Learn English – What does ‘Red meat rhetoric’ exactly mean

expressions

I see quite often the expression 'Red meat rhetoric’ these days in journals, for example

Obama’s red meat rhetoric –CNN Conservative Media July 7.

Mitt Romney delivers red meat rhetoric to CPAC Crowd. – National Journal Feb. 11.

Tim Pawlenty needed red meat rhetoric – I forgot the source.

I checked the definition of this expression on both Cambridge Dictionary online and Merriam-Webster com. Neither of them registers it. I checked Google Ngram. It shows growing rise of the usage of ‘Red meat,’ notably coming into 1980s, but no ‘Red meat rhetoric' registration.

I found two posts defining the word in Word Reference Com. Language Forum, which say;

  • This is rather like the contrast between an aggressively carnivorous creature, an eater of red meat – perhaps a hyena; and a more gentle and judicious creature, a muncher of leaves and fruit – perhaps an orangutan

  • Red meat" rhetoric is rhetoric that you can "chew on". "Chew on" = "think about".
    As opposed to rhetoric that you can "swallow whole," predigested.

I don’t know either the above definitions are right or not, but they feel very loose. Can you provide me with a more concise and exact meaning of Red meat rhetoric?

Best Answer

From "Looking for Red Meat Political Terms That Won't Bring a Hail of Dead Cats" (June 12, 2008):

WILLIAM SAFIRE: I was looking for some criticism of people who were defeatist, who thought that we could never win in Vietnam. And so I came up with the nattering nabobs of negativism. That is known as red meat rhetoric. When you talk about 'there is no red meat in this speech,' that means there is no ammunition you can feed your supporters to use or throw into the cage of a lion that was hungry.

So basically he says 'red meat rhetoric' is about making substantial, "nutritious" statements, not beating about the bush or hand-waving with general terms. So it involves a bit of both of your definitions. It can also dip into a populist speech.

Related Topic