11.22.04

The Gadflyer

a few great blogs from the gadflyer, a site I visited for the first time today:

first, comments on Tom Shales’ shellacking of Michael Powell in the Washington Post. Here’s an excerpt:

Here’s how to understand what’s truly appalling about Powell’s stewardship of the FCC: He gets everything wrong.

In the one area where there is a legitimate need for the government to regulate broadcasters – making sure there is a diversity of owners/voices on the limited broadcast and radio spectrum – he looks the other way while media conglomerates like Clearchannel Communications gobble up as many stations as possible. And when they are finished gorging themselves on those, he tries to change the ownership rules to let them feast insatiably on some more.

At the same time, in the one area the government clearly has absolutely no business regulating – content – Powell is suddenly omnipresent. Or at least he is when it comes to imposing antiquated “decency” standards that make breasts, bare backs, and vice presidential language the gravest threats to America’s children, all evidence to the contrary notwithstanding.

[full text]

The second article is from Paul Waldman, who writes about the battle between the GOP and the Democrats for the hearts and minds of American voters. Waldman nails something that I’ve been trying to write about in this blog: that the Democrats need to learn to fight the public relations battle before they do anything else. Here’s the good stuff:

Democrats need to get this into their head: they can’t overcome their image of “condescension” and “elitism” by trekking to a few NASCAR events or talking about how they dig Jesus, too. Because this image was not of their making: it is a carefully planned and executed strategy carried out relentlessly by conservatives. Listen to conservative talk radio for ten minutes and it becomes crystal clear what the message is. It’s not about who Democrats are, it’s about who Republicans say Democrats are. That’s what they have to figure out how to fight.

[full text]

Amen.

Finally, Paul Waldman points us to Christopher Hayes’ New Republic article, Lessons Learned About Undecided Voters. Take a look at Waldman’s summary for a few snippets from the article. Here is one interesting quote from Hayes, who spent the last seven weeks of the election working in Wisconsin, trying to convince undecided voters to vote for Kerry:

The undecideds I spoke to didn’t seem to have any intuitive grasp of what kinds of grievances qualify as political grievances. Often, once I would engage undecided voters, they would list concerns, such as the rising cost of health care; but when I would tell them that Kerry had a plan to lower health-care premiums, they would respond in disbelief–not in disbelief that he had a plan, but that the cost of health care was a political issue. It was as if you were telling them that Kerry was promising to extend summer into December.

Hayes also has a good bit on how, in the mind of the undecided voter, Kerry somehow took the blame for some of Bush’s mistakes, while Bush was let off scott-free by many voters.

I do have to say that Hayes’ observations ring very true with my canvassing experiences.

Comments





Comment Feed (RSS 2.0)
If your comments do not appear immediately, they may have been eaten by the spam filter. I can recover them if you let me know about it.

You do not have to be logged in to comment, but registering will ensure that your comments get past the spam filter.







philly ad network logo
Liberal Prose Ad Network logo