Rhetorical devices, Catchphrases and Possible Slogans that Democrats Don't Use

[Elixir]

I think Republicans catchphrasing ability is legend, and has cost the opposition many an election and justify many a terrible decision.
So I thought I'd start a thread here to see what catch phrases infidels believe to be under or unused.

For instance, a little while ago, for some reason I recalled an episode from more than 50 years ago, when my little brother brought home a skanky little thing, and my mother later excoriated him, calling her "jailbait". Well, my little brother thought that was hilarious. So much so that he nicknamed her "jailbait", her friends started calling her that... it's just a damn catchy, lyrical and resonant word. And in this context, that's why I think Joe Biden should be referring to Trump as jailbait.
I can hear Joe...
"I don't pretend to be quite the picture of of youth that some voters would require, but hey, really? Do you really want to send that piece of jailbait back to the Whitehouse after what he's done? Remember last time, he had to pardon most of the criminals he appointed, so they wouldn't rat him out - his words."

Also:

"Trump Crime Family" - should have been in wide use since 2019, (1989 actually) but dems are SOOOOoooo polite that they still haven't figured it out, even though Sleepy Joe has been successfully appointed to the head of The Biden Crime Family by the Trump Campaign.

Ok Y'all let's hear some other/better ones.
Actually, there's never too many. Catchy is good.

 

[Tigers!]

"Its the economy stupid."
"Slick Willie" always sounded so good and rolls of the tongue
"Deplorables" was good to show how truly someone felt about another

 

[Elixir]

"Its the economy stupid."
"Slick Willie" always sounded so good and rolls of the tongue
"Deplorables" was good to show how truly someone felt about another

None of which would make a good slogan for democrats. Though “deplorables” might have power due to having been historically repeated so much.

 

[ZiprHead]

Don the Con (vict, man, whatever.)

 

[Tigers!]

"Its the economy stupid."
"Slick Willie" always sounded so good and rolls of the tongue
"Deplorables" was good to show how truly someone felt about another

None of which would make a good slogan for democrats. Though “deplorables” might have power due to having been historically repeated so much.

Oh I did not realise you wanted slogans fro just Democrats. I thought it was a free-for-all.

Though I hear a lot about apparently how well Biden is running your economy so "Its the economy stupid." is worth remembering

 

[Elixir]

Its the economy stupid." is worth remembering

Yes, that would be great, and accurate, and way too late. So … no.

Just like Sleepy Joe is now the Godfather of The Biden Crime Family, the Republicans have made sure that The Economy Is In The Dumper, and only Orange can save it.

It wouldn’t matter if every index went into and remained in record territory; the fools who think their pain is due to the Mismanaged Bidenomic Economy will remain convinced of that fable.

 

[ideologyhunter]

Trump's mug shot with a prisoner number badge added: 187. Let's hang 187 on this skunk and keep doing it. (I do assume everyone on this this site knows the number, but, if not, it's the # of minutes our president sat and, mainly, watched his TV as the Capitol rioters rampaged.) He loves to call others traitors; let's just call him 187 and keep on doing it.

 

[Elixir]

Trump's mug shot with a prisoner number badge added: 187. Let's hang 187 on this skunk and keep doing it. (I do assume everyone on this this site knows the number, but, if not, it's the # of minutes our president sat and, mainly, watched his TV as the Capitol rioters rampaged.) He loves to call others traitors; let's just call him 187 and keep on doing it.

XLNT!!!

@Tigers I neglected to confirm for you - yes this is a partisan exercise. Hence “Slogans Democrats Don’t Use” in the title. I’m looking for stuff they should use but aren’t, usually because they’re too polite (or “politically correct” in RW Hate Speech).
But your contributions are of course appreciated.

 

[Tigers!]

Trump's mug shot with a prisoner number badge added: 187. Let's hang 187 on this skunk and keep doing it. (I do assume everyone on this this site knows the number, but, if not, it's the # of minutes our president sat and, mainly, watched his TV as the Capitol rioters rampaged.) He loves to call others traitors; let's just call him 187 and keep on doing it.

XLNT!!!

@Tigers I neglected to confirm for you - yes this is a partisan exercise. Hence “Slogans Democrats Don’t Use” in the title. I’m looking for stuff they should use but aren’t, usually because they’re too polite (or “politically correct” in RW Hate Speech).
But your contributions are of course appreciated.

I have seen some of the attack ads run by both your parties. Polite is not the first adjective that springs to mind.

Noce to have my contributions appreciated. Even a backhander is nice.

 

[Gospel]

Bitch please. Should be used more often.

 

[Patooka]

Anything late night talk shows use to describe Trump. I'm not joking. MAGAtards lean hard into the white racist domestic terrorist trope. Might as well lean into the librul meedja vibe. Seriously, what can republicunts do? "Democrats are doing exactly what we've been telling you for decades except this time we mean it!" isn't really an effective comeback.

 

[southernhybrid]

I know this is from a line from a Steely Dan song, but couldn't we adopt it or change it a little to use against the pro-life Republicans who love the fetus but don't give a shit about poor children or people?

"Republicans like to throw back the little ones and panfry the big ones."

Since every business that Trump started, failed, I think we should start calling him "The biggest loser." Considering his lies about the 2020 election, we could add the poorest loser as well.

That's all I got right now.

 

[ideologyhunter]

To send your specific ideas to the Biden campaign, via snail mail (which I prefer -- I'm old school, and I think a message delivered on paper is less easy to discard than an email) -- here's the campaign manager:

The Hon. Julie Chavez Rodriguez
The White House
1600 Pennsylvania NW
Washington, DC 20500

I've sent the campaign 5 letters so far, including ideas for spot ads and script suggestions. Who knows if anyone will see them or be impressed. Gotta try.

 

[hurtinbuckaroo]

Dementia testing champion

Felonious DJT

 

[TomC]

To send your specific ideas to the Biden campaign, via snail mail (which I prefer -- I'm old school, and I think a message delivered on paper is less easy to discard than an email) -- here's the campaign manager:

This is important.

Back when a married couple and I were spearheading a Stop the War effort, in the lead up to the Iraq Invasion, she explained this. She had low level friends in the government, like intern level. They'd explained the priorities of contacting your representative.
E-mails mostly get ignored and deleted en masse. Form letters weren't treated very differently.
What got attention was a hand written, addressed, and stamped missive. That meant the constituent really cared about the issue.

They bought a big roll of stamps, I bought a batch of nice stationary with envelopes. We photocopied a list of points and addresses, and gave them to anyone who would agree to hand write, in their own words, and mail a letter to their congressman or whatever.

It matters how much effort the constituent puts into the missive.
Tom

 

[bilby]

Back when a married couple and I were spearheading a Stop the War effort, in the lead up to the Iraq Invasion, she explained this. She had low level friends in the government, like intern level. They'd explained the priorities of contacting your representative.
E-mails mostly get ignored and deleted en masse. Form letters weren't treated very differently.
What got attention was a hand written, addressed, and stamped missive. That meant the constituent really cared about the issue.

They bought a big roll of stamps, I bought a batch of nice stationary with envelopes. We photocopied a list of points and addresses, and gave them to anyone who would agree to hand write, in their own words, and mail a letter to their congressman or whatever.

So, you suceeeded in stopping the invasion of Iraq, then?

Or is this a detailed, step-by-step, set of instructions on how to be ignored while feeling as though you were less ignored than the other people they ignored?

 

[TomC]

Back when a married couple and I were spearheading a Stop the War effort, in the lead up to the Iraq Invasion, she explained this. She had low level friends in the government, like intern level. They'd explained the priorities of contacting your representative.
E-mails mostly get ignored and deleted en masse. Form letters weren't treated very differently.
What got attention was a hand written, addressed, and stamped missive. That meant the constituent really cared about the issue.

They bought a big roll of stamps, I bought a batch of nice stationary with envelopes. We photocopied a list of points and addresses, and gave them to anyone who would agree to hand write, in their own words, and mail a letter to their congressman or whatever.

So, you suceeeded in stopping the invasion of Iraq, then?

Or is this a detailed, step-by-step, set of instructions on how to be ignored while feeling as though you were less ignored than the other people they ignored?

Perhaps you didn't notice the part of the post I quoted and responded to?
Tomorrow

 

[Swammerdami]

So, you suceeeded in stopping the invasion of Iraq, then?

Or is this a detailed, step-by-step, set of instructions on how to be ignored while feeling as though you were less ignored than the other people they ignored?

Even a White House Special Assistant or the Vice President is likely to end up with his/her advice ignored. That's just the way large human organizations work. Or is your point that if you can't be Dictator you don't want to be involved at all?

The discussion is about how to change a one-in-a-million chance of having effect into a one-in-a-thousand chance. If a thousand citizens each operate that one-in-a-thousand chance, maybe there WILL be some effect.

I've never been very active politically, but I have had several letters to the New York Times published. While their net effect on policy was doubtless minuscule, they probably had a better chance than just casting a vote.

 

[bilby]

Back when a married couple and I were spearheading a Stop the War effort, in the lead up to the Iraq Invasion, she explained this. She had low level friends in the government, like intern level. They'd explained the priorities of contacting your representative.
E-mails mostly get ignored and deleted en masse. Form letters weren't treated very differently.
What got attention was a hand written, addressed, and stamped missive. That meant the constituent really cared about the issue.

They bought a big roll of stamps, I bought a batch of nice stationary with envelopes. We photocopied a list of points and addresses, and gave them to anyone who would agree to hand write, in their own words, and mail a letter to their congressman or whatever.

So, you suceeeded in stopping the invasion of Iraq, then?

Or is this a detailed, step-by-step, set of instructions on how to be ignored while feeling as though you were less ignored than the other people they ignored?

Perhaps you didn't notice the part of the post I quoted and responded to?
Tomorrow

What you were responding to is completely irrelevant to the fact that your claim "What got attention was..." is, in fact, untrue.

You contrasted your approach with other approaches, such as "E-mails", which "mostly get ignored and deleted en masse", and "Form letters", which you say "weren't treated very differently".

And yet, your alternative approach had exactly the same outcome that you deride for these other approaches.

You are promoting a mythical tale in which the moral you derive is not in any way consequent from the story you told.

 

[bilby]

The discussion is about how to change a one-in-a-million chance of having effect into a one-in-a-thousand chance. If a thousand citizens each operate that one-in-a-thousand chance, maybe there WILL be some effect.

And the story claims that an email is less effective than a handwritten letter. But there's no evidence that this is true; As you correctly note, it is likely that neither has any effect whatsoever.

If, by some incredible stroke of luck, you are able to present a concept, or piece of evidence, or train of logic, that could actually influence the decision, then we have no reason to believe that this will be less effective if presented in email form, than if presented as a handwritten letter.

If a person is disinterested in the communications they receive, they are perhaps more likely to see a sentence in an email preview as they delete the message from their inbox than they are to see a sentence on a letter that is in an envelope they never open.

Perhaps not; Maybe a handwritten letter does have a better chance of being looked at. But that is far from certain, and Tom's anecdote (that he presents in support of the handwritten letter approach) constitutes evidence against his claim, not for it.

Which approach is more effective probably depends on the (unknown) habits of the recipient.