Three months ago, walking through the downtown streets of Austin, TX or Portland, OR, you’d be likely to see some semi-hip Millennial wearing a too-tight t-shirt with the phrase “Stay Weird” or “Keep Austin Weird.” Fast forward to today, and the term “weird” has evolved into the political critique du jour.

But, like, every👏 minute👏 of👏 every👏 jour👏.

If you’re the type of comms pro who tries to stay on top of national politics, then you likely tune into cable news. And in the past couple weeks, if you’ve tuned into CNN or MSNBC, you’ve probably noticed the word “weird” being directed at conservatives by Dem politicians or strategists ad nauseam. Maybe your initial reaction was, “huh???” Name calling’s not a typical “device” employed by heavily message-trained liberals on air. But then you might’ve also noticed the triumphant shit-grins that started following the use of the weird-wording on-air.

These Democrats were very pleased with themselves.

The mass social media chorus of accusations of MAGA movement weirdness by liberals, along with a lot of enthusiastic “think pieces,” followed right behind the initial wave of cable news hits.

For once — according to these digital pundits — the Democratic party has started to speak with one voice in a way that may energize young people to think differently about the Republicans whose antics should offend them so much. Known for so long as a “big tent” party, Democrats have always struggled to speak with a common language.

And, to be fair, there’s been definite impact from this fairly short-lived pattern of attack. Google Trends shows that searches for the word “weird” in news have skyrocketed over the past week, where there really was no inquiry into the word before. The people definitely want to know “who the hell is weird???”

But really? Is junior high name calling going to cut it and miraculously push Democrats to simultaneous victories that put the first woman president in the White House, while holding the Senate and reclaiming the House? Will uniting behind the word “weird” put the multitude of high-stakes ballot initiatives into perspective for voters or help stave off more hyper-local upheaval of school boards across the country?

The prospects seem a little thin to these authors.

Yes, yes, yes — common sense and tons of election cycles tell us that politicians or issue strategists can create a boogeyman out of almost anything. And there’s definitely a time to do that. But in an election cycle in which the population demographics show us that either candidate at the top of the ticket has to actually convert over independent or undecided (or even decided-in-the-other-direction) portions of the electorate to eek out a win in the Electoral College, how’s a “weird” label going to influence significant cohorts of voters to endorse your position?

Well, seems like Democrats may actually have to refocus on spotlighting…a position. And yes — that is hard; it takes intense work; there is a ton of investment involved in local organizing. But that’s the job. And that’s what wins elections. We can guarantee you it’s not name calling (especially against one of the most proven name callers in our nation).

Taking a step back, it’s fairly simple to assume that some extremely well compensated consultant came to the table with some quantitative research, wrote a strategic memo touting the power of the word “weird” and worked with party gatekeepers to circulate some talking points that were quickly adopted as pundits saw a little traction in some early TV interviews.

And while thinking outside the box is always welcomed by these newsletter authors, banking one’s messaging strategy on the deepest insult a 13 year old can levy against a classroom foe….it’s just not a good look nor a winning political approach. 🤷

What your thoughts about the "weird" line of attack? Hit us at diemcomments@gmail.com to let us know.