top of page
  • publiusfederalist

Understanding Decision-Making Differences - Right vs. Left

Updated: Jun 29, 2022

Often, people on the Right, or at least the Conservatives, don’t understand how the Left makes decisions or how they can ignore proven facts or disagree with published peer-reviewed information. This is very frustrating for those on the Right. This impacts political decisions, ad campaigns, and even relationships.

To better understand the Left’s mind, we must understand their motivation. What does the Left consider when making a decision? Once understood, the Right can legislate more effectively or improve relationships, and most importantly, COMMUNICATE. Imagine the possibility!

First, let’s set a baseline for Conservatism. Conservatives by nature make their decisions based on historical or current facts/figures that have or will be proven – Critical Thinking. They depend on their knowledge and curiosity on a topic. They use their past experience and apply common sense to new issues and look for facts or figures that confirm. Once the Conservative has applied Critical Thinking, they will make a decision. This decision will remain a constant, unless new proven facts/figures are discovered that alter their conclusion. Conservatives can change positions, if there is an overriding reason and rational data to support change.

The Right-mindset is typically constructed on four guiding principles:

1. Risk of Life is based on personal decisions not by the Government

2. Markets in general, can be liberated and do don’t need controls by the Government

3. Natural Laws are defined by a Theological Perspective and are Objective Theologically

4. Liberty is defined by what is possible by the Citizens with a constrained Government

Understanding How the Left, or Progressives, or Liberals Make Decisions

The Left make decisions using a totally different process that confounds Conservatives. Conservatives don’t understand the Left’s position or how they reach their conclusion. Conservatives might even get upset and usually stop listening if not understood. At this point there is NO communication happening.

The Left typically utilizes “Emotions” in their decisions. They don’t follow the Conservative Critical Thinking process. Emotions literally establish a physical-like bond to the position, policy, activity, or whatever “it” is. Once the emotional bond is established, it cannot be broken, regardless on any proven truth, facts, figures, or logic - unless a new emotional bond can be established. This is the key for Conservatives to reshape their argument. The Conservative must find a way to establish a new emotional bond to whatever they are trying to get the Left to adopt – without the emotional connection, nothing, I do mean NOTHING will change.

When the Left is corned where facts or truth become undeniable, they still will not accept. The Left will either change the definition of a term or call the Conservative a racist or white supremist. The Left will use any means to terminate the discussion, they will even try to censor the Conservative. In the Left’s mind, the ends justify the means. If Conservatives confronts the Left on this tactic, the Left descends to tactics that attempt to destroy the Conservative.

For example: The recent protesting of Supreme Court Justice Brett Kavanaugh at his home. Even though protestors were violating Federal Law by protesting at the home of Judge Kavanaugh to change his pending Roe v. Wade decision violating (18 U.S.C. 1507). The Justice Department chose to do nothing.

Proof of this disparity: How many times do you hear a Conservative say, “I think” versus a Liberal saying, “I feel”? Which phrase is based on logic and which one is based on emotions?

The Left has used simplified terminology in their titles of Bills for years. The Left will label Bills simply so they can be remembered vs the Right’s Bills which sounds like a college term paper footnote and is not easily remembered. Just like the headline in a newspaper; the body of the article may have little to nothing related to the Headline. The Headline grabs your attention, as the author desired, and it is what you normally remember. Finally, we have learned that ultimately the Bills that the Left construct and pass only tend to have 30-40% or less of the resources earmarked for the solution they propose. The remaining balance have been tacked on as PORK and used for other Leftist agendas or favored organizations.

To better understand the mind of the Left, a baseline needs to be established. We need to understand how the Left-mind has been constructed. There are four guiding principles.

1. Risk of Life can and should be controlled by the Government

2. Markets in general, need to be controlled by the Government

3. Natural Laws are defined by an Objective Perspective as defined by the Government

4. Liberty is defined by what is permitted by the Government

The solution for the Right: To help those citizens that have been engulfed into the Let’s approach to this kind of decision making, the Right must develop similar approaches to capture the Left’s Constituents in such a manner to win them over to the “Right-minded” solutions in opposition to the way the Left delivers their message. Learn from the Left. Find or create an emotional connection for whatever the Right is trying to pass or argument that should be won. Right-minded people can do this, it is not easy, but can be accomplished with additional emotion-based thought. If you still have Liberal friends, ask them for their input or seek the opinion with a Millennial.

Practice Active Listening to obtain the messaging (the Words) that not only captures the essence of the Bill, but clearly show all, or nearly all, of the projected resource utilization to meet the objectives. Also, it should be noted, from our perspective, NO part of the Bill should be funding Left or Right pet objectives (PORK).

Example of Left Legislation:

Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act, or Obamacare. There was nothing “affordable” about it – still. It was passed by bending the rules. Again, the Left lied to their Constituents to justify this Bill. People need healthcare, and who could argue with having it “affordable”. Once established as a benefit, it is almost impossible to eliminate it. Many on the Right actually agree with Obamacare, mostly RINOs.

Example of a Pending Republican Bill:

H.R. 1934 by Michael McCaul. “Promoting United States International Leadership in 5G Act of 2021”.

First of all, many Americans, especially of the Left either don’t understand what 5G is or they don’t think we (the United States) should be Leaders – that is not fair. The Bill is a good idea, but experts give this Bill a 4% chance of passing, which is sad since we compete globally.

The Left’s approach this totally different. There is no emotional connection as it stands. The Left would call this Bill; “Universal Fairness Act”. First off, it is shorter, catchy, and is would be about “Fairness” – the church they live in. They always want “Fairness”. It is similar to “Climate Change”. What a perfect word or phrase choice. It covers all aspects of climate and cannot be denied. The climate is always changing. If you are opposed to this, are you a “Climate Denier” (very negative; Example: Are you still beating your wife? No correct answer or reply possible. Tie in “Universal” and you have Left (their Constituents’) support.

Leftist Terminology / Hot Buttons to develop Legislation or Win Arguments

Feels like, Fairness or Fair, Equity, Change, Progressive, organizer, diversity, inclusion, dis-information, invest in the future, disadvantaged, grassroots, rainforest, economic or social justice, challenged, asylum seekers, women’s rights, sophisticated, cutting edge, pushing the envelope, residentially challenged, street person, food insecure, under-served, suboptimal outcome, shared responsibility, living wage, wealth concentration, sustainable, speaking truth to power, disenfranchisement, balanced solution, common-sense solution (they have none), infrastructure, gray employment, solidarity, hate speech, religious right, religious extremists, takes a village, for our future, Agenda 21, Child at risk, social responsibility, human rights, mainstreaming, gender reassignment, universal (healthcare), watchdog, assault weapons (whatever they are?), senseless gun violence, world class, global citizen, tolerance, inclusion, acceptance, open-mindedness, understanding, & love is love.

Examples of Actual Democratic Bills

(Using the Emotional Strategy)

HR 1629 Fairness in Orphan Drug Exclusivity Act

HR 7790 Infant Formula Supplemental Appropriations Act

HR 396 Transit Security Grant Program Flexibility Act

HR 9051 CASH Act (Caring for Americans with Supplemental Help)

HR 4439 Creating Hope Reauthorization Act

HR 1916 Ensuring Lasting Smiles Act

HR 3884 More Act – (Marijuana Opportunity Reinvestment & Expungement Act

HR 1693 EQUAL Act (Eliminating a Quantifiable Unjust Application of the Law) Act

HR 5376 Build Back Better Act (2% Chance, no cosponsors)

HR 1711 Financial Inclusion in Banking Act

HR 204 STEM Opportunities Act (Science Technology Engineering & Math)

HR 1754 MEDIA Diversity Act (Measuring the Economic Driving Investments and Access for Diversity Act)

HR 3110 PUMP for Nursing Mothers Act (Providing Urgent Maternal Protections for Nursing Mothers) Act

S 1941 MAPS Act (Metropolitan Area Protection and Standardization) Act

S 2293 CREW Act (Civilian Reservist Emergency Workforce) Act

S 442 BRIGHT Act (Bulb Replacement Improving Government with High-Efficiency Technology) Act

S 693 No CORRUPTION Act (No Congressional Obligated Recurring Revenue Used as Pensions To

Incarcerated Officials Now) Act

S 3969 PAVA Program Inclusion Act (Protection and Advocacy for Voting Access Program Inclusion) Act

S 2089 Burial Equity for Guards Act

S 5086 Senate Shared Employee Act

S 2274 Federal Employee Fair Treatment Act

How Republicans adopt Democratic Strategy in Naming Bills

(Sample Bill Names)

Disenfranchisement Protection Act –> Voter ID Bill

Universal Society Act (U.S.A) –> Police Funding for Bullet Proof Vests

Responsible Economic Solutions Powering Environmental Conservation Tomorrow (RESPECT) –> Tax Cuts

Sub-optimal Under-served Children’s Act –> Home & Private School Tax Credit

Healthcare Optimal Progressive Equity Act (H.O.P.E.) –> Funding to arm teachers at schools K-12

Fair Inclusion of National Equality Act (F.I.N.E.) –> Bill to open up of ANWAR Oil Field in Alaska

For Reference the Federalist 2.0 Definition of Common Sense

There is a definition of Common Sense that needs to be developed that is or has a Conservative point of view, that definition includes the following:

1) Sensibility or common sense, is the emotional impact words have on another human being across society and groups.

2) Political Common Sense tells us that something is not right within the world of politics (a political statement, a political decision, legislation, and political efforts).

3) Some event for some reason does not “feel” right, there is a sense that it does not make sense, and when checking with others that you know, they chime in and just repeat the view, they too do not feel it is right (this makes the “sense” COMMON).

4) This is your sensibility, an intuitive understanding that something is not going to work long-term (or even the short-term).

From a Conservative standpoint, this “Ability” is derived from two components, your senses, and your reason/logic. Where these two, if aligned properly, provide you with a sense of Sovereignty such that the Conservative thinker can find alignment; the belief in Free Will, knows and takes responsibility for their life and action, has been taught the proper deployment of logic and strives to be virtuous. Where the Left’s emotional alignment has broken one or more of the four mentioned components mentioned above.

Developed by Federalist 2.0 and Samuel’s Mission - All Rights Reserved ©2022

45 views0 comments

Recent Posts

See All
bottom of page