Advocacy has three pillars:
Reason: The facts involved with the advocacy are linked toward a call to action in a self-consistent, fallacy free, logical, common sense way. The advocate takes facts, frames them into context, linking them together in a way that compels others to act on, identify with, or simply be impacted by the advocacy. Rational.
Character: When we are acting as advocates our own character has a significant impact on the potential of the advocacy to be successful. Good advocacy being delivered by a buffoon or ass, for example, won't be given the credence the very same advocacy would be when delivered by somebody of respectable character. Credence.
Emotion: Advocacy often involves strong emotional components. In fact, good advocacy mandates emotional resonance as much as it does the other pillars. It is often a mistake to diminish emotional arguments when doing advocacy, and this is probably the most common mistake or confusion between advocacy and the more formal debate. Empathy.
Though we so often frame politics in terms of debate, really it's advocacy more than it is anything else. We are looking to find common ground and drive people toward consensus more than anything else.
So what does this have to do with personification vs vilification? Read on for some potent advocacy techniques you can use to impact others and punch through the Republican noise machine!
Please thank this Kossack, who prodded me into writing this. After some light discussion on Kosmail, it became obvious this diary dovetailed nicely. IMHO, worth a complimentary read.