i.
Fear of loss of jobs. Here it would seem very recommendable to use intensively testimonials of very simple people in precarious situations that might loose their job, or have already lost it because of the non approval of CAFTA. This is also vital to reinforce the idea that this is not a struggle of the rich against the poor. In the same way, it is possible that in some specific regions it would have a great impact to show specific cases of companies that have postponed investments, that have cut shifts or that are considering leaving the country due to the non approval of CAFTA.
ii.
Fear of attack to the democratic institutions. It is crucial to make YES the equivalent of democracy and institutionality (this is what Eduardo Ulibarri said: we have to fill YES with a content of values) and make NO the equivalent of violence and disloyalty to democracy. There is something very important here: this campaign is no longer rational and, in consequence, about the contents of CAFTA. So, the argument of the defence of democracy is the only resource we have left to move the emotions of the people who favour CAFTA. At this moment the people in favour not only don’t have any motivation, but feel intimidated by the motivation shown by the NO people. We have to understand one thing: no one is willing to “die” for free trade, but maybe they would for democracy. We have to give YES an ethical motivation, and not only an instrumental one.
iii.
Fear to the foreign influence in the NO. We have to insist everywhere on the connection of the NO with Fidel, Chaves and Ortega, in very strident terms. It is possible that this kind of campaign might be uncomfortable to some people, but it is almost sure that it can have a considerable impact amongst the simplest people, which is where we have the most serious problems.
iv.
Fear of the consequences of a triumph of NO on the Government. All the surveys show an important degree of satisfaction with the President and the government. Many people simply haven’t made the connection that a triumph of NO in the referendum will leave the government in a precarious situation, with its effectiveness totally reduced, and the country in a situation of poor governance. That connection has to be induced. This is an argument that might only work for certain sectors, but it can be very effective in planting doubt. There are three questions that have to be planted in the minds of people, that can make their finger shake if they are planning to vote NO: