AP Reporter Responds To Chris Hayes Panel Debate On Racism Of Droppin=?windows-1252?Q?=92_G=92s_?=From Obama Speech

Victor Steinbok aardvark66 at GMAIL.COM
Fri Sep 30 02:09:24 UTC 2011

Really? Tell that to Bill Clinton--he's the only one in recent memory
who managed to get nominated or elected while being an effective
code-switcher. The rest tend to be either academic (Gore, Dukakis),
droning (Bush Sr., Dole, Kerry), semi-flamboyant (and petulant--McCain),
or "folksy" (Reagan, Bush Jr.). I don't think, anyone had accused
Clinton of pandering because of the way he talked--perhaps because of
poll-watching and being "flexible" on some positions, but not because of
the language he used.

Given the choice of whether being accused of pandering because of
code-switching or because of flip-flopping on issues, I suspect, most
politicians will choose the former. This is most certainly NOT the
choice that would have worked in the Republican party since 2001 and
it's getting progressively worse. They would rather conform on issues,
than on the way they talk to different audiences. Romney is an extreme
case, but the entire party, up and down the ranks, is guilty of the same
thing. And, of course, it's a chain reaction.


On 9/29/2011 1:20 PM, Dan Goncharoff wrote:
> ...
> I think any politician who changes the way they speak based on their
> audience runs the risk of accusations of pandering.
> DanG

The American Dialect Society - http://www.americandialect.org

More information about the Ads-l mailing list