Honest, I don’t remember exactly when it was, but it seems it was before I went into the Marines that I heard on the TV that commercials are designed for six-graders. Most people don’t like more complex things explained to them. So, if you hope to sell your product, you make sure the commercials are simple and don’t require a PhD to understand, even if your target sales is for PhDs.

I guess, in a way, we as commercial watchers are lazy. We really don’t want our minds taxed after working hard all day. On the other hand, maybe the PhDs are too smart too buy products they don’t need, especially the overpriced ones.

I suppose it does have one other side effect. It might actually make it so the commercials aren’t as expensive. After all, isn’t it all about that important bottom line?

I have taken writing tests before. I don’t know if they still have them, but according to the tests, I write at about sixth grade level. Now isn’t that convenient. My readers do not need to strain their brains in order to understand what I have to say. I guess I could say that it is convenient to be less intelligent.

Thing is, (Shouldn’t use those words so much. I’ve been trying to break myself of that.) I was considering what I heard way back then and associated it with something I heard yesterday. If it works better to write commercials for 6th graders, maybe it is good to write political ads for 6th graders.

I got to thinking, is this a good thing. Do we really want the politicians to talk to us as if we are all sixth graders? Yet it would appear It’s common practice. Reagan was known as the great communicator. Maybe it was because his ads didn’t require so much thought. As the guy said, “Keep it simple stupid.”

Just so there are no misunderstandings. it’s not my words. I did not mean to imply that my readers are stupid. However, the saying has been altered to a short abbreviation, KISS.

It is something of a disadvantage for Republicans. The dems make a simple statement that sounds good and it takes hours for us Republicans to explain why the statement isn’t true. For instance, the dems say how nice it is to tax the rich and provide for the poor. Sounds good. Doesn’t work. Never did. And yet we spend hours and hours explaining why and the general public still can’t understand it.

The same thing can be said of many things the dems try to tell us is good, open borders, weak military, and de-funding the police. (Hint: Since de-funding police, crime has sky rocketed. Since the border was opened, fentanyl has gone from about 50 thousand deaths a year to about 150 thousand a year. Tell me how that worked out, but it sounded good didn’t it. In a way, that is perhaps one of the most expensive decisions Old Joe made. It cost us more lives than Vietnam, both sides. It is why I don’t call him president. He will answer to God for all those deaths.)

It is why I don’t like what the dems are doing. It is especially why I don’t like the methods and the means of Old Joe.

At one time, Democrats and Republicans tried to maintained a closed border, a strong defense and strong law enforcement. Since Obama, not so much. Since Old Joe, even worse.

Then again, if they can successfully treat their followers as 6th graders, what can we expect.