The New York Times has an interesting article in this Sunday’s magazine, Can the Republicans be Saved From Obsolescence?
There is much to learn from the article about how much more open Democrats are to the digital era, how insular Republican leadership is, and how Obama won the war the Romney campaign thought it was winning.
There’s no reason to close our eyes to our problems, and we should learn from our mistakes. One of those lessons is that Republican digital leadership may be beyond repair and it may be time for a complete rethink.
But beware articles like this one, it’s not meant to inform and enlighten, but to reinforce negative stereotypes of Republicans as needing to become Junior Democrats in order to win.
The best example is the lessons we are supposed to learn from two focus groups, which held negative views of Republicans similar to the views voiced every day at The New York Times, MSNBC, CBS, ABC, The Washington Post, etc. But note that these were two groups of people who voted for Obama (emphasis mine):
One afternoon last month, I flew with Anderson to Columbus, Ohio, to watch her conduct two focus groups. The first consisted of 10 single, middle-class women in their 20s; the second, of 10 20-something men who were either jobless or employed but seeking better work. All of them voted for Obama but did not identify themselves as committed Democrats and were sufficiently ambivalent about the president’s performance that Anderson deemed them within reach of the Republicans.
The negative (and inaccurate) conclusions of the group about mean and nasty Republicans are used to draw the conclusion that Republicans are actually mean and nasty.
But isn’t this a circular conclusion, isn’t the problem that inaccurate and highly politicized portraits of Republicans dominate the media; why does this mean that Republicans need to become more like Democrats, as opposed to getting the message out better and fighting the relentless media smears.
Sarah Palin almost killed Gabby Giffords, right? Republicans want you to die slowly, right? Black Republicans are tokens and used to hide Republican racism, right?
If the Republican brand and ideology are so toxic to their core, how is it we do so well at the state and local level? Perhaps it’s because the mainstream media does not pay as much attention to state and local races, and therefore Republicans at that level are not demonized daily into gross caricatures. But raise your head up to the federal level, and WATER!
Obama received 65,899,625 votes and Romney received 60,928,981 votes. The vote gap was much closer in congressional races. Those vote differences signal a challenge ahead, but hardly signal an obsolete Republican Party.
There’s something which does not connect in these dots the NYT author wants us to draw. Yes, we need better outreach to younger and minority voters, and yes, we need to have a more open and fluid structure, but those points do not equate to becoming Democrats. If that’s the solution, then the solution is worse than the problem.
The author gave away his game, for anyone who read the article carefully, which was to portray Republicans as burnt extremist toast:
Nor during the [Lee] Atwater era, when Ronald Reagan was president, did the party’s most extreme wing intimidate other Republicans into legislating like extremists themselves, thereby further tarnishing the party’s image.
Extremists!
Learn and innovate, but don’t fall for the digital trolling of The New York Times.
DONATE
Donations tax deductible
to the full extent allowed by law.
Comments
Well, of course! If you stand for anything NOT Collectivist, YOU, ya freak, are perforce an “extremist”!!! Oh, and a dirty, terrible whatever someone wants to call you.
This is why Pres. Sleeper is constantly invoking “common-sense solutions” and “balanced approaches”, along with my favorite “most everyone agrees” in its various guises.
He is staking out the “reasonable middle” for his radical Collectivism, which pushes all of his opposition into the rhetorical wastelands of “extremism”. It is as cheap a trick as it is effective. It is also warmly approved of by his ally, Mr. Straw-man.
Funny the NYT should call Republicans obsolete, when print media is going the way of the dinosaur. Talk about self-loathing! It almost makes me laugh. Almost, but not quite.
They also like to say that the TEA Parties would have more influcence if they were less radical and less racist.
The New York Times used to be ubiquitous in hotels and airports across this nation. Now, it’s hard to find. They have longstanding problems with the quality of their product.
The fallacist’s fallacy: Just because one can show that an assertion (nat’l GOP dying slow death) may be based on identified biases and agenda doesn’t make the assertion wrong. Keep coming with sterling candidates like John McCain and Mitt Romney for president and I’ll carve the GOP’s tombstone myself.
Keep coming UP with….
(Freudian slip)
Indeed. The GOP keeps nominating Presidential candidates that seem weak, clueless, and cringing in the general election. After a slash and burn primary, the Romney campaign had too many deer-in-the-headlights moments after securing the nomination.
Obamacare hung around Obama’s neck like a 2-ton anchor, so the GOP massaged the primaries to make sure the one guy who couldn’t say a thing about it got nominated. They should’ve said to Romney what Michael said to his step brother Tom:
“Tom, you’re out. You’re not a wartime consigliere…”
Never take advice from people who want you to fail.
Seems to me the most extreme Republicans elected Obama when they stayed home! Paulines, Mormon haters, RINO haters (Mitt was more RINO than JohnnyMac)and Libertarian types! Romney didn’t excite the base! Gary Johnson got 1,275,000 votes!
The Rep. establishment was ultimately to blame for foisting a liberal whose policies and actions in MA were the model for Obama’s over-reaching presidency and whose corrupt, taxpayer gouging business style was exactly what conservatives and even most liberals hate.
There is more at politico.com (yeah, I know) about how Ted Cruz used social media to win in the Texas’ primary:
http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0712/79213.html
Various polls and some unsystematic surveys have shown solid majorities in agreement with conservative positions or Republican policies, in conjunction with majorities stating a preference for Democrats.
The conclusions are obvious: Many people aren’t well informed on the policies of each party, but they have absorbed a general impression of each party from the Kultursmog.
That’s a pretty strong indication of how consequential the media bias in favor of Dems is – it persuades large numbers of people to vote against their own beliefs and opinions (and self-interest).
Agreed, the media is very successful in demonizing Republicans. I think the influence of the entertainment tribe is underestimated. Jay Z, Beyonce, J Lo, Eva, Chris Rock, Will Farrell, Matt Damon, Seth McFarlane, Jon Stewart, Stevie Colbert, Scarlett Johansson, etc., have enormous sway with young people, minorities and women! The loinfos worship these celebs!
I remain amazed about features of our politics that endorse and call for overt lying, such as when a presidential candidate is expected to appeal to his/her base with one set of positions during the primaries, and then move to the center by claiming a different set of positions. Why is this not considered simply lying for political gain as opposed to professional politicking?
In that lying is an accepted, expected part of American politics, and that 90% of the media routinely lies to promote chosen pols and parties, I’m not sure I can blame the average American voter for having little to no idea what anyone in office or running for office stands for.
Mark Steyn stated that if the USA had compulsory voting attendance ( you can throw your ballot away) as in Australia , the Republicans would have very rarely won , if ever.
There are another 50 million out there who will vote D just waiting for a phone. not a call – an actual phone & service thank you.