reply to post by jamie83
 


One question, how would we be able to corroborate this?



posted on Sep, 10 2008 @ 04:29 PM
link   
 


off-topic post removed to prevent thread-drift


 



posted on Sep, 10 2008 @ 04:42 PM
link   
 


off-topic post removed to prevent thread-drift


 



posted on Sep, 10 2008 @ 04:45 PM
link   

Originally posted by jamie83
I've been getting Obama emails for months now, and it's become apparent the Obama camp is using a formulaic approach at this point.

I get official emails from both campaigns and see nothing of what you describe.

Are you certain you're getting official campaign emails, or have you subscribed to one of the nearly three dozen supporter email lists? Or, are you making this up?



posted on Sep, 10 2008 @ 05:25 PM
link   
Let's get back to the TOPIC shall we?

Please continue with the discussion about the OP's theory of a ..


Predictable Obama Pattern


Thank you.



posted on Sep, 10 2008 @ 05:55 PM
link   
It's a plausible theory for raising campaign funds but there are some obvious questions that will be asked.

1) How do you determine that your staged events won't generate too much support for the other side? If there is no way to calculate this you could end up creating more support for the enemy than your fundraising can counter. Is the answer to rely on political experience and take the risk?

2) The enemy will always be attacking you on some issue, you could just as easily use these risk free excuses for more fundraising money from your constituents. Is the answer you use these also to generate maximum fundraising opportunities?



posted on Sep, 10 2008 @ 06:51 PM
link   
reply to post by jamie83
 


Are these quotes from one email you received or parts of all the emails? Can you post the other e-mails you received as well to help discern the pattern?

This is an interesting topic and I would like to see all the emails to compare.

In the interest of space and bandwidth perhaps someone knows of a good file hosting site.

TIA



posted on Sep, 10 2008 @ 06:54 PM
link   
The following is my opinion as a member participating in this discussion.

reply to post by Kellter
 


Interesting questions. Also, are there GOP emails that you are getting similar to this? Basically, is this odd?

As an ATS Staff Member, I will not moderate in threads such as this where I have participated as a member.



posted on Sep, 10 2008 @ 07:30 PM
link   
What jamie has posted are legitimate excerpts from various Obama emails. I have them, too. But his unprofessional analysis and conclusions are based on his own slanted perceptions and overtly biased opinions. He has taken sentences out of context and formed more negative opinions about the Obama campaign. That should be no surprise. The fact that jamie, a known Obama detractor, even signed up to receive the Obama emails tells volumes.

This pattern of jamie's should be clear to anyone who has been reading in this forum for any time.


Originally posted by jamie83
3. Obama plays the role of the innocent victim.


He's not the only one who does this. If you don't think so, ask yourself what exactly is "sexist" about calling someone a pig... Playing the victim is NOT a technique used by Obama only. The McCain camp is getting quite good at it, in fact.



He becomes self-righteous and scolds his opponents for playing politics as usual, and portrays himself as being above the fray. He fans the flames while trying to portray his opponents as being the ones who are attacking him for no reason.


This is all biased judgment and opinion.



They make it seem like if you don't send money to help US, THEY will win. If you don't send money you must be one of THEM.


This is where your accusation falls completely apart. They ask for donations, yes, but they have never indicated that I am "one of them" if I don't send money. Never anything remotely CLOSE to that. Are you sure you didn't get your emails mixed up?



posted on Sep, 10 2008 @ 08:16 PM
link   
Nice post and observations!

I get those same e-mails and noticed those same tactics as well.

Obama is using the "anchoring" technique.

Anchoring is getting the reader or viewer to first identify with the product (in this case Obama). Obama does this through the 'We' concept of "us against them".

It's what his change Mantra is based on Most people want some sort of "change" so they identify with Obama in that regard.

The next thing the "anchoring" technique does is to associate massive pleasure to the product. While many politicians do this, Obama takes it farther with blatent lies and massive flip-flops.

It's why the second part of this technique is failing for him. People can't associate pleasure to what you'll do for them if you keep switching or flip-flopping all the time!!

Bruce Lee said it best: "To change in a change is to be in a changeless state".

It describes Obama well as he continues flip-flopping to gain voters only to never truely make change (because he's always changing for appeasement).

Obama has also tried to use subliminal techiques like with his version of the Presidential Seal. He wanted Americans to subconsciously view him as President by associating the Presidential Seal to himself.

The problem with that is that most Americans were consciously aware of it!

It's obvious he's "wet behind the Ears" and the Presidential Campaign should not be a testing ground for a Junior Senator.

McCains experience, as his advisors who are business-savvy, is shining through.

Likewise, Obama's inexperience is doing the same.

Sarah Palin already has the second part of the Anchoring technique covered - many American Men find her beautiful.

Obama had this with younger women, but that wears off after getting too much of the same thing.

Most people are fickle in the first place.



[edit on 10-9-2008 by jetxnet]



posted on Sep, 10 2008 @ 11:21 PM
link   

Originally posted by intrepid
reply to post by jamie83
 


One question, how would we be able to corroborate this?



I'm guessing you could ask other people who are on Obama's mailing list to corroborate it. Maybe there's a website that has documents what Obama mails out.



posted on Sep, 10 2008 @ 11:42 PM
link   

Originally posted by Benevolent Heretic
The fact that jamie, a known Obama detractor, even signed up to receive the Obama emails tells volumes.



I signed up on Obama's site back in February or March because I liked Obama then, and I wanted to be on his mailing list. I have said over and over here that I couldn't stand McCain, and in fact he was the only person who ever inspired me to call a politician's office to lodge a complaint.

I truly believed Obama was genuine and meant what he said, that he was a different type of politician.

Then I started hearing rumors about him. Not the Muslim rumors, etc., but about who was backing him and why. I investigated these rumors on my own, and discovered they were true. His entire campaign was orchestrated by the most influential players in the hedge fund world, and the entire reason was related to their alternative energy holdings.

The law firm of McGuire Woods is a central player in all of this. They represent Dominion Gas, which is position to reap huge rewards. Another is Smith Foods. And of course Perseus LLC and George Soros are heavily invested in alternative energy companies.

And I also am keenly aware of the marketing/psychological strategies being used by both campaigns. This thread is identifying a very common pattern:

attack
response
victim
support

Simply put, the candidate attacks, the other side reacts, the attacker claims to be the victim, and then asks his or her base for support, usually financial.

This is nothing new. It's why there's this apparent new found phenomenon of demanding apologies. Do you really think McCain cares if Obama apologizes, or vice versa?

Of course not. What they care about is step 3 of the pattern -being the victim.

It's just that Obama did this over and over during the primaries. It was easy because people already had a high negative opinion of Hillary and Bill Clinton.

But now it's not working so well. One reason is McCain has gone out of his way to be perceived as taking the high road as often as possible. It's not that McCain is necessarily noble, but more likely that his handlers want to do whatever they can to lessen the effectiveness of the "victim" strategy.

And now they McCain camp has boomeranged the strategy back at Obama in a way that Hillary could never do. Now McCain's camp is playing the "victim card" and Obama seems genuinely frustrated.

The next card to be played will probably be the race card. This has been Obama's ace in the hole all along.



posted on Sep, 11 2008 @ 12:13 AM
link   

Originally posted by intrepid
reply to post by Kellter
 


Interesting questions. Also, are there GOP emails that you are getting similar to this? Basically, is this odd?



I found a site that accumulated all the campaign emails.

campaignemails.blogspot.com...

And I just went through the McCain emails. In spite of the truly unprecedented rumors and attacks against Gov. Palin, there was not ONE email talking about the attacks or trying to use them as an excuse to raise money.

On the other hand, Obama has been using this strategy for a LONG time.

Here's an excerpt from April:

"But it's clear the attacks are going to continue, and we're going to continue fighting a two-front battle against John McCain and Hillary Clinton.

I need your support right now. Please make a donation of $25:"




Here's how he used the "bitter" comments and turned them around to ask for money:


"There's nothing elitist about the largest grassroots campaign in the history of our country -- and you can prove that right now.

Make a matching donation of $25:"


AND...



"You've probably heard about the latest dust-up in the Democratic race.

A few days ago, Barack spoke about the frustrations that working people in this country are feeling and said what we all know is true: that many people are bitter and angry because they believe their government isn't listening to them.

You and I both know that the hope of changing that reality is what drives the unprecedented support for this campaign from ordinary people in every part of the country.

But our opponents have been spinning the media and peddling fake outrage around the clock. "


He even used the same "fake outrage" line he used today.



Here's Obama using the "they're attacking YOU" in regards to Clinton back in March:


"But just turn on the news and you'll see that Senator Clinton continues to run an expensive, negative campaign against us. Each day her campaign launches a new set of desperate attacks.

They're not just attacking me; they're attacking you."




This is from March and it's about being a victim of Clinton's "kitchen sink" attacks:

"This morning, the New York Times reported that Senator Clinton is launching what even her aides admit is a "kitchen sink" bombardment of negative attacks against Barack.

This is the same stale, Washington playbook that has driven so many Americans away from the political process."




And this is how the Obama campaign began all the way back in January with an email from John Kerry already painting Obama as a victim:

"This year, the attacks are already starting. "


So yes, it has been documented that Obama has been playing the "victim" card from the beginning. And when you see the same phrase like "fake outrage" being used months ago, and again today, it becomes obvious that this is a contrived strategy.



posted on Sep, 11 2008 @ 12:31 AM
link   
IU don't want to caus derision, but Jamie...could your research skills produce a similar "money'ed" background for McCain?

He is rich...and explicitly so.

What you insist on focusing on are irrlevancies. Money begets money. And they invariably turn to politics (in some cases).

W. Bush is worth how much? John Kerry is worth how much? McCain is worth how much? Obama is worth how much? Let's focus this issue on all aspects of campaign manipulation.

If we don't do that, then there is no hope...because the two party system is based in money. It matters not who the name is...



posted on Sep, 11 2008 @ 12:53 AM
link   

Originally posted by MemoryShock
IU don't want to caus derision, but Jamie...could your research skills produce a similar "money'ed" background for McCain?


I think you misunderstand the situation.

McCain's wife is wealthy. No doubt about that. She's worth around $100 million. But that's not the type of money we're talking about here.

The people who are behind Obama, people from McGuire Woods, Perseus LLC, and Soros funds are involved in venture cap and hedge fund businesses that have investments in the $100s of millions in small companies. Perseus LLC has about $3 billion in total money under management.

Next you need to understand how these guys make money. Typically they get 20-25% of profits made from investing OTHER PEOPLE'S MONEY. That means large institutions give them money, and they make money if the investments they make pay off.

So for example, if Perseus LLC gets a 25% return, that would be 25% of $3 billion, or $750 million. The managers get 20% of that, or $150 million for ONE YEAR.

And the profits are even larger for venture cap firms that bought into companies at pennies on the dollar. It's not uncommon for these companies to go public and make the initial investors ten or even 100 times on their initial investment.

I've researched McCain and I can't find any connections in the hedge fund industry. And like you said, he's already rich. He doesn't need to win to be set financially, nor does he need kickbacks from corporate buddies.

At some point Obama got into relationships with principles at McGuire Woods and Perseus LLC, and his proposed policies reflect that. Alternative energy companies are to Obama what Haliburton was to Dick Cheney.

And don't forget about Biden in all of this. His son Hunter was involved in the outright purchase of the Paradigm hedge fund for almost $20 million in cash. Paradigm manages over $500 million in assets. And Hunter Biden also is a lobbyist for two biotech companies. Keep in mind that Soros partnered with Perseus LLC in a biotech hedge fund.

Also keep in mind that the main reason Obama won Iowa, and was catapulted into the position of front runner, was because of his positions on subsidizing Iowa corn farmers for the production of corn used to make ethanol.





new topics
 
2
<<   2 >>

log in

join