Democrats took a shellacking, and it's partly my fault -- not because I took time away from journalism to help manage a Congressional Campaign against an incumbent Republican in Minnesota's Second Congressional District, rather because I failed to engage more people in the process.Look, both major parties have a collection of loyal supporters who consistently identify as a Democrat or a Republican, and many of them turn out reliably to vote even in non-Presidential elections. Polls prior to November revealed Democrats were dis-spirited, Republicans were angry, and those coveted swing-voters (and the capital "I" Independents) had largely lost their enthusiasm.
It wasn't about facts, of course, it was about spin. Logic would suggest (if not mandate) more voters would align with Democrats - Obama had wrenched the economy out of a death-spiral, lowered taxes for most people, lowered the deficit, lowered the troop presence in Iraq, started the process of restoring the cost-benefit ratio of our health care system, and jobs were finally being created faster than they were getting lost.
Meanwhile, the media gave play to every story blaming the state of the economy on Democrats or the White House (hey, they didn't say they believed the story-teller, they just reported that's what was being said, right?) and let the Republican talking points about lower taxes creating jobs echo over and over even though that correlation has been dis-proven repeatedly: it certainly hadn't done so while Bush was in office for 8 years (but hey, the media never said they believed that, or talked about the wealth-gap, and they even let a few people point out that demand is the more logical driver of job-creation, but lots of photogenic people with convincing smiles and voices were talking about how taxes and uncertainty kept rich guys from wanting to hire people. They "covered" what was being "said" right?)
Bush oversaw record growth in government? Well, obviously that's the Democrats fault for caving in, don't they know how to run a filibuster? I mean, big government is bad, right? Unless it provides for our military defense, or social security, or Federal disaster recovery funds, or interstate highways, or border patrols and immigration enforcement, or keeping our toys from being painted with lead, or.... oh never mind.
Earmarks, we all know earmarks are bad, right? They account for nearly 1% of the Federal budget, and if there's one thing we know it's that if we all had 1% more of our money that goes to taxes we'd be just fine now, right? Not so much?
The point is: voting is not about logic. Advertisers have known that logic lets us rationalize our choices for centuries, and modern politicians have long understood there are two fundamentally different parts of holding elected office: there's the campaign - which doesn't remotely test the skills necessary to govern, that's the GETTING into the office part though - and then there's the rest of it, the actual wielding of power while in office. Successful politicians master both, although there's no one "right" way to do either.
I failed to engage or electrify enough voters in my area; so the cable-TV watching middle class, convinced to vote by a carefully-crafted message laden with buzzwords focus-tested by so-called Conservative strategists that Obama and his "agenda" were leading the country to ruin, elected Republicans in droves in Minnesota.
Remember 2000, when we elected Bush? He was the sort of guy people thought they'd like to have a beer with. Now Minnesota voters face a recount for the Governor because they were reassured by a guy who tried to lower drunk-driving penalties after he got cited for that very offence, because he's told them the $6 BILLION deficit our current (Republican) governor proclaimed as a crisis is mostly just an accounting and spending problem... although he can't explain just how that's going to work, but it's very, very reassuring that somebody knows it can be fixed if voters just trust Republicans.
Post-mortem? No, if there was logic in the outcome of the November 2nd elections it might rise to that level; from here on the ground in Minnesota, looking at the numbers, and the facts, it's a wake-up call for Democrats: they were out-strategized. (Yes, I know, I made that word up. You're one of those logical people, aren't you?) Worse yet, there were voices they could have heeded.
Voters were, in a word, hoodwinked. Democratic politicians lost ground by losing lots of elections to a bunch of slick, experienced, successful Used Country Salesmen. And right here in Minnesota, it's partly my fault.
Thomas Hayes is an entrepreneur, journalist, political strategist, and photographer who recently worked as the Campaign Manager on the Madore For Congress campaign in Minnesota's 2nd District. He contributes regularly to a host of other web sites on topics ranging from economics and politics to culture and community. He'll be more active again here at Zennie's now, unless maybe there's a vote recount in an important election in Minnesota. Oh, wait...
In the case of most employed in the media the answer is simple enough, they seek attention because their producers use ratings as the primary metric - corporate media thrives on advertising revenues, which rise and fall with ratings. Relatively few fans realize credibility takes a back seat to celebrity -- logic is overwhelmed by the profit motives of the "business" of news coverage.
Both major parties seek to expand their influence and control. Since voters often forego logic when deciding who to empower, the original goal of a political party has to bow, at least in part, to pragmatic reliance on persuasion to preserve their bureaucratic turf.
The Tea Party ideology may have had legitimate, grassroots origins, but it's now a tool of right-wing strategists who spread the story of their concern that it attracts extremists and all manner of unsavory and under-educated bigots while disingenuously stressing the threat to the GOP if Republicans don't accommodate and react. The appeararnce of a growing third party movement even further to the right than the Republicans sets up the GOP strategists to market their candidates as "middle of the road" moderates in the political spectrum. Brilliant not simply as strategic ploy, but also because it's lately become impossible to continue winning votes by touting the GOP brand as compassionate, fiscally conservative, or good for small business interests.
Shelley Madore
