IT seems to me that Republicans should wonder as to why they do not win more elections. They are not perfect, but they have been given significant advantages. They are in favor of increased wealth, more freedom, basic decent values and patriotism. And, as never could have been imagined if it had not happened, they have been given the issue of motherhood, while their main opponents are strongly in favor of all forms of infanticide. Yet the Party continues to be unable to exploit these advantages. I offer a reason why.
First, I posit the following. Despite what any expert says, people often do not vote to their obvious advantage. They often vote irrationally, and know it. This happens most often when the voters “like” a candidate. They often disregard policies and support someone because he is more like-able than the other guys. For example, most Blacks will vote for another Black, because he is “one of us.” Thus, a problem the republicans face is becoming more like-able. I believe that I found a good example of how they are not.
“National Review” was (still is?) THE source of upper-class Conservative expressions. I recently came across a copy and read part of it, in the arts section. It is highly questionable that such a publication should have such a section. It is more likely to annoy readers than to please them. The author of the article in question wrote a review of a book evaluating the song writer team of Richard Rodgers and Oscar Hammerstein. These guys composed mainly for Broadway and Hollywood musicals.
To put it briefly the team was excessively successful in both quantity and quality. The reviewer, accepting a common temptation, felt the need to be negatively critical. He thus could have written that their music (or melodies or subjects) was, well.. routine, repetitive, etc. Instead he declared them to be (this is not a joke) quotidian. Really. I know this word, but I am odd. I even heard it used, correctly---but only once in my life! It means daily, that is occurring every day, as with a daily newspaper.
My point is NOT that the author is actually implying that the songs were apparently “delivered(?) to producers every day. I even can allow, in theory, a critical comment on the music. However, the choice of the obscure word is unfortunately symbolic. It can only serve to annoy most readers, who will need to stop to find out what it means. The less than subtle message is the following. “I know more words than you do. Am I not wonderful?” In other words: “I am not like you.” And not likeable is similar in nature and word selection to “not like.” And this is close to not voted for. We regular people are not usually favorably impressed by over schooled snobs. We have to overcome such reactions in order to vote for them. It all works against winning elections.
And this habit of pride is rather common, almost quotidian. At least he did not use any neologisms.
Comments