Cognitively framing voters' minds

I was reading a post in Tikkun about how to win elections in national politics. It is not necessarily about the realities of the issues that inform voters' decisions. In The Reality of the Political Mind, George Lakoff writes that,
"Election campaigns are primarily about the realities of voters' minds, which depend on how the candidates and the external realities are cognitively framed. They can be framed honestly or deceptively, effectively or clumsily. And they are always framed from the perspective of a worldview."
Lakoff gives a very poignant analysis of how Republicans shrewdly appeal to swing voters through metaphor.
He writes that,
"(The)Palin nomination is not basically about external realities and what Democrats call issues, but about the symbolic mechanisms of the political mind-the worldviews, frames, metaphors, cultural narratives, and stereotypes. Her job is to speak the language of conservatism, activate the conservative view of the world, and use the advantages that conservatives have in dominating political discourse. Conservative family values are strict and apply via metaphorical thought to the nation: good vs. evil, authority, the use of force, toughness and discipline, individual (versus social) responsibility, and tough love. Hence, social programs are immoral because they violate discipline and individual responsibility. Guns and the military show force and discipline. Man is above nature;"
Lakoff writes that Pallin embodies this metaphor.
"Palin is the mom in the strict father family, upholding conservative values. Palin is tough: she shoots, skins, and eats caribou. She is disciplined: raising five kids with a major career. She lives her values: she has a Downs-syndrome baby that she refused to abort. She has the image of the ideal conservative mom: pretty, perky, feminine, Bible-toting, and fitting into the ideal conservative family. And she fits the stereotype of America as small-town America. It is Reagan's morning-in-America image. Where Obama thought of capturing the West, she is running for Sweetheart of the West."

Lakoff argues that these metaphors form an archetype that has been embedded in working-class culture through repetition. The uber- motivational speaker, Anthony Robbins would call this neuro-linguistic programing on a very large scale.
The script will sound familiar. Lakoff predicts:

"Palin will appeal strongly to conservative populists, attacking Obama and Biden as pointy-headed, tax-and-spend, latte liberals. The tactic is to divert attention from difficult realities to powerful symbolism."

I have previously written in this blog about how narrative is a powerful tool to help us process the complex amounts of information we encounter in our lives. If the multitude (and magnitude) of issues facing undecided voters harbours confusion, a narrative crafted with an accute sense for the cultural gestalt of these target voters will prove eminently persuasive.

I don't want this post to give readers of this blog the impression that I am escaping the responsibility of answering my own question, How does the artist sense the balance?

I will start by describing my bafflement at how differently people have reacted to McCain's choice of Sarah Pallin for VP. I exist in social and professional circles that are full of people who reacted one way to her political emergence. It is inconceivable to anyone in these circles to understand why anyone could feel differently. I read blogs, newspapers, hear television and learn that an equal, opposite reaction has occured with other people in this country. Using the lens of my interest in the intersection of different social worlds, I want to know what we can mine from the gridlocked collisions of these competing cultural frames. Is there another (third?) narrative that can compassionately listen to the competing metaphors from the left and the right, and create something new? I hope Barack Obama remembers his message from the 2004 Democratic convention, talking not about red states, or blue states, but United States. My sense here, is that the balance for undecided voters lies with candidates who can listen to all sides of a cultural divide, establishing a connection via compassion, which is the bridge to developing the legitimacy to speak for everyone.