I’ll insert the standard disclaimer: Jon Chait is a mixed bag. But I think he’s onto something in a column published today about how President Biden and the Democratic Party’s agenda and brand have been squeezed by competing factions within the party. He says there’s still time to set things right before the 2022 and 2024 cycles but warns that time is running short.
The column outlines the list of intraparty grievances, e.g., centrist claims that leftwing slogans like “Defund the Police” hurt the party, countered by leftwing claims that focusing on swing voter concerns alienates the party’s activists. (IMO, there’s some truth to all of these claims because it’s a big, complex country and a big, complex political tent.)
Chait claims the “popularism” strategy (i.e., focus on popular agenda items and don’t talk about policy that doesn’t have broad support) prevails in the Biden White House. I think that’s probably true; it prevailed in the Obama White House too. The problem is that Democratic centrists have settled on creating the (bogus, FWIW) perception that they’re budget hawks as the sole flex that separates them from the progressive wing, and they’ve targeted the popular (and paid for!) programs:
One recent poll asked voters to identify the features of the Build Back Better plan that most appealed to them. The top five were, in order, adding dental and vision benefits to Medicare, home health care for the elderly and disabled, letting Medicare negotiate prescription-drug prices, Medicare coverage for hearing, and free community college. Democratic centrists in the Senate eliminated three of them from the bill completely and gutted a fourth. “Bizarrely,” observed Democratic pollster William Jordan in September, “the parts of Biden’s agenda that are most popular seem to be most at risk right now.”
The article, which is long, acknowledges the battalions of lobbyists armed with suitcases full of cash that accompany these displays of “fiscal responsibility,” which cannot be discounted as a central culprit. But Chait also makes the point that media coverage of figures like Manchin and Sinema so internalize the “view from the C-suite” that they can’t even treat the finance industry, the pharma lobby, etc., as the special interests they are.
Instead, the Beltway media portray strapped college students, poor single moms, people who are dependent on insulin, etc., as “specialist interests” whom these centrists nobly stiff-arm in the name of prudence:
Embattled Democrats have not staged any high-profile gestures to distance themselves from their party on policing, abortion, or guns. Manchin is not walking around toting copies of the lesser-known offensive editions of Dr. Seuss. Instead, moderate Democrats, noted Politico, “tout the Chamber’s backing to bolster their bipartisan cred in swing districts.” While Fox News is blaring constant coverage of cancellations in elite liberal milieus, centrist Democrats focus on blocking the cancellation of billionaire tax loopholes. The Chamber of Commerce has filled a vacuum where the shaping of a culturally moderate wing of the Democratic Party ought to exist.
An Axios story praised Sinema for defying the “woke politics” of her liberal colleagues. Woke has long since escaped its origins in the social-justice left to become a pejorative term that stands for a set of social and cultural norms. But what Sinema has broken away from is not any social-liberal shibboleths but the party’s traditional working-class agenda.
The irony is that the BBB plan as originally outlined was far more fiscally prudent than the infrastructure bill centrists Democrats were so keen to pass. In concept, BBB was paid for by raising taxes on the wealthy, going after tax cheats and empowering Medicare to negotiate for pharmaceuticals. But the party’s centrists have branded the bill as leftwing “entitlement” overreach, and they’re trying like hell to strip out all the means to pay for it.
We’ll see what happens. I’m more optimistic than I was that something will pass. But I think it’s important to acknowledge that the brand of “centrism” on display at the rightward edge of the Democratic caucus isn’t aligned with the “conservatism” espoused by the majority of those pols’ constituents. At all.
Open thread!
rikyrah
Does he acknowledge that our problems can be placed in one place – the Senate.
And, if we were able to pick up some seats, we could make those problems – Manchin and Sinema – irrelevant.
Periodt.
Jim, Foolish Literalist
I think Chamber of Commerce is up there along with “small business” as one of the most misleading terms in politics. People see that and think it’s Ed who owns the local hardware store and Marilyn the realtor who everybody calls when they want to sell their house. “Small business” in political terms means car dealers and medical corporations, and the US Chamber of Commerce is pretty much a lobbying front for the SP 500
ETA: It is a very long piece, and my attention may have gotten fuzzy, but IIANM he never mentions gas prices
glory b
As an aside, can I complain about the appropriation of African American Vernacular English (AAVE) by the media? A LOT of those terms have much more subtle and complex meanings than Dana Bash and company ascribe to them. AAVE is much richer and developed than they ever bother to learn.
Betty Cracker
@glory b: Example?
Villago Delenda Est
“The worst of both worlds.” So, it’s a really dumb not green and mean Bruce Banner we’re talking about?
Sure Lurkalot
Can’t be said enough that the “moderate, centrist” wing of the Dems would be Republicans in just about any other modern era, just that the Republican Party is a revanchist, fascist organization and we are forced to negotiate and fight amongst ourselves. This is the true meaning of Dems in Disarray.
Villago Delenda Est
@Betty Cracker: “Woke”
Villago Delenda Est
@rikyrah: From your lips to FSM’s ears.
Geminid
It’s not surprising that Chait uses the “Centrists versus Progressives” framing that has become a staple of analysis just about everywhere. But I think that at least for the House Democratic Caucus, it actually only applies to about 20 Representatives who occupy either end of the caucus. If Chait were to write of the common political views of the other 200 Democrats, his article would be less provocative, but more useful.
Jim, Foolish Literalist
@Geminid: I actually don’t find it that provocative, maybe because it’s a very long version of what I’ve been saying for a while: a whole lot of Democrats learned the wrong lessons from 2016 (and 2018), didn’t unlearn them after 2020. And as Chait says, there’s no better example of this than Elizabeth Warren’s presidential campaign
Betty Cracker
@Geminid: I don’t think Chait exaggerates their numbers in the article, but maybe I missed it. Our margins are thin enough that tiny factions make a huge difference.
Betty Cracker
@Villago Delenda Est: Dana Bash uses “woke”? Okay then.
Ruckus
@Jim, Foolish Literalist:
As a former small business owner who used to think the chamber of commerce was about small business, until I had an actual chamber interaction, I agree with this. My experience is that the desire to be big business and screw, politely of course, everyone else is exactly their position. I was specifically asked to talk to about and present my new company to the chamber, as a new member of the community. I showed up and was told that I had to pay them to deliver my talk. I asked them why they were wasting my time for trying to be part of the community, when all they were interested in was my bank account and started to walk out. I ended up giving my short talk and never saw or heard from any of the members of the CofC ever again. And my life was better for it.
Geminid
@Sure Lurkalot: When you say “moderate, centrist wing,” who do you mean? The 105 or so Representatives who are not in the 89 member Progressive Caucus? Would moderate New Democrat Caucus member Val Demings be a Republican in another era? Would Tim Ryan? They seem like solid, true blue Democrats to me, and strong Senate candidates for their states. How is either not as good a Democrat as Katie Porter or Mark Pocan?
Jim, Foolish Literalist
I’ve been avoiding mentioning this, but what the hell, it seems relevant. Local hero AOC went back to her favorite NYT writer to claim, again, that Democratic losses were because that ookie old Neo-Liberal corporate consensus Establishment refuses to turn to her and her self-evident awesomeness
Bernie Sanders. Nina Turner. India Walton. Whoever she endorsed in the NYC mayoral primary. All lost in constituencies far bluer than the VA general electorate. And she still tells herself, and anyone who will listen, that she’s an unappreciated political powerhouse who speaks to and for the base of the party.
Sure Lurkalot
@Geminid: I’ll use my own senators…I think Michael Bennet is a centrist Democrat, while Hickenlooper would fit right in with Republicans of the 1980’s. I agree with you that the distinctions are minute and I painted too broad a brush. Thanks for pointing this out.
Anonymous At Work
Chait swings for the fences. He’s a sucker for “teachers’ unions” and “free speech” stuff, but pretty good at calling out inconsistencies and hypocrisy on other topics.
As far as Sinema goes, she needs to get used to every public detail about her being heavily scrutinized as long as she BOTH: (a) draws attention to herself and (b) keeps her agenda hidden from view. She’s creating a lot of interest in filling in the blanks of her agenda but by refusing to fill in the blanks SHE HERSELF CREATED, she should expect her choice of deodorant to be scrutinized by the public.
Kay
@Jim, Foolish Literalist:
Obama created an entire political apparatus, from scratch, because the existing Democratic Party apparatus was so bad. It hasn’t gotten any better.
Reject AOC’s approach if you want, but people have been saying this for 20 years and they are right.
I don’t know what we pay so much for. No one does. We don’t lack funding. Democrats have an absolute small donor machine. It isn’t what we spend, it’s what we spend it ON.
Biden has actually done a lot with student loans, by executive and agency action. Why doesn’t anyone know about it? These people are professionals at marketing, right? Where are they? What do they do all day?
Ksmiami
Again where’s the digital media campaign, the YouTube videos, the weekly speeches, the necessary articulation that the Republican Party is a danger to America etc. ? We need to fucking fight
Almost Retired
Not really on-topic, but the execrable Ted Cruz (with all due respect to excrement) was on Face the Press This Week (I get them all mixed up) and expressed the hope that US athletes would “kick some Commie ass” at the Beijing Olympics. He rendered Margaret Stephantoddoulous absolutely speechless.
lowtechcyclist
For far too long, ‘centrist’ in the Democratic Party has meant legislators who were doing the bidding of corporate interests.
Fortunately, the number of such legislators has diminished.
Unfortunately, we still need some of their votes to pass legislation.
Kay
@Jim, Foolish Literalist:
Some functioning, productive sales team for a political Party could really run with that. Instead they seem to be relying on….NPR to do their work for them? Hit and miss. Oh, well. Feed another billion into the campaign shredder.
Ruckus
@Geminid:
In reality you’ve described American politics. We are a big country that is supposed to reflect the entirety of the population, not just the edges. And the rich edge believes that everyone else is try to steal their wealth, and the poor edge believes that the rich edge is trying to kill them. For those in the middle it’s a crap shoot. The rich edge is wrong, the vast majority just want them to pay their fair share, the poor edge isn’t wrong, the rich are looking for any way to get richer because that is their entire point of living. The squishy middle is just mostly trying to move a bit towards the rich edge and not the poor edge. Now of course it is a bit more complicated than this and there are fractions in each group, but it is not complicated by a whole lot. It’s the methodologies that each group can and do employe that make it harder to see and tell the distinctions. And over the last 200+ yrs it’s the money that has won most often. FDR made an almost joke about the above by recognizing that to be a country of actual free people we had to make these groups at least a bit less about fighting about the money and more about the actual living. Other politicians have this same view but it’s difficult to get them elected with a country that is fighting about power in one way or another and basically stating – fuck rights, living, equality, we want money, either far more or some.
lowtechcyclist
@Ksmiami:
This. But when your party’s leader says good things about what can be accomplished when the parties work together, it’s really hard to run on the opposite message at the same time.
So it would help if Biden would STFU about the virtues of bipartisanship. Those days have passed. The GOP isn’t a loyal opposition, they’re a party dedicated to the destruction of America as we know it. And Dems really need to shout that from the rooftops.
ian
@Sure Lurkalot: Bennet gives me plenty of internal grief (I voted for his primary opponent, Romanoff, in 2010 and 2016) but I think he learned from his two re-election campaigns. Bennet has moved steadily leftwards his entire time in office, and AFAIK, has not been nearly the thorn in his fellow Dem’s side that he was in 2009 and 2010
Edmund Dantes
@Kay: he also tries to act like AOC is running out as soon as she can and acting unprompted. As if no one has spent the preceding times since the election blaming “progressives” for the loss (or even tried to pre blame them for it during the BIF negotiations
Yep. That Dastardly AOC. How dare she respond to people trying to blame her and others for stuff.
Kay
@lowtechcyclist: ‘
You can though. It’s not one message for all groups. They know this. They know AOC’s “youth vote” get different targeting than swing voter senior citizens. Thinking “Biden” has to do all this is just further evidence that the apparatus- the big organization- isn’t functioning. It doesn’t do what it’s supposed to do.
Miss Bianca
@ian: I would tend to agree with this assessment.
Steeplejack
@Sure Lurkalot:
I agree with this. And the “moderate, centrist” Dems are actually conservative, but hardly anyone says that because the term “conservative” is reserved for the (now imaginary) Republicans.
Sure Lurkalot
@ian: Exactly me! I voted for Romanoff v. Bennet and also v. Hick. And I believe Bennet is a decent centrist Dem and Hick is not.
Kay
@Edmund Dantes:
It is the single most common complaint from activist Democrats, “Party people” so not ideologues. The people who just want to win. Obama was actually resented for it. He was like “thanks but no thanks, your machine doesn’t work- we’re making another one”
You have to keep making new ones. It’s a competitive business!
Betty
These so- called centrist Democrats have shown themselves to be putting corporate interests above those of their constituents and by the way, the President’s agenda. True centrists, like Jon Tester, are not doing that. Democrats have to battle Republican lies and a media that will not wake up to the reality that Republicans are out to gain power no matter what. Good messages don’t matter if you can’t get media to give you a platform to deliver them.
Geminid
@Sure Lurkalot: I hope I wasn’t too vehement. I am sometimes immoderate in my defense of moderate Democrats.
Your state and mine (Virginia) are similar in that they both have gone from reddish purple to bluish in the last two decades. Your Senators are also similar to my pair, Tim Kaine and Mark Warner.
In 2018 I saw Jennifer Wexton, Abigail Spanberger, and Elaine Luria flip red seats in Virginia. Luria and Wexton (I think) joined the New Democrat Caucus, while Spanberger hangs out in the Blue Dog Kennel. Next year I will be working with other Democrats to flip my own reddish purple 5th District. I suspect we will need to flip a few nationally to hold the House.
The political situation around me has conditioned my views on Democratic politics, and I often differ with Democrats who I believe live in safely blue districts. I also find myself in conflict with Democrats who live in gerrymandered red districts. I sometimes think this may be a secondary result of gerrymandering: some Democrats who live in these districts identify more with liberal legislators from far away blue districts than with the type of moderate Democrats they’d end up fighting for if their districts were drawn neutrally.
Woodrow/asim
Maybe not. And yet, it is 100% a term that was originally AAVE. From a Merriam-Webster article:
Now? “Woke” is used by too many Conservatives as a pejorative, to bash the Democratic Party — not-so-subtly labeling the Party as beholden to shoving money at Black folx, over all other concerns.
It stuns me that people talk about these terms as if they are sui genesis, without even considering that there are well-funded campaigns to play into prevailing prejudices. What Bush’s campaign did with Willie Horton decades ago, or the long history of efforts to push Creationism into schools? Those same processes, far more polished, practiced, and funded, are playing out with how we’re being pushed into talking about terms like Woke, Defund the Police, and Critical Race Theory, today.
Sure Lurkalot
@Almost Retired: I have noticed a minor move from calling Dems socialists to communists. Maybe to tie into their phony “all shelves are empty” rhetoric?
I had a few items left on my TG list and waited until this morning to avoid the weekend crush. I went around 8 am when from time to time you do see empty spots because the stocking crews are busy. Not today, just freaking burgeoning shelves everywhere.
glory b
@Betty Cracker: “Woke” used to mean someone who is aware of their rights, knowledgeable of the country’s history of race relations, intelligent and informed. Now it’s a perorative, and usually used derisively. It was an admirable trait, someone who has done their homework.
My next TED talk will be about the term “shade.”
Edmund Dantes
@Kay: we’ll also need to make it more permanent. One of Obama’s bigger mistakes was letting his machine go somewhat fallow once they won. Then ramped it back up for his re-election.
Dems need to build more permanent frameworks that outlast elections. That can adapt and add on needed but also aren’t reinventing the wheel every presidential cycle.
Also don’t blackball companies and people that beat your incumbents. Bring them into the fold and learn from them. Pick off their best talent.
but nope. The DNC and DC establishment decided it’s better to lock those people out for having the temerity to challenge the status quo.
Cameron
@Kay: It may not do what it’s supposed to do, but it definitely does what it was designed to do.
glory b
@Woodrow/asim: Thanks. I’m at work today and don’t have much time, your comment was great.
Woodrow/asim
@glory b: Thanks! I happen to be on my lunch break, and these topics are close to my mind, at the moment. :)
Geminid
@Sure Lurkalot: I’ve noticed that use of “communist” too. Maybe Republicans focus-grouped “socialist” and found it wasn’t as scary as they thought it was.
Kay
@Edmund Dantes:
I have to say though, if AOC actually wants to persuade Democratic electeds to do something differently in their campaigns this is the absolute worst way to do that. All they’ll do is dig in. She should talk to them. The whole point of electing her is to get her on the inside. Operate there.
I know it’s a response to progressives being blamed for every Democratic loss, granted, but that’s petty and worse it’s not going to work.
Betty
@Woodrow/asim: It would be great if you or someone the media recognized would be given a national platform to discuss these concepts. Your explanation is so clear and helpful to anyone interested in dialogue and not disparaging others.
Cameron
@Woodrow/asim: I think the conservatives who kick off these campaigns actually have some idea of what the words mean, but they know their followers don’t have a clue. You listen to your street-issue wingnut babbling about “wokeness” and “CRT” and “socialism,” and you realize very quickly that all of these mean the same thing to them: “something bad that Democrats/liberals like.”
glory b
Last Sunday Bash asked Mark Warner if the Democrats were now too “woke” for their own good. Her exact words.
Betty Cracker
@Kay: The dynamic is frighteningly similar to what happened to the Democratic Party in Florida. God knows we don’t want to see that result replicated nationally.
Woodrow/asim
ETA that @glory b posted on this while I was writing this, first!
I swear I was just curious — this is not trying to be a direct attack. That said, a quick search of “Dana Bash woke” found the following:
Above from https://twitter.com/therecount/status/1457358348454711296, posted 11/7/2012.
So yeah, Bash did use the term “woke”, at least once, and in a clearly pejorative sense.
Sure Lurkalot
@Woodrow/asim: Thanks for reference, I learn so much here!
Cue all the substackers writing the same Rittenhouse take, definitely well practiced and funded, but I’m not sure about more polished. I can’t believe that most of these people don’t know how ridiculous they sound, but I have a RWNJ brother, well educated and man he’s an easy mark.
Kay
@Edmund Dantes:
I wonder about that. The conventional wisdom was to blame him, but I wonder if there was resistance to his model, which really was different. It was hugely labor intensive and had a huge bottom rung. I think there are a lot of Democratic consultants who prefer a… top heavy organization :)
They don’t want it flattened out. They want the money to stay at the top. It’s always bothered me because it’s ideologically incorrect for Democrats. Create some jobs, you dopes! Spread it around! If there’s $300k campaign jobs there should be $40k campaign jobs, and there should be a lot of them. There’s all kinds of organizational and operational schemes to use. They don’t even have to make a profit. The money comes in, they spend it.
It’s insane to only look at amount coming in without asking what it’s spent on, and why. They can raise a billion. It doesn’t matter if they spend it poorly.
Hoodie
@lowtechcyclist: It’s not an either/or choice. There are a lot of voters who are not Republican faithful (who are increasingly nutjobs) but could be classified as biased towards Republican candidates by cultural factors such as race or locale and who are vulnerable to bipartisan appeals and caricatures of Democratic positions (e.g., “woke,” “defund the police” and CRT), but are gettable. This is the reservoir of votes that the GOP taps against Democrats, even though many of these voters agree with mainstream Dem policies. I’d agree that simply using “bipartisan” rhetoric gives legitimacy to the entire Republican Party. It would be great if Biden and other Democrats could differentiate these gettable cultural “Republicans” from the bulk of the party apparatus, which should be labeled as captive to extremists and hucksters. I’d like to see Biden specifically go after particular republicans like Greene, Cawthorn, etc., things like “wackos” and “nutjobs” such that the press identifies the GOP with those folks and quits looking for reasonable Republicans, even though many of them may still exist. If some Republicans choose to go along with Dem initiatives, great, Dems should acknowledge them in a backhanded way by saying something like “I’d like to thank the 13 House Republicans who defied their corrupt House leadership and the nutjobs in their caucus to help pass my infrastructure bill.”
Woodrow/asim
Thank you — and yes, there’s some discussions on that front. :)
Mostly, I’m just very lazy, and hate getting into fights over “meaning” and stuff I don’t know/can document, directly. I know I can get a bit one-note, but I like to think of it as not getting outta my lane(s). :)
Betty Cracker
@Woodrow/asim: I wasn’t doubting that Bash used it. just noting the absurdity of that. JFC.
Josie
@Almost Retired:
I have noticed that Cruz is more and more trying to sound like an ignorant, bullying conservative and, in doing so, is beclowning himself. I’m wondering if the true ignorati will recognize his contempt for them at some point and turn on him. I can’t wait to see what ridiculous statements he comes up with next. I can imagine him sitting up nights making notes and trying out stupid phrases to see how they sound.
Woodrow/asim
@Betty Cracker: May I ask that we chalk this up to the challenge of understanding meaning in textual conversations? Again, I had no intent to attack, just wanted to be really clear as to the situation and antecedents.
I honestly apologize for misunderstanding your intent, with that comment.
Kay
@Betty Cracker:
They love it :)
A “wokeness” incident is like the pellet they feed to the substackers. Hit the lever, and out comes the Yale law students and dinner parties, or whatever they’re all fucking het up about.
They can’t quit it now.
Salty Sam
Appropriating an in-group word or phrase and then using it against that group is just another trick “they” use. It’s similar to Karl Rove’s tactic of “attacking their strengths, not weaknesses”. And since political journalism is wired for the conservative machine, they have followed along blindly.
This past summer, I unfortunately got drawn into political discussion with my MAGA Mom. She derisively used “woke” (complete with sarcastic air quotes) in reference to liberals. I feigned innocence and said “y’know Mom, I’ve heard that term a lot lately, but I don’t know what it means- can you explain it to me?” She fumbled a bit before finally saying no, she didn’t know either. Thankfully that ended the “discussion”.
ETA: Woodrow asim got there earlier at #34…
UncleEbeneezer
@glory b: That TED talk will be “lit!”
Betty Cracker
@Woodrow/asim: No apology necessary! Just wanted to be clear I wasn’t doubting what glory said. I asked her for an example because I was curious which word she was talking about (she didn’t specify in the original comment), and I made my comment about Bash in response to someone else.
Geminid
@Kay: Congresswoman Ocasio-Cortez might have been responding defensively, but she making a critique that for years she and her allies have fo been making offensively. I tend to be skeptical of Ocasio-Cortez, and part of this is because we differ on policy. But a whole lot of my wariness is because of her association with the Justice Democrats organization.
They are running a candidate in the Ohio Democratic Senate primary, as is their right. I actually think that’s a good thing, because 1) Tim Ryan will get to tell general election voters, I’m not a leftist, I just beat one, and 2) Ohio Democrats will get a first hand look at the Justice Democrats and their tactics.
zhena gogolia
@glory b: Vomit.
Geminid
@Kay: I am interested to see what @StrikePac comes with regarding political ads. It’s run by Rachel Bitecofer and a couple other women. A political scientist, Bitecofer hit a career crossroads two Aprils ago when her Virginia university denied he a tenure track job. She has since moved home to Oregon, and has taken up political engineering full time. She’s kind of an upstart in that world, and her outsider point of view may make her work more effective.
James E Powell
I think we found the reason why “centrists” are determined to defeat it.
Other MJS
@Woodrow/asim: Thanks for this commentary. I think “woke” still works in the context of something like this poem, but otherwise (especially used by whites) has become irredeemably sarcastic. Language does what it wants.
BTW, I think you mean “sui generis“. :)
sab
@Ruckus: My local chamber broke with the national about 15 uears ago necause the national organization was so damaging to the local members’ political and economic interests. But we are a very blue city.
Edmund Dantes
@Kay: but this isn’t happening in a vacuum. Are you assuming she isn’t talking to them in background? Has anyone put their name to AOC (or others) don’t talk behind the scenes?
It’s why I put in the thing about blackballing. The establishment shit on her and a bunch of other people that did well with good campaigns, and told them no one can hire your campaign companies that helped you or they lose DCCC, DNC, and other central money plus tools the central party runs.
Is she doing this perfectly? No of course not but none of what is happening here is her going out to shit on people just for the sake of shitting on them
Edmund Dantes
@Kay: yeah. Not wholly blaming him. It’s all part and parcel of the problem with the DC political operative cartel.
taumaturgo
@Kay: According to recent statistics elected officials need to raise funds to keep their jobs which have become fundraising.
oatler
Whenever I see “woke” in an article it will inevitably progress to “snowflake” and sometimes to vaguely homophobic names like “soyboy” or even “pajama boy” (remember the Obamacare ad?)
Woodrow/asim
@Other MJS: Hi! Yes, I did mis-spell; was trying to get a lot out between bites, and forgot to double-check my fancy Latin Word of the Day. :)
That said, I do have a couple of quibbles:
In other words, the “why” of it changing matters a lot, and was the point of my comment.
James E Powell
@Kay:
They seem to spend a lot of time talking to each other about each other.
James E Powell
@Kay:
Totally agree. One of the diseases of the Democratic electorate is the wide spread belief that “somebody but definitely not me or us should do something!”
Other MJS
@Woodrow/asim: I don’t disagree with anything you said; I just felt like babbling. :) In particular:
Heartily agree!
James E Powell
@Woodrow/asim:
Even after the insurrection, Dana Bash was declaring a New Tone! from Trump. Jake mocked her for it on the air. She is a stupid asshole of the first order and one of many reasons why we cry Villago Delenda Est!
gene108
@Ksmiami:
Republican politicians do not to much work in demonizing Democrats. That’s left to right-wing think tanks, activist groups like Americans for Prosperity, and right-wing media. There’s coordination between media and politicians on talking points, but there’s much more infrastructure there to support endless repetition of the talking points, even if they aren’t based in reality.
The DNC or some other Democratic should try something to get more attention, but as long as the MSM is more scared of conservatives than Democrats, such efforts will never be as effective as we’d like.
@Kay:
How much do we pay for versus the Koch’s, Mercers, etc.?
Republicans aren’t terribly efficient in messaging. They just seem to have endless funds to keep screwing up and trying something new. The caravans coming in 2018 didn’t work, calling Biden senile and “sleepy” didn’t work, but they kept spitting out crap until they got something with CRT this year.
Democrats need to fund data driven approaches as to what works in turnout, messaging, campaign organization etc. Republican operatives actually have data to base their decisions on, whether it’s polling data or marketing data of some sort. They are fairly scientific in their approach compared to Democrats.
Ksmiami
@lowtechcyclist: agreed. We need to go outside of the dnc clap trap. Fear sells esp when it’s true
Ksmiami
@gene108: we can go around traditional msm. As I said start flooding social media networks and it’ll bubble up
Edmund Dantes
@gene108: the gop is king at repetition and it’s said so often in so many places that it becomes background noise. It’s just there, and because of the media rules it has to be covered.
this is where the media being hardwired for gop truly helps them. But they are also constantly pushing this stuff all the time, non-stop through the think tanks and other stuff.
there just isn’t anything similar on Dem side. They are too focused on immediate election in front. Then it all gets torn down to wait the next time it gets built up.
Fair Economist
@Geminid:
It would apply to 6 on the left (the Squad) and 9 on the right (those dragging their feet on BBB). Probably NONE are willing to really oppose the 205 in the middle – the Squad and Golden cast protest votes on BIF and BBB, respectively, knowing they would have no effect.
The real story here is the unprecedented cooperation within the Democratic party. Remember, the party of “I’m not a member of an organized political party, I’m a Democrat”? Never in American history has a party with such narrow margins been able to get substantive legislation through in the face of implacable resistance from the other party and the media. That *should* be the story, but it won’t be; because the reason for this unprecedented cooperation is they all know it’s “hang together or hang separately” because the other side has turned fascist. And the media does NOT want to talk about the Republicans turning fascist.
Fair Economist
@Ksmiami:
The problem is that the Republicans flood social media with troll networks (largely out of the country, based on the majority of pro-Rittenhouse tweets being from outside the country). We don’t have those kinds of networks, and if we did they’d be exposed and the MSM would “butter emails” the whole business.
I set up a Twitter account and retweet virtually everything decent I see. Of course I’m nothing compared to buildings full of people doing that as a full time job, like Putin has. If enough of us started amplifying, maybe it would make a difference.
Other MJS
I searched “Beltway media” and came up with surprisingly few hits, many not even pejorative (e.g., “Custom communications solutions to meet your business’s unique needs.”). It’s clearly BJ vernacular; the Dems should get this term Out There, so that we are not merely disputing the “fake news” / “liberal media” narrative but leading with our own. I know we have “corporate media”, but that sounds like lefty jargon to my ear and is also less precise.
BTW, while searching, I stumbled upon this:
Betty Cracker
@Other MJS: Not sure if I heard the term first here or somewhere else, but I use it to make a distinction between the celebrity media jack-wagons who cover domestic politics as a horserace and hardworking journalists who don’t deserve the disdain the Beltway crew earns every day.
Geminid
@Ksmiami: Evidently, some research psychologist monitored different parts of subjects brains and showed them political ads. It turned out that the most effective ones stimulated parts associated with emotion, not reasoning. Bitecofer has written about this, and about how she thinks Republicans have been ahead in this area. Reviewing the Democrats successful anti-recall campaign in California, she commended their “Republican style” messaging. She called it “Threat-Emotion-Stakes” framing.
Geminid
@Fair Economist: Yeah, the threat level is high. But I think the Democratic Caucus is also hanging together because there is a lot of fundamental agreement on essential issues. When this is so, it’s easier to compromise on the ways and means.
Ksmiami
@Geminid: Agreed. But how do we get in touch with the Dem messengers on this? Or do we just buy up ad space and start
Geminid
@Ksmiami: I think a good start would be Democrats to stop focusing so much on problems and divisions in their own party, especially those related to process.
I don’t follow Democratic party messaging much. I do see some very strong advocates for and defenders of the Democratic party on Twitter. Some of the best are Black Democrats, and that may be no accident. A Democratic ad writer would do well to read these people and learn something.
We need effective advertising that hits Republicans as Republicans hard. That’s one reason I am interested in @StrikePac. They are fairly new to the game. Their strategy is to lean into negative partisanship and make the Republican brand execrable. But there are other good operations too I’m sure.
J R in WV
@Kay:
They are sending me emails, snail mail, and phone callls to solicit donations from us to people who receive regular monthly donations.
AOC is one of the few we contribute a small monthly sum to who doesn’t ask for more, MORE, MORE! Val Demings is another, she gets quite a bit more than AOC, who is in a blue district and doesn’t really need our pittance.
I did get a very polite phone call from the Southern Poverty Law Center who asked us to increase our monthly donation, which I did. They do great work against racists and fascists, who by super coincidence tend to all be Republican-leaning extremists. They’re non-denominational in that they fight all fascists, evil doers, everywhere they find them.
Matt McIrvin
@Sure Lurkalot: Trump won the vote of a lot of Cuban, Vietnamese and Cambodian immigrant communities in 2020 by claiming that Biden and Harris were Communists and would be instituting something like Khmer Rouge government.
Brachiator
@Geminid:
Coming late to this thread. Lots of interesting comments.
I don’t know that there was much of a campaign. And Democratic voters were not responding to any particular messaging.
Early on, media pundits were doing a lot of hand wringing that. Democratic Party voters were not showing much interest in the recall, while Republicans were furious and engaged.
Fortunately, Larry Elder was the kiss of death for GOP hopes. Once he entered the race, and once he was seen as leading the Republican field, sane voters came out and resoundingly rejected his ass.
It also helped that voting was easy, especially early voting. And the Republicans were hobbled by dumb messaging that told them to risk the plague and vote in person.
Republicans consistently misread voter sentiment and the appetite for recall.
Also, the mainstream Republican candidates never generated interest. And Larry Elder came across as a wild eyed amateur.
Geminid
@Brachiator: Bitecofer was not on the ground like you were. She is a campaign geek and may have picked out ads to prove a point, even if they did not get a lot of exposure.
Elder’s support among Republicans reminded me of how the radicals in Virginia have exercised influence beyond their numbers. One thing the party did this year with their “Unassembled Convention” nominating process was to neutralize their fervor. Glenn Youngkin’s money did the rest.
henqiguai
@Other MJS (#80):
1. A day later on a dead thread, and2. Thank goodness *someone* looked to notice the article is a PRC publication (globalpost.cn)
The link: https://www.globaltimes.cn/page/202109/1234378.shtml