"Teflon". What is it and where does it reside?

[Mairead]

Many of us will remember that Reagan was said to have a 'teflon coating' because not even the worst criticism could be made to stick to him. Now people are saying the same thing about Dean--that no matter what he says or does, it's all water off a duck. Nothing matters.

What actually is this 'teflon'? Is it some property--mystical or mundane--that certain individuals have, is it a function of Media Inc.'s unwillingness to make criticism stick to certain people, or what is it exactly?

[mouse7]

1. On my money

Any money I get just slips away.

[private_ryan]

2. it will stick to dean

it's not sticking to core dem base but the accusations are sticking to the general population. Did you see his latest numbers versus the Chimp?

[NewJeffCT]

10. it is sticking

Everybody in the Reich Wing is painting him as an angry, far left Yankee liberal, and now the non Reich Wing is picking up on it... if Clark became the frontrunner, we'd hear how he is overly ambitious and not liked by some in the military... if Kerry did, he is French looking and boring, too intellectual, etc.

[Northwind]

11. Incorrect

Yes, they are trying to paint him as such. It is not working, however. Their actions do not equal immediate and predetermined success.

[NewJeffCT]

12. maybe

But, it is still early... after a few more months of pounding away at him (and the Reich Wing media machine is HUGE - Fox & all the Murdoch companies, CNN, MSNBC, CNBC, Moonie Times, the Tribune Companies, etc, etc) - it will start to seep in to the non-news media (i.e., the mention of Dean as a far leftie on "the View")

[private_ryan]

13. the paint is sticking

you hear their talking points everywhere and the poll numbers vs Bush have dropped. That's sticking to me.

[Zomby Woof]

3. I've wondered the same thing myself

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=104&topic_id=881495

It's mostly about Bush, but Dean fits the mold too.

[Northwind]

4. The whole teflon thing...

...is a confusion of cause and effect, and a mis-read of what is significant.

People liked Reagan not because of his policies, but becasue of his personality. He came off as warm and genuine, and people responded. His message revolved around "traditional" Amewrican concepts of patriotism, pride, hard work and just reward. His actual policies may have been 180 degrees away from that, but his message resonated nonetheless. I once saw an interview with Geraldine Farraro (sp?) in which she talked about her and Mondale's run against Reagan. She recounted one incident, late in the campaign, when she was stumping before a group of union folks somewhere in the midwest. They were stone faced and unresponsive to her speech, and the polls were showing a pretty sure defeat for her and Mondale. About halway through ehr speech, she sort of sighed and stopped reading her prepared remarks, and started asking the union workers some straight questions. She asked them if they thought Reagns' policies represented thir best interests. They willingly admitted that they did not. So she asked why they were supporting him. They were quiet for a monment, then one guy straightened up and said, "because we're standing tall." His response was met by enthusiastic agreements from his co-workers. They knew his policies by then, and they knew his policies were not the best for them, but they did not care, simply because he told them it was good to be proud of being American.

Much the same thing happens with Bush. You can talk about his disastrous policies. You can point to him breaking every single pledge he made during his first campaign. It won't matter, becasue for a lot of people, the fact that he comes off as this "regular guy" is far more important than any policy decision. His teflon comes from a perceived connection with regular, common people. Yes, he is a priveledged son of wealth and class, but he does not seem that way to most people, and so they like him on a personal level, which is where most people make their decisions in the voting booth.

With Dean we are getting something simliar. People who see him speak like him on a personal level. He comes across as a straight shooter, someone who says what is on his mind, who doesn't have to sit down with a commitee and decide what is most popular. Is it true? Probably not 100%. He does shoot from the hip, he does say what's on his mind, and some think he makes a lot of gaffes, but it hasn't hurt him, so maybe what is going on is that the people who talk about gaffes are not as savvy as they think they are.

We like to act here on DU as if issues are the focus of a political campaign. Candidate X is better becasue he is for/against (pet issue here). But the fact is, personality has way more to do with it that issues. History backs up this assertion.

The teflon bandied about by the pundits comes not from some mystical wellspring or from media controla dn complicity, but from a fundamental misunderstanding by those pundits (and other observers) of what is truly important in a campaign.

[Nay]

5. An excellent post, Northwind.

I try and try to tell fellow Dems that policies will mean very little to the average voter -- they just want to "feel good" about their choice. The only time policy rules is when things get so bad that no one "feels good" about the way things are going. And even then, if these voters don't connect the "feeling bad" to Bush, they will still not vote in their true interests -- they will listen to the words rather than evaluate the results.

Sad, but this is what you get when your whole environment is nothing but ads, appeals to the emotions, easy-to-digest pictures, emotionalism, and anti-intellectualism, and when reading and thinking and pondering are considered "boring," "nerdy," or blasphemous.

[Northwind]

6. whoa...

First response to my post is positive...I am in shock...

[leesa]

7. Actually, it's even more complex, because Bush DOESN'T come

across as a nice guy, or an average joe-type at all, the media simply tells us this is how we feel about him. Meanwhile,he goes around and is as mean-spirited, terse, rude, arrogant, non-sensical and spoiled as is humanly possible. He is frequently seen at high price parties, on exclusive golf courses, enjoying months of vacation time, things the average joe is not usually doing, yet we are told we relate to him as a regular guy. We don't of course, he has nothing whatsoever in common with us, but the propaganda says that is our relationship and we accept it despite what we see in front of us.
They have an amazing propaganda machine.

[plaguepuppy]

8. the media simply tells us this is how we feel about him

Yes, that's exactly right. And by constantly telling us how popular and well-liked he is they justify their own refusal to follow up on even the most obvious lies and crooked dealing.

It's a purely Republican brand of teflon, and works only if you have a strangle-hold on the mass media.

[Northwind]

9. That is a cop-out answer

It resembles nothing so much as the years of conservatives whining about "liberal media bias," and also like it, is an excuse for not challenging your own preconceptions.

The fact is, to a majority of Americans, Bush does come across a a nice man. A regular guy. So he appears on an expensive golf course. So what? He is there with his father, enjoying a game between father and son. For most people Bush talks and acts like them or people they know. They believe they know HIM, they feel connected. Regular folks do not oppose rudeness if they feel it is justified, in fact they applaud it with hoary colloquialisms such as "he don't take no shit."

The fact that you think Bush is rude and priveldged (as do I, which he is, but that is beside the point) does not speak to what most Americans think of him. Most of Amwerica is not you, or me. Most America thinks Bush is like them.