Although it is impossible to know in advance the credibility of political messages, such persuasive discourse can be analyzed in a non-partisan, common sense way using predictable patterns in content and form. The content of a candidate's message can be summarized as "I am competent and trustworthy; from me, you'll get 'more good' and 'less bad.'" However individuals define good and bad, expect from those speaking to the haves a conservative rhetoric stressing protection of the good and prevention of the bad, and expect from those speaking to the have-nots a progressive rhetoric stressing relief from the bad and acquisition of the good. The "pitch" and the "pep talk" are two common forms of persuasion. Listeners can evaluate the five-part pitch strategy by asking what techniques were used to get the listeners' attention, to build confidence in the speaker's trustworthiness, and to stimulate desire for the product or program. Listeners can also ask whether any urgency stressing techniques were used, and what response the speaker was seeking. The pep talk, which seeks committed collective action, usually follows a pattern of threat/bonding/cause/response. Listeners can evaluate this pattern by asking what the threat is, what words and nonverbal messages were used to bond the group, what the cause being defended is, and what response the speaker was seeking. (HTH)