Why progressive ideals are struggling in the United States

Just doing some more thinkin' about cognition and how people are able to reason better with positive language than negative language. This is truly something to think about in context of the previous election. What was the liberal agenda? To remove the Bush Administration from power. We had the evidence...more than was ever needed to oust this guy and his lackeys, but what held the nation back from doing that...I think the answer lies in positive vs. negative language.

By this, I don't mean attack ads. Considering the number of attack ad's from both of the major parties, that would have never made a difference. What I mean by positive and negative language was in the manner that the language was phrased. So were the attacks phrased to be a committed attack (i.e. John Kerry first voted for the war, then voted against funding it) or a omittive attack (i.e. George W. Bush has not kept his promise for funding his No Child Left Behind education plan). My hypothesis is that if you tallied up the number of committive and omitive attacks in the past election, you would see that Bush's campaign had more positive attacks than John Kerry's campaign, and that might be why so many people had difficulty comprehending why progressives didn't see G. Dub in as favorable a light as the other 59 million Americans.

Until one could do that study, my advice to progressives is to emphasize the parts of our ideals that we already have, and committively affirm that their plans are better for the population as a whole. Start doing that, and we can start washing away the filth from Washington D.C. and the world as a whole.